Sitting of 1 July 1872

MINUTES.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—First Reading—Metropolitan Tramways Provisional Orders Suspension* [219]; Local Taxation Accounts* [220]; Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Supplemental (No. 2)* [218].
First Reading—Prisons (Ireland)* [221].
Second Reading—Bank of England (Election of Directors)* [211].
Committee—Metropolitan Police Superannuation* [207]—R.P.; Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 3) (re-comm.)* [171] debate adjourned.
Committee—Report—Naturalization* [145]; Baptismal Fees* [209].
Considered as amended—Colonial Governors Pensions* [176].
Withdrawn—Clerks of the Peace and Justices Clerks Salaries and Fees* [164]; Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister* [14].

TREATY OF WASHINGTON. TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION (GENEVA). THE INDIRECT CLAIMS.

  CORRESPONDENCE. ARGUMENT.
  Copy presented,—of Correspondence respecting the proceedings of the Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.—North America (No. 10, 1872).
  Copy presented,—of Argument or Summary, showing the points and referring to the evidence relied upon by the Government of Her Britannic Majesty in answer to the Tribunal of Arbitration constituted under Article I. of the Treaty concluded at Washington on the 8th May 1871 between Her Britannic Majesty and the United States of America [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.—North America (No. 11, 1872).

BIRMINGHAM SEWERAGE QUESTION.

  QUESTION.
  MR. MUNDELLAasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he is aware that in consequence of the rejection of the Birmingham Sewerage Bill by the House, the promoters are individually liable for the expenses incurred in endeavouring to comply with two Injunctions of the Court of Chancery; whether he is further aware that the property and revenues of the Corporation of Birmingham are liable to sequestration by the Court of Chancery for non-compliance with its Injunctions, thus depriving a town of upwards of 350,000 inhabitants of all municipal government and control; and, what steps the Government propose taking to afford the relief necessary under such circumstances?
  MR. STANSFELDsaid, he was not in a position to impugn the statement of his hon. Friend, and was afraid it must be admitted that, in consequence of the rejection of the Birmingham Sewerage Bill, the promoters might be liable to heavy expenses. There was, however, a Bill of the hon. Member for York (Mr. Leeman), the Municipal Corporations (Borough Funds) Bill, now before the House, which dealt with subjects of the character referred to, and he knew no other remedy for the difficulty than one suggested by that Bill. With that view the Government thought it important, under the circumstances, that an opportunity should be given of taking the opinion of the House in Committee upon the clauses of that Bill, and would be prepared to give facilities for that purpose.

LOCAL TAXATION—PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.—QUESTION.
MR. GOLDSMIDasked the President of the Local Government Board, To state to the House the course he proposes to pursue with regard to Clauses 15 and 16 of the Public Health Bill, which by imposing additional charges on the rates, contravene the Resolution relating to Local Taxation agreed to by the House on the 16th of April, to the effect that, "it is expedient to remedy the injustice of imposing Taxation for national objects on one description of property only?"
MR. STANSFELDsaid, his hon. Friend had put his Question on the Paper under some misapprehension as to the effect of Clauses 15 and 16 of the Public Health Bill. Those clauses would not impose any additional burden upon the rates; but would merely distribute in a different form charges under existing Acts of Parliament, or which might be imposed by other clauses of the Bill. But even if the clauses referred to did impose additional charges, they would not come within the terms of the Motion of the hon. Baronet the Member for South Devon (Sir Massey Lopes) to which the House had assented. If his hon. Friend referred to the Motion adopted by the House, he would find that its terms were to this effect—
"That no legislation with reference to Local Taxation will be satisfactory which does not provide, either in whole or in part, for the relief of occupiers and owners in counties and boroughs from charges imposed on ratepayers for the administration of justice, police, and lunatics, the expenditure for such purposes being almost entirely independent of local control"

EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) TEACHERS OF PARLIAMENTARY SCHOOLS.

  QUESTION.
  MR. CAMERONasked the Lord Advocate, Whether his attention has been called to a recent decision by Lord Gifford in the Edinburgh Court of Session, in the case of the Teacher of the Parliamentary School of Onich, who was removed from his office by the heritors of the parish for long continued inefficiency, in consequence of a report by one of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools specially appointed for the purpose; and, whether under the repealing clause and other provisions of the Education Bill which has lately passed through this House any teacher of a parliamentary school may, notwithstanding the decision of Lord Gifford, be hereafter removed for inefficiency, in the same manner as the teacher of a parochial or any other public school?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE: Sir, I have seen the judgment referred to only in the newspapers; but my attention has been directed to the question decided The learned Judge expressing himself as upon a doubtful point of law—and it certainly appears doubtful—I may say that I have given an opinion contrary
  426
  to the judgment pronounced. The main part of the Question, however, is the last; and I have no hesitation in saying that under the Bill which this House has passed, and which has now gone to the House of Lords, the teacher of a Parliamentary school will be removable in the same way as the teacher of any other public school, and the judgment referred to has no effect upon that.

ARMY—THE AUTUMN MILITARY MANŒUVRES—VOLUNTEER REGIMENTS.

  QUESTION.
  COLONEL LOYD LINDSAY, presuming that during the first period of the Autumn Military Manœuvres the several Divisions will be left to themselves to drill and work independently, and that the latter period only will be devoted to combined movements, asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, in the event of Volunteer Regiments not being deemed sufficiently advanced to take part in the latter period, they will be allowed to be present during the first period of the manœuvres, and if so permitted to be present during those first eight days, whether such Volunteer Corps who can arrange to attend as complete regiments will be granted priority in their applications over other corps who can only form consolidated battalions by amalgamating together?
  MR. CARDWELL: The arrangement, Sir, is that, except in the case of the Wiltshire Volunteers, no corps will be accepted for a shorter period than 15 days. With respect to priority, there is a manifest advantage in accepting corps which can undertake to come out as complete corps of 400 strong; but it is necessary, also, to consider the claims of corps which did not obtain the advantage last year before deciding to accept any which did. In the meantime, the hon. and gallant Gentleman's corps having been out last year, and having only offered to come out for eight days this year, an inquiry has been addressed to them to ascertain whether they will undertake, if there shall be room for them, consistently with the claims of others, to come out for the 15 days. If they answer in the affirmative, their claims will be duly considered.

  LOCAL TAXATION—ANNUAL PROSECUTION EXPENSES.—QUESTION.
  SIR MASSEY LOPESasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, What course he intends to pursue in the event of the Public Prosecutors Bill not becoming law this Session, or where its provisions may not be adopted, in order to give effect to the assurance of the Government that counties and boroughs should be relieved from all annual prosecution expenses, and that disallowances should hereafter be discontinued?
  MR. BRUCE: Sir, the assurance given by me on the part of the Government did not involve a promise that the costs allowed by the local taxing officers should be paid without question or revision. The Government undertook to examine the subject with a view to find a substitute for the present system; so that the Treasury might have adequate control over the expenditure without making counties and boroughs responsible for improper allowances. Such a substitute they think they found in the amended Public Prosecutors Bill, which, if not carried this Session, they undertake to introduce as a Government measure next Session. In the meantime, and until that proposal has been discussed and accepted or rejected by Parliament, it would be premature to suggest any alternative plan. But care will be taken in the interval to apply the present system with as much elasticity and consideration for local interests as regard for the public interest will justify.

  NAVY—EXPERIMENTAL GUNNERY—HER MAJESTY'S SHIPS "HOTSPUR" AND "GLATTON."—QUESTION.
  LORD HENRY LENNOXasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether, before the "Glatton" is fired at by Her Majesty's ship "Hotspur," he will lay upon the Table of the House a Programme of the intended experiment, showing what shot and shell are to be fired, and at what angles of the turret they are to be directed?
  MR. GOSCHENsaid, the Government would feel it to be their duty to give full information to the House with regard to this experiment; but he did not think it would be expedient—and it would certainly be contrary to rule—to place beforehand on the Table a programme of
  428
  the experiments to be performed. Moreover, such a course would appear to pledge the Admiralty that they would be carried out in a certain way, and would interfere with that absolute discretion over the conditions, time, and place of the experiments which the Executive Government were entitled to exercise on such occasions.

BRITISH CLAIMS AGAINST BRAZIL.

  QUESTION.
  MR. ANDERSONasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, What progress has been made in the negotiation for the settlement of British Claims against Brazil?
  VISCOUNT ENFIELDsaid, that Mr. Matthew, our representative at Brazil, on his return to Rio, took with him instructions to bring to an amicable settlement the mutual claims between this country and Brazil. He returned in the month of April last, and the Government had not yet heard what steps he had taken in the matter.

SUEZ CANAL—INCREASE OF TONNAGE DUES.—QUESTION.
MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether his attention has been called to the following extract from The Times of Saturday:—
"M. de Lesseps has written a letter to the Liberté, dated Paris, June 28, in which he contradicts the Bourse rumours that the Porte, supported by England, had opposed the tariff of navigation dues which the Suez Canal Company will put in force on the 1st of July. He says—'The Sublime Porte has only transmitted to me the representations of the Italian Government, to which I replied, maintaining the right of the Company, which is incontestable.'"
And, whether the Under Secretary will explain to the House what is the actual position of the Suez Canal Company with regard to the new dues they propose to levy on all vessels passing through the Canal after this date?
VISCOUNT ENFIELD: Sir, a suggestion has been made by Her Majesty's Government, through Sir Henry Elliot, that the question of an increase of tonnage dues levied, by the Suez Canal Company should be postponed; but information reached the Foreign Office yesterday, to the effect that the agent of the company stated that the Council of Administration at Paris having decided that the new tariff should come into

429
operation on the 1st of July, he was unable to postpone the date, as recommended by Her Majesty's Government.

CIVIL SERVICE—PAY OF TEMPORARY WRITERS.—QUESTION.
MR. PEASEasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is true that by an Order in Council dated the 19th August, 1871, the pay of temporary writers in Her Majesty's Civil Service was placed on a different footing to that on which it existed up to that date; and, if so, whether it is a fact that there are temporary writers now attached to the Civil Service Establishments, who, having entered the service before the 19th August, 1871, have in consequence of this Order been reduced in pay, or deprived of those advantages in pay which were held out to them as inducements for entering the service?
MR. BOWRINGsaid, that when the House was in Committee of Supply he stated that the pay of certain writers had been reduced in the manner indicated in the Question of the hon. Member for Durham. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then denied that such was the case, and he now wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, Whether he has since made further inquiries on the subject, and whether the statement he (Mr. Bowring) then made is not strictly accurate?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that when it was determined to introduce competition into the Civil Service, it became necessary to look up the whole subject of the employment of temporary writers, which was found to be in no little confusion, because they found this to be the state of the case—that the writers were differently treated under different Departments; that they received different rates of pay and different notices of discontinuance of their services, and that they had different holidays. They might be divided for convenience into three classes. The first, which was the largest class, consisted of writers who were obtained from law stationers, and who received a payment, some portion of which no doubt was paid to the law stationers by way of commission for getting them the employment. There were other writers employed at different rates of pay by the hour in different offices; and besides them there were a set of writers, by far the most important class as regarded
430
this question, who were employed on a system of increment, gradually increasing, with a considerable period of notice, as much as three months, before their services could be dispensed with. Moreover, in cases where they had served five years, they were entitled to a certain gratuity if their services were not any longer required. This state of things was dealt with by an Order in Council in 1871. It was very necessary that it should be dealt with, because, in the first place, there was great danger that as they had blocked up the entrance to the higher parts of the Civil Service by competition, there would be a great rush of writers into the lower outlets of the service; and, in the second place, there was great danger that these writers, who were receiving salaries calculated on an increasing increment, and with certain rates of payment in case of dismissal, should become a sort of secondary Civil Service, and obtain interests almost as permanent as those in the Civil Service itself. The way in which the Government proposed to deal with that state of things was this—they had placed all future writers entirely under the Civil Service Commissioners, who would examine them, and see that they were qualified for the duties of a writer—that was, to write, to copy, and to spell well, with a little arithmetic, and then, whenever a department wanted a writer, it sent to the Civil Service Commissioners for him. The rate of pay was fixed at 10 d. an hour, and that was certainly somewhat lower than that hitherto given. The law stationers received 1s. an hour for each man; but, this being mere mechanical work, he apprehended that there could be no doubt the Government were justified, and were bound, in justice to the public, to obtain it as cheaply as they could. The other part of the subject was much more difficult; that was, those writers who were receiving increment, because they had been a sort of imitation or repetition of the Civil Service. He held it to be absolutely necessary to put an end to it; and the Order in Council stopped the increments from the period of the first Order in Council in 1870, and it might be said, therefore, to have prevented the increase of their salaries that would otherwise have taken place. The case of these persons was well worthy of consideration, and he had a plan in his mind for affording them some redress of a not

431
illiberal character, which he hoped would be laid on the Table in a few days.
MR. OTWAY, who also had a Notice of a Question upon the same subject on the Paper, said that while demurring entirely from the statement which the right hon. Gentleman had made with regard to the position of the writers, he wished to ask him whether their liberties, as regarded leave, had not been curtailed, and whether during this year he would re-consider that part of the subject, and grant them the holidays they had formerly enjoyed?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he had not the least objection to give them any amount of holidays they liked to take, but during holidays of course they would not be paid. To do otherwise would be to do the very thing he was most anxious not to do, for he did not desire to admit that they had any permanent status or claim on the public whatever. All these things savoured of the Civil Service, and they should be obliged to make a heavy pecuniary sacrifice to get rid of what had already been done in this direction; and they could not be too careful in restricting these writers to the simple relation of persons hired for a short occasion, whose services might be put an and to when they were no longer necessary.
MR. OTWAYgave Notice that on Class 3 of the Civil Service Estimates he should call attention generally to this subject, and show the House how the matter really stood in regard to these writers.

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.—OBSERVATIONS.
MR. EYKYNsaid, that the Order for going into Committee on the Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister Bill was the 31st Motion on the Paper, and there could be no prospect of the success of the Bill unless the Government would take it in hand. He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government to do that, in deference to the many discussions and divisions in its favour that had taken place in the House.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that he could not hold out any expectation that the Government would hold themselves responsible for the passing of the Bill during the present Session. The subject was one which, if the Government were prepared to take it up at all, ought to be taken up at the commencement of the
432
Session, and not because, towards the end of it, the Bill was in a position of difficulty and embarrassment. At the same time, if the Government did take the matter into its own hands, he did not know that it would have any effect on the successful passing of the Bill. It was true that certain Members of the Government had given it all the support in their power; but the distribution of opinion upon it, both in the House and in the Government, was well known, and it had never been regarded as a Government measure.

SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
(1.) £31,052, to complete the sum for the Maintenance and Repair of Royal Palaces.
MR. STACPOOLEsaid, he hoped that was not an inopportune moment to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether any steps had been taken with the view to the establishment of a Royal residence in Ireland?
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he could not see the connection between the question of a greater intercourse between the Royal Family and Ireland and the establishment of a Royal Palace in that country and the repairs of the Royal Palaces in this country.
Vote agreed to.
(2.) £75,876, to complete the sum for the Royal Parks and Pleasure Gardens.
MR. BOWRINGasked the Chief Commissioner of Works for an explanation of the large increase in the items for St. James's, the Green, and Hyde Parks—an increase of more than £2,000 over last year, apart from the fact that in last year's Vote the sum of £2,123 was granted for "extraordinary works," whereas this year that item only came to £450. He also asked, in the interests of the poorer classes, who lived in large numbers in such districts as Kensal New Town, to which Kensington Gardens were the nearest public park, whether his frequent complaint as to the entirely neglected state of the north side of those Gardens would be attended to, and whether any flowers, for instance, would be planted there, the expense of which would be quite trifling? At present those persons, if they wanted to enjoy the gardens, must walk three-quar-

433
ters of a mile across them, in addition to a long walk there, and do, moreover, what they disliked—namely, mix with the upper classes.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that he had not the details of the increase in the items referred to by the hon. Gentleman, and was therefore unable to explain the matter. In regard to the north side of Kensington Gardens, it was not intended that it should be neglected; but it was not desirable that there should be the same quantity of flowers and plants that was to be seen on the south side. Variety was desirable; the north side was used for walking, and persons found the trees and shrubbery very agreeable.
MR. BOWRINGasked what the right hon. Gentleman meant to do with respect to the drinking fountains which, on a former occasion, he undertook to provide for the different Parks?
MR. AYRTONsaid, the proposal was to have a simple fountain, and that would be carried out.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEpointed out to the hon. Member for Exeter that the south side of Hyde Park was very bare of trees, while upon the north side there were some very fine trees. In that fact was to be found a reason for the larger outlay on the south side.
MR. MITCHELL HENRYhoped the right hon. Gentleman would place a few more seats in St. James's Park. He knew there were objections to an increase of seats, but the presence of a few extra policemen would remove the objections. When going through the Park, he felt exceedingly sorry to see the poorer people turned away from the chairs because they were unable to pay the penny which the upper classes could afford to pay.
SIR JOHN TRELAWNYasked whether the Chief Commissioner of Works would not think it desirable to plant Hyde Park with more evergreens, to take the place of deciduous plants, so as to make the grounds more ornamental during the winter months? It also occurred to him that there should be bathing-places in the middle of the Serpentine, formed by something made to represent islands resting on piles, with a passage to the land. Railings should be placed round the islands, and the railings being covered with evergreens, the bathing-places would in the distance appear mere islands. There
434
should be bathing-places for both men and women. He was told that there were a number of persons, about 30, calling themselves "All - the - Year - Bounders," who did actually bathe in the Serpentine all the year round, and they certainly ought to be considered.
MR. DENISONasked what was being done towards the erection of a fountain at the north end of Hamilton Place, the cost of which was to be defrayed out of money left by a deceased lady?
MR. STAPLETONinquired when the Chief Commissioner of Works expected to have a better supply of water in Victoria Park?
MR. BERESFORD HOPEobjected to money being wasted in the planting of evergreens in the Park, they being trees the inevitable fate of which was to become the colour of rusty iron and then die. Why not try acacias, laburnums, and other spring-flowering trees, and give up the eternal repetition of lime and plane trees? A good selection of deciduous trees would very much improve the effect.
VISCOUNT BURYsaid, it was generally allowed that great improvements had been effected in the public gardens since they came under the charge of the right hon. Gentleman, and, contrasted with their former condition, they were now such an ornament to the metropolis as to elicit the admiration of foreigners. He congratulated the Chief Commissioner on his success in that particular.
MR. W. H. SMITHtrusted the Chief Commissioner of Works would give an assurance to the Committee that more free seats would be provided in Hyde Park and St. James's Park.
MR. AYRTONsaid, the whole of the grounds were under the charge of one of the most accomplished gardeners in England, and he exercised his judgment in the cultivation of the Park, guided by an experience of many years. All classes of trees had been recommended in turn, and the proper selection to make had been discussed for generations; and he trusted hon. Gentlemen would excuse his saying that it was one of those questions which could not well be settled in Committee. With regard to the fountain in Hamilton Place, the lady referred to died when in the midst of prosecuting her enterprize for providing public baths in the Parks for London, and he had £50,000 in his possession which she

435
had intended to appropriate for that purpose; but that and all other cognate matters must remain in abeyance till her estate was finally wound up. The fountain, however, was in the hands of a sculptor, under a contract, and the work was being carried on. [Mr. DENISON: Who is the sculptor?] Mr. Thornycroft. With reference to Victoria Park, an additional supply of water had been provided, and they were now considering how it could be further increased. Seats had been added from time to time in Hyde and St. James's Parks, and there would be no objection to furnishing more if they were required by the public. The seats, however, did not interfere with the chairs, as the persons who used the one would not use the other.
MR. OTWAYsaid, he never rode in Hyde Park, because he could not find room there; and he wished to know whether the Chief Commissioner would take into consideration the expediency of making a ride for equestrians in Regent's Park?
MR. AYRTONsaid, he thought there was not such a desire on the part of the public for a horse-ride in Regent's Park as to justify the expenditure necessary for the formation of a horse-ride there. It was true that at certain periods of the day Rotten Row in Hyde Park was crowded; but the horse-ride on the northern side of the Park was comparatively deserted at most periods. Another way of avoiding the inconvenience of overcrowding, and one which he adopted, was to get up at 8 o'clock, and ride in the Park, or else in the evening.
MR. RYLANDSsaid, that the Royal Parks and Gardens Bill having received the Royal Assent, he should like to know when the rules for the Parks might be expected to be laid on the Table?
MR. AYRTON: In the course of a week.
Vote agreed to.
(3.) £99,875, to complete the sum for the Maintenance and Repair of Public Buildings, &c.
(4.) £10,250, to complete the sum for Furniture, Public Departments.
MR. MELLORsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that on every £4 charged for furniture the official expenditure was 12 s.
MR. AYRTON, in reply, said, the establishment was a kind of furniture police for the protection of the public
436
Revenue; its efficiency being tested not so much by what was spent as by what was prevented being spent. The duty of the office was to see that nothing was supplied which the public service did not imperatively require.
Vote agreed to.
(5.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £22,741, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1873, for the Buildings of the Houses of Parliament.
MR. BOWRINGsaid, he wished to call attention to sub-section 3 of this Vote, relating to warming, ventilating, and lighting. On gas and fuel, of the great expense of which he had on former occasions complained, he was glad to observe his right hon. Friend had within the last two years effected a saving of £1,300; but he thought economy might, with great advantage, be carried still further. The heat and glare of gas, arising from the enormous quantity consumed—say, 30,000,000 cubic feet for three months in winter and three months in summer—were, in some parts of the House, perfectly intolerable, and the books in the Library, especially, suffered in consequence. In the short conversation which occurred on Friday evening the right hon. Gentleman stated that the fire in the Clock Tower had been occasioned by the wooden frame at the back of the gas jet unexpectedly taking fire from a change of wind. Now, it seemed to him that if the light had been placed in an iron tank the fire would not have occurred, and he wished to know whether the accident had arisen owing to the desire to save a few pounds in the erection of proper machinery, or whether, which was more likely, it was the result of carelessness?
MR. GOLDSMIDsaid, he should be glad to know what the right hon. Gentleman intended to do to preserve the works of art in the lobby? Some of the frescoes had suffered considerably, and the public would be glad to know that there was some probability of preserving them. He thought there was nothing to find fault with in the warming of the House, compared with what it was some years ago.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he should like some information as to the

437
artist and subject of the fresco for which they were called upon to vote £500 under this head, so that hon. Members might really know whether they were voting money to advance or retard the progress of high art in this country. He hoped the old oil-lamps would be restored in the division lobbies, instead of the present flaring gaseliers, which rendered what used to be the coolest place in the House the most oppressive.
MR. MACFIEsuggested that seats should be provided in the outer hall for strangers waiting to see Members, and for the accommodation of aged and infirm visitors. He also thought the accommodation in the Ladies' Gallery might be greatly extended if his right hon. Friend would only exercise a little of his characteristic ingenuity and gallantry, and go a little step farther and slope the seats from the back to the front. As at present arranged, only the occupants of the front seat had the advantage of seeing and hearing. There was always a rush to the front, and the two back benches were generally unoccupied.
VISCOUNT BURYobserved that the complaints which used to be made as to the want of accommodation within the House appeared to have sunk into silence, he presumed from a feeling of despair, for the evil was as great as ever, if not even greater. The average attendance of Members was greater than it used to be, and steadily went on increasing. Times out of number he had seen hon. Members come down, and try in vain to find a place from which they could address the Chair. He asked whether the question of extra accommodation within the House itself had been shelved, and whether the silence observed on the subject had been construed by the right hon. Gentleman into an acquiescence in the present state of things?
MR. R. N. FOWLERsaid, that, in former debates on the size of the House, when the present Parliament was younger, the Prime Minister had said—"Wait, and see whether the large attendance of Members is maintained;" and experience had justified the prescience of the right hon. Gentleman in that respect. True, during the debates on the Irish Church Bill it was difficult for some Members to find seats; but there was no longer any pressure, except very occasionally, when a large division was impending, and then it
438
only lasted for a few minutes. The House at that moment could not be called a thin House, and yet there was abundance of room to spare. The evils consequent upon enlargement, he was afraid, would be greater than those that were suffered now, for any additional seats would not be so good for hearing as those which now existed. It seemed better, therefore, to limit the accommodation to the number of Members in the habit of attending than to put them to inconvenience by providing for a larger number, including those who were not in the habit of attending, except when whipped up for a great division. The Government ought to consider most those who were in the habit of attending night after night, in order to make a House and carry on the Business of the country.
MR. ALDERMAN W. LAWRENCEcomplained that the heat of the Library had been greatly increased by the lowering of the chandeliers by two feet, and the disuse of candles, which could be extinguished when not required. He believed that when the lighting was by means of candles the atmosphere was much better than it was at present, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would return to the former mode of lighting. He also thought the books were suffering material damage from the great heat.
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he should be glad to hear if there was any probability of the "Judgment of Daniel," by Herbert, being soon placed in the public position for which it was destined. The item, for frescoes took him by surprise, because it had been understood that, on account of their fugitive character, they were to be superseded by mosaics; and therefore he should be glad of an explanation of the adherence to fresco-painting, unless, indeed, the use of the word were an error of the Press. No hon. Member could go round the building without observing the ravages that time was making with the soft stone; all kinds of projects to arrest decay had been mooted, but nothing effective had been discovered; and it was, therefore, desirable that the Committee should receive some information as to whether anything effectual could be done. The late Chief Commissioner removed paint which had been uselessly put upon beautiful stone inside the building, and he (Mr. C. Bentinck)

439
considered it a great improvement; he therefore regretted to observe that the bases of statues in St. Stephen's Hall had been covered with about the most ugly and unsuitable paint that could be used. He quite agreed with what had been said about the gas in the Library, and would suggest that the heat could be reduced by instructing the attendants to lower the lights that were not being used. He did not see the use of the lantern in the pinnacle of the Clock Tower, which caused the alarm of fire on Friday night, and he hoped that the signal would be discontinued.
MR. RYLANDSsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that a number of rooms over the Committee-rooms were not in use, for it would be desirable, if it were possible, to facilitate the access to the House of hon. Members sitting on Committees when the Division bell rang. He believed the House itself was large enough for the ordinary attendance, and that to enlarge it would increase the difficulty many hon. Members had in making themselves heard. The Members' light was a very useful beacon, often looked for by Members who were three or four miles away from the House, who were saved a useless journey when the absence of the light indicated that the House had risen. The light, he believed, had involved only a very slight expense, while it must have saved many hon. Members a good deal of trouble.
MR. J. S. HARDYsuggested that a simpler plan would be to exhibit the light during those hours of the night when the House was not sitting.
MR. DILLWYNsaid, he thought it was a discredit to the country that hon. Members were obliged, when a division was called, to crowd into the passages leading to the House, and to ask some hon. Friend what was going on. Greater facilities of access to the House ought certainly to be provided, and he thoroughly concurred with the remarks of the noble Lord (Viscount Bury) in reference to the subject.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he would, in the first place, reply to what his hon. Friend the Member for Warrington (Mr. Rylands) had said respecting the number of rooms in the building. Perhaps hon. Members generally were not aware that there was in the upper story of the House a beautiful suite of some 10 rooms, which he believed had not been
440
used for the last 20 years. No doubt that was a great waste of public accommodation, but there was considerable difficulty in utilizing the rooms. They had been given to the House of Commons for its own use; and therefore it had not allowed anyone to intrude into that part of the Palace of Westminster. No one could get to these rooms without ascending the staircase which the House claimed as its own, and he was afraid, therefore, that they must still remain unused and unoccupied; whereas if a staircase were made for Members to come down from the Committee-rooms by a short cut, instead of having to find their way to the House by a public staircase, they would perhaps be less tenacious of the occupation of this suite of rooms. With a view to effect the desired end, some years ago he proposed that the staircase leading to the smoking room, should be extended upwards to the corridor of the Committee-rooms, and be reserved exclusively for the use of hon. Members. The estimate made for the cost of the alteration was, however, very considerable, and the suggestion was not carried out. Since then, the subject had been reconsidered, and if the extension could be made consistently with certain difficulties connected with the ventilation of the House, he should be glad again to propose the plan. In the event of its adoption, it might be possible to utilize the rooms above, for other persons than Members might then be allowed to use the public staircase, in order to reach the suite of rooms to which he had just alluded. With regard to the light in the Clock Tower, it was a mistake to suppose the slightest risk had been incurred by reason of the use of a piece of wood, for the upper part of the tower being wholly constructed of iron there was no chance of its taking fire. In fact, there was no alarm experienced on the occasion, except that caused by the arrival of the fire-engines. The experiment was only a temporary one, and the wood was used because it could be easily adapted from time to time to any alteration. As to substituting the light behind the face of the clock for the light used in the tower, great inconvenience would arise from extinguishing the light behind the clock face at uncertain times. It was far better to have an independent light for the purpose of indicating when the House was

441
sitting, and as far as he could gather it had already been found to be a considerable convenience to hon. Members. If, however, the reverse was the case, and hon. Members did not appreciate the light, it could be removed, for it was no particular pleasure for him to keep it burning. The suggestion, however, that it should only be lighted when the House was not sitting, could not, he thought, be adopted. As regards the library, he had to state that there was no additional gas there at all. Until recently all the gas burners in the library were so placed that they could not give sufficient light. No one, in fact, could see to read a book without lighting a wax candle, and under these circumstances he thought the best thing to do was to utilize the gas-burners. The complaint now was that the light was too strong; but that inconvenience could be easily modified by slightly turning down the gas, according to the reader's experience. The same remark was applicable to the gas in the lobbies, which he might remark had been made much cooler than they used to be by additional openings for ventilating purposes. It was determined by the Royal Commission that the compartments in the Central Hall should be illustrated with pictures of the four patron Saints. One of these—St. George—had been executed in the Venetian or glass mosaic. Undoubtedly, the opinion generally entertained was that the glass mosaic was not very satisfactory as a work of art, or fitted for the decoration of the walls of the Palace of Westminster. It appeared to him, therefore, that he ought not to proceed further with that species of decoration without consulting gentlemen who were professionally conversant with art. In the first place, he asked all the artists who had been practically concerned in fresco painting, whether it ought to be abandoned as an impracticable mode of decoration; and here he might remark that he himself had no particular preference for fresco painting or for any other mode of decoration. Well, they thought it would be quite premature to abandon fresco painting, because the eminent chemist who was associated with them in their inquiry, was of opinion that the failure of the frescoes could be traced to definite causes, and that with a knowledge of those causes we might bring the art to perfection. That being their opinion, the
442
gentleman who drew the design for St. George, and who had also been engaged to make the designs for the other three panels, said he should be prepared to undertake fresco painting if he were desired to do so; and he might add that this gentleman had himself been associated with the Committee, because it was thought he would examine the subject in an eminently practical light. No definite arrangement had, however, been come to with regard to the matter. The artist's original engagement was to make four designs for the glass mosaics; but that gentleman had since declined to continue to furnish them at the particular price then stated, and had himself withdrawn from the engagement. One grave objection to the glass mosaic was, that a comparatively small sum was paid for the work of art, while three or four times as much money was paid for putting the pieces of glass together to represent the original painting. That did not at first sight appear to be a good mode of advancing the highest class of art. Under these circumstances, it was open to the Committee to sanction the payment of the £500 proposed, in order that we might, with all the experience which had been obtained, make another effort to obtain a fresco panel. On the other hand, there were other modes of painting. For example, there was the method applied by Mr. Maclise, which it had been hoped would be better than the ordinary fresco; but, unfortunately, that gentleman's work had now begun absolutely to decay and peel off; consequently, the mode he adopted could not be repeated. The subject had been carefully considered by the chemist who had devoted much time to the question; but he had not yet made his final Report as to the steps to be taken for arresting the decay of the large cartoons. As to the "Judgment of Daniel," which was ordered several years ago to be painted by Mr. Herbert, while it was in an unfinished state the canvas unfortunately showed certain symptoms of swelling. Steps would be taken to remedy those defects, and a Vote would be proposed to enable him to finish that work. As to the Ladies' Gallery, the back seats were, no doubt, rather low, and he saw no reason why they should not be raised. As to the proposal to enlarge the House, which was recommended by a Committee up-

443
stairs, no hon. Member had asked the House to affirm the Resolution of the Committee. He thought the Chief Commissioner of Works should not propose to pull down that House for the purpose of building another, unless the House of Commons itself first resolved that that course was absolutely necessary for the carrying on of Public Business. His personal conviction was, that no such necessity existed. However inconvenient the present room might be, he believed a larger room would be found on the whole to be infinitely more inconvenient. Therefore he recommended the Committee not to adopt any change on that point. At all events, he would not initiate any change. It would be necessary to raise all the pinnacles on the building, and to re-fasten them so that they should not fall down. No doubt too many stones had been used in the construction of that building which exhibited signs of decay. Any stones, therefore, that might be found so defective that they ought to be removed would be removed, and the only thing that could be done to preserve stones from further decay was to coat them with a composition.
LORD ELCHOsaid, it was somewhat strange that fresco painting had failed in that House, wherever it had been applied; and he wished to know whether it was intended to take out the panel which had been filled in with glass mosaic, and to substitute for it a fresco?
SIR WILLIAM TITEsaid, a Committee sat upon the subject of the stone employed in the construction of the Houses of Parliament some three or four years ago. They examined some very eminent chemists, and various remedies were suggested for arresting the decay, but it was found that no good could be done by washing the stones with any solution or composition. The only thing available was to cut out the stone wherever it was found to be decaying.
MR. OSBORNEsaid, he was of opinion that the time had arrived when the advocates of economy and the lovers of art might join together in putting an end to this diabolical system of voting money for these frescoes. He was surprised that his right hon. Friend, who was really one of the most careful guardians of the public purse, was not satisfied with the experience we had had of these frescoes. We had spent between
444
£40,000 and £50,000 in defacing these walls with the most expensive paintings, which were completely out of character with the building, quite forgetting the example of Venice, and the way in which her frescoes were destroyed by capillary attraction, as our frescoes would be destroyed in another 20 years. The frescoes painted by Maclise had cost £7,500 each, and they were painted by the water-glass process, which was supposed at the time to last for ever; but what was the result now? Why, in the painting of the meeting at La Belle Alliance, Blucher had become very nearly obliterated, and the famous nose of the Duke of Wellington was dropping from his face. The Commission of Fine Arts which sat for the decoration of the Houses of Parliament found rather an expensive plaything. Noble Lords and most noble Dukes went on holding meetings on the subject, although they were warned that the walls of this building were not adapted for fresco painting. And what was the consequence? Every fresco was now rotting off the walls. He believed his noble Friend opposite intended to ask the Committee to put a veto on this Vote of £500, and that was the only way to stop this fresco business. Moreover, with respect to the representation of our patron saints, we were in what the Americans would call "a tarnation tight fix." In the Central Hall we had got St. George and the Dragon in mosaics up near the roof, and he believed it would be found more expensive in the end to take down that patron saint, than to put up the other three patron saints under this Mosaic Dispensation. With regard to the advice given by the hon. Member for Bath (Sir William Tite) not to paint the stone outside the building, did hon. Members remember what happened when this building was about to be erected? There was actually a Geological Committee which sat before the stone was selected, and if anyone wanted to know what had come of their deliberations, he had only to walk out and look at the stone, and he would see that it was in much the same condition as the frescoes inside. He should like to know after that how it was possible to put any faith in professors? He was sure that some subsequent House of Commons would be called upon to cover the whole of the Houses of Parliament with a coat of

445
Roman cement? To return to the Central Hall, he hoped his noble Friend (Lord Elcho) would insist upon having a distinct answer to the question whether St. George and the Dragon was to remain there or not? Mr. Poynter was no doubt a very great artist and a man of taste; but he (Mr. Osborne) objected to pay him. The original contract was to put up three more patron saints in glass, but certain people objected to it that it was not possible; so it was not done, and it seemed to him that they were to utilize the artist in another way and get him to paint a fresco which no doubt would quickly drop off the walls, with the rest of these monuments of decayed art. The money might, in his opinion, be just as well thrown into the Thames. He moved that £500, the Vote for these frescoes, be disallowed.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Item of £500, for Painting one Panel in Fresco in the Central Hall, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Osborne.)
LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, he was not certain that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had given a correct version of what had been done about the selection of the stone. The Commission that had been appointed did not recommend the stone which was ultimately selected. The particular stone which they recommended was to be taken from the Roche Abbey Quarries in Yorkshire; but the stone actually used came from some quarries in the neighbourhood. With respect to the Central Hall, after the repeated failures that had occurred, it would be an extremely hazardous thing to set about painting frescoes again. And more than that, there would be a certain incongruity in having one panel filled with a mosaic and the other three with frescoes. At any rate, the panel opposite to St. George ought to be filled with a mosaic. As a matter of congruity and harmony, it would be better to have all the panels filled with mosaic, of the enduring qualities of which there could be no doubt.
LORD ELCHOsaid, that his hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Osborne) had anticipated him in moving the Amendment. If the Committee, after having seen the signal failure of these frescoes, were to vote £500 for another, it would be a most mischievous proceeding. Under all
446
the circumstances, the best course to take would be to complete the whole of the panels in the Central Hall in the same style of decoration as had been already begun.
MR. AYRTONsaid, the explanation of the matter was this—A number of eminent artists, Royal Academicians, having been asked for their opinion as to the decoration of the walls, made a Report which had been laid on the Table. In that Report they condemned certain modes of decoration, of which glass mosaic was one, on the ground that none of these modes really represented the work of the artist. ["Name, name!"] Among these gentlemen were Mr. Cope, Mr. Watts, Mr. Armitage, Mr. Ward, and Mr. Herbert, the very gentlemen who painted the frescoes, who were very conscious of their own failure, and therefore understood the matter better than anyone else. Those gentlemen having recorded their opinion, it was his duty to present their views to the consideration of the Committee. He himself would give no opinion on the subject. If the Committee was of opinion that Mr. Poynter would fail, he (Mr. Ayrton) was not one of those to urge upon the Committee to proceed with the proposed work, as he thought he had sufficiently discharged his duty by bringing the subject before the Committee.
MR. A. SEYMOURsaid, it would be a thousand pities to destroy almost the only indestructible work of art in the House, and nothing could be more foolish than to put up three other frescoes when those which they already had were tumbling to pieces. He should most decidedly vote with the noble Lord opposite upon the question, and trusted that before his right hon. Friend embarked in any more fresco painting, he would allow the Committee to see the paper from which he had been reading, and would take the opinion of other people besides artists?
MR. LOCKEsaid, he could not approve of the condemnation passed both on the mosaic and the fresco by the hon. Member for Waterford. He was surprised, however, at the observation of the hon. Member who spoke last (Mr. A. Seymour), because some time ago he had approved of fresco on each side of the stained glass window at the west end of the Inner Temple Hall. Now, the Benchers of the Inner Temple had accu-

447
mulated much evidence as to the decoration of their Hall, and Mr. Poynter had told him that the mosaic in the Central Hall was a failure, that it was not properly executed, and that he would not recommend any more. Mr. Poynter suggested frescoes, and it seemed to be thought that, with new ingredients, frescoes could be made to last for ever. Glass had been put over the frescoes, which would undoubtedly preserve them, and it had been stated that it would be great extravagance to do away with the present decoration altogether, until they found whether or not some improvement could be made. He thought they ought to trust the right hon. Gentleman in this matter.
MR. COWPER - TEMPLEsaid, he was quite ready to trust the Chief Commissioner, if the right hon. Gentleman had an opinion upon the subject; but, if he had not, it would be better to rely upon common sense. The report on the decay of the frescoes was very valuable. The decay had been only partial, and, in a great degree, arose from the impurity of colours; and the gentlemen who made the Report suggested various methods in which mistakes might be avoided in future: it would be safe and right to entrust able painters with the task of continuing the fresco painting where it had been commenced. It was important, however, to avoid any retrograde movement, and as they had begun with mosaics in the Central Hall, it was advisable to go on with the work. The mosaic decoration being in its infancy was capable of much improvement, and was admirably suited to large buildings; and, therefore, he hoped the decoration for the Central Hall would be finished in the style which had already been adopted.
MR. AYRTONsaid, the Report of the Committee of eminent artists was laid on the Table and printed on February 12. He had asked their opinion upon the subject, because dissatisfaction had been expressed with the mosaic painting. Mr. Poynter had desired that some portions of it might be taken out, and other pieces substituted for it; but he thought such an attempt might not be successful. He did not wish to pledge himself to proceed exactly in the manner pursued with regard to this mosaic; but he thought it possible that they might complete the decoration of the
448
Central Hall in an improved style. If it was the wish of the Committee that that should be done, they had better strike out the item under discussion.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he must protest against the idea that by striking out this item, they would be substituting mere decoration for fine art; they were simply preferring one process of fine art to another. If it was supposed that the mistakes made in the frescoes might be avoided, was there not ground for expecting that the mosaics might also be improved?
MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, it was interesting to hear the authorities on art differing from each other. He had begun to find out that the art critics in that House were not such very distinguished authorities as he used to think they were, and he should like to see them, while they pretended to teach others, agreeing among themselves. He regretted that the Chief Commissioner did not persist in his intention of following the advice of the artists whose Report he had received.
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he understood that Dr. Salviati was not satisfied with the execution of the work, therefore the most reasonable thing seemed to him to be that before they discontinued it, they should try if it would not succeed when the work was better executed. Let them see whether on the Continent, and more especially at Rome, improved methods could not be found of dealing with the subject.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that there was great difficulty in going on with the glass mosaic, because Mr. Poynter declined to proceed with the designs; so that the whole matter must be carefully considered, even assuming that they went on with the decoration of the Central Hall.
LORD ELCHOsaid, that a Committee had been named to decide on the best mode of copying a portion of the cartoons, with a view of their being made more generally known, and he thought some very useful suggestions bearing on the question with which the Committee was dealing might come out of that inquiry.
Question put, and agreed to.
Original Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.
(6.) £75,250, to complete the sum for the New Offices in Downing Street.
MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, he wished to point out the great disadvantage there was in not having a comprehensive plan in dealing with those buildings. There was a sum of £37,000 on the Estimates for the annual hire of offices, which represented a capital of about £1,600,000, and if buildings had been erected for that sum most admirable offices might be secured for the money which was now expended in the shape of rent. He wished to know when the houses in Parliament Street in front of the new offices would be taken down, and whether they had been purchased?
MR. AYRTON, in reply, said, that the £37,000 referred to by the hon. Member was laid out on the hire of offices not only in other parts of the metropolis, but in the country, which offices could not possibly be concentrated in Parliament Street. This Vote was for the completion of buildings now in course of erection on land acquired under several Acts of Parliament, and, therefore, they were only proceeding within the limits of the authority already given by Parliament in reference to the space between Whitehall Place and Charles Street. All the houses between Charles Street and Whitehall Place would be pulled down as soon as the new Home and Colonial Offices were complete. At present, they screened the works in progress, and were useful as offices for persons who must be in the neighbourhood. When those houses had been pulled down, the space they now occupied would belong to the Crown, and it would be competent to Parliament to deal with it as might be thought proper. But it did not follow that the ground would be given to the public of of the metropolis as a street, because that would bring all the noise and turmoil of the street close under the windows of the public offices. ["Oh, oh!"] Probably the space would be reserved. There was, however, a moral claim on the part of the parish to have as much space added to Parliament Street as the parish formerly occupied with King Street, and the claim would have to be aken into consideration. Still, he had no authority to give the space to anybody, for it belonged really to the House of Commons or the Crown.
MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, that what he had complained of was that there was no comprehensive plan in
450
dealing with those improvements, and that the right hon. Gentleman did not know, even now, what he intended to do with the space. The noise of carriages passing would be heard as much in the offices if the space was planted with trees as if it was thrown into the street.
MR. AYRTONreplied, that all he proposed to do was to carry out the provisions of the Acts of Parliament on the subject. This property had been acquired under Acts of Parliament, and if anything more was required new Acts of Parliament would have to be passed for the purpose.
MR. LOCKEsaid, he should like to know whether the Department of Works would inform the House, when the buildings in Parliament Street were pulled down, what they proposed to do with the vacant space? He was all the more anxious to have information on this point, because of the course which had been taken with respect to the reclaimed land on the Thames Embankment. The Government had misbehaved themselves in that matter, and would not make any alteration although a Committee of the House had decided what should be done. They had appointed another Committee on the subject, and the result would presently be seen. Was a large brick wall to be built in front of the new offices, or was the open space to be made use of for the purpose of widening the street?
LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, the complaint of the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. B. Cochrane) was founded on strict justice. It was impossible for great public works to be commenced in a particular method by one Government and carried on in a totally different way by their successors without the greatest possible public inconvenience. But in this instance, the position was even worse, because the change of policy had taken place during the existence of the present Ministry. A scheme was prepared by a Commission appointed by Lord Russell's Government for laying out the whole of this land, and concentrating all the public offices on the long line extending from the Admiralty down to George Street, and that plan was adopted, and the necessary notices given by the late Government. When Mr. Disraeli's Government went out of office a Bill

451
was brought in, which was backed by the names of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Layard, for carrying out the major part of that plan, the execution of which would have obviated the complaints now made by the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight. That Bill, however, was entirely shelved, and now the Chief Commissioner declined to state what was to be done with the line of houses immediately in front of the new buildings. When the Chief Commissioner stated that what was being done was carried out under Acts of Parliament and Votes, agreed to by that House, he must remind the right hon. Gentleman that those Acts were passed and those Votes obtained by the Ministers of the Crown in accordance with certain maps and plans produced for the satisfaction of Parliament, and Parliament was induced to sanction the Bill of 1865 on the distinct understanding that Parliament Street was to be widened by the whole breadth of the land purchased under the various Acts, and not required for the buildings. It was to be regretted that when the whole of the block of houses in question might at one time have been purchased at what would at the present moment be considered a moderate price, this piecemeal policy should have been entered upon, and that a miserable set of houses should be left standing in what might otherwise be one of the finest approaches to the Houses of Parliament, and the Abbey at Westminster.
VISCOUNT BURYremarked that the question was whether the right hon. Gentleman had any comprehensive plan at all, and, if so, when would it be laid on the Table of the House, for they were now within one year of the actual completion of the works. They ought, therefore, to take care how they parted with the control of public expenditure in the matter, and to know whether one of the greatest alterations made in recent years was to be an improvement or not. He was surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman say either that he had no plan, or that he declined to produce one; and in order to persuade the right hon. Gentleman to give the Committee all the information possible, he should be prepared to move a very material reduction of the Vote.
DR. BREWERsaid, it was for the House to determine what should be done
452
with the acquired land, and he asked whether it would not be possible to throw the whole of it into Parliament Street? They could not hesitate to vote what was necessary for the widening of the street, as the object was of an Imperial rather than of a local character.
MR. GOLDSMIDsaid, that the question was whether the understanding that all the space not required for the public offices should be thrown into Parliament Street ought not to be carried out. The original plan should be carried out for the sake both of the public and of the Government offices themselves.
MR. COWPER-TEMPLEsaid, he was rather alarmed at the suggestion thrown out by the Chief Commissioner of Works, that Crown property might not, like other property, be used for the public advantage. The extent of public thoroughfare that had been lost by stopping up part of King Street had to be replaced in Parliament Street; and although the whole of the street could not be widened by the present plan, the widening of half its length would be an important gain in beauty and convenience. He hoped to hear some satisfactory explanation of the right hon. Gentleman's remarks, for he was curious to know at what they could be pointed. The great thoroughfare between Trafalgar Square and the Houses of Parliament ought to be widened, whether from local or from Imperial funds. He hoped the Government would have no difficulty in stating their views upon the subject.
MR. ALDERMAN LUSKthought the Committee had been a little hard on the Chief Commissioner of Works, for it was not so much his business to say what he was going to do as for the Committee to say what ought to be done. It would be imprudent in the Chief Commissioner to assume the functions of the House of Commons, and decide important points like this, and the Committee ought not to press the matter.
MR. M. CHAMBERSsaid, the Committee had been asked to vote £100,000, and for what? This was an estimate of the amount required during the current year for the erection of new offices in Fludyer Street. The hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. B. Cochrane) had argued that Parliament had been extravagant and incautious with regard to purchases of property for the public offices, yet what were the facts? Forty

453
years ago the Government purchased Downing Street, which was for many years in a dilapidated and uninhabited condition; when suddenly there was a resolve that something should be done; a magnificent scheme for building public offices was drawn up, and afterwards the House of Commons was called upon to vote the money to carry out the plan. If, however, sufficient property for any public improvement was not taken at first, when more was required it could only be obtained at a price beyond that which it would have fetched originally. No doubt this money would have to be voted; but the demand afforded a fair opportunity for commenting on the folly of a Department planning a grand scheme, and then running away from it on account of the great expense, which had been the evil in this case. The Chief Commissioner ought to have been prepared to tell the Committee what he was going to do with the land in question, and his statement that the land was not to be thrown into the open street was not and ought not to be satisfactory to hon. Members, whose duty it was to see how the public money was expended. He did not wish to cause embarrassment to his right hon. Friend; but the House ought to have the power of saying—"You shall not have the money unless you tell us what is to become of the land."
MR. AYRTONsaid, the discussion had travelled very wide of the real question before the Committee, which had reference simply to the voting of money for the new Home and Colonial Office, for the erection of which, on the faith of former Votes of the House, contracts had been entered into, the works had been commenced, and the money now asked for was for the purpose of paying the contractors. The complaints made as to the non-dedication of lands to the public should be addressed to his predecessors, who had not thought proper to insert the necessary clauses for securing their object in the Acts under which the site was acquired. Not long ago the parochial authorities called on him to ask whether he was not going to widen Parliament Street. He asked them to point out the sections in the Acts requiring that to be done; they, of course, were unable to point to any such directions, but they thought that perhaps he might do it. He, however, had no power to give away
454
the lands which Parliament had bought. The houses were still standing on those lands, and were occupied as offices. When the lands were cleared, then would be the time for whatever Government was in office to decide what should be done with the site. For his own part, he felt no embarrassment and no responsibility in the matter; the time for dealing with it had not yet arrived. He had not prejudiced or predetermined the matter in any way; he left it a perfectly open question. The local authorities seemed to consider that they had an equitable claim to have the breadth of King Street added to Parliament Street. When the proper time arrived, whoever then held the office entrusted to him, would deal with that question according to every principle of justice which could be quoted. The noble Lord opposite (Lord John Manners) was quite wrong in supposing that he had departed from any plans proposed by his predecessors; the plan on which the new buildings were proceeding had indeed been reconsidered by the architect, but the ground plan was precisely the same as that settled by his predecessor in office. As regarded metropolitan improvements, he would remind hon. Members that there was a far greater power than the Chief Commissioner of Works, and that was the Metropolitan Board.
LORD ELCHOadmitted that the question as to the land did not arise immediately out of the Vote for the new Home and Colonial Office, but thought it was closely connected with it. His right hon. Friend, in fact, admitted this, when he said that the future occupant of the office which he now held would have to decide the question whenever the land was cleared. This course was too characteristic of all our legislation, which proceeded in a happy-go-lucky, hap-hazard spirit, upon the assumption that sufficient for the day is the good or evil thereof. Had the scheme of that great ædile, Sir Benjamin Hall, been carried out at the time it was proposed, the land would have been acquired at a price which, in these days, would be considered moderate, whereas matters had been deferred from year to year, till at last no one exactly knew what was being done. With a view of rendering matters more intelligible, Mr. Layard, now our Minister at Madrid, caused a great model to be prepared for exhibition to Members in the conference

455
—now the dining—room of the House of Commons; and if by this or similar means Parliament were enabled to judge of the schemes for public works in progress or in contemplation, the present difficulty would never have arisen. That difficulty arose from this—that a space of land was to be cleared, and the Chief Commissioner of Works told them that his successor would be able to judge how to deal with the land, and that the Government then existing would deal with it on principles of justice. But this was not what was now wanted. What was wanted was that some clear and intelligible system of action should be laid down—not that land should wait until it became vacant, and then be dealt with, in the words of his right hon. Friend, "according to every principle of justice."
MR. M'LARENsaid, that all hon. Members who had spoken seemed to him to have missed the real question. The point whether this space should be thrown into a street had been discussed, and there seemed to be great unanimity of opinion that it ought to be, but the question who should pay for it had never been broached. He held that street improvements ought to be paid for by the Metropolitan Board of Works, and that the people of Ireland and Scotland ought not to be taxed for them. He would put an analogous case. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government had, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, agreed to have Industrial Museums in the three capitals of the kingdom—London, Dublin, and Edinburgh. When the time arrived for carrying out the improvement the Government opposed the erection of the Museum in Edinburgh unless the people agreed to pay the expense of widening the street from 25 to 70 feet. He was one of a deputation who urged him not only to erect the building but to widen the approach to it; the right hon. Gentleman, however, declined to do so, and the result was that the City of Edinburgh had to widen the street from 25 to 70 feet, at an expense of £30,000 or £40,000. If that was the right principle applicable to the North, why was it not applicable to the South—to the City of Westminster as well as the City of Edinburgh? And why should not the Board of Works in the metropolis do what was done by the people of Edinburgh—make the road at their own expense? He said that the rather be-
456
cause so much pressure was occasionally brought to bear upon the Government in relation to the Embankment and other improvements in the metropolis, which ought not to be paid for out of the general taxation.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he was satisfied that a very large sum of money now voted for the rent of public offices might have been saved if a proper systematic plan for rebuilding them had been adopted at first. The present complication would have been avoided if Parliament had been called upon for a certain sum of money to carry out a fixed mass of buildings capable of decently housing the public offices of the country—say, a new Home and Colonial Office, as well as a National Gallery and a Royal Academy.
MR. RYLANDSsaid, a question had been raised—what was to be done with a certain amount of land which had been purchased by the nation when the houses which at present stood on it had been removed? But what was the object of discussing that question now? When the time came for the buildings to be cleared away, then it would be for Parliament to decide what was to be done with the vacant space. His right hon. Friend, if he should remain in office—as he hoped he would for many years to come—could not take any further step in the matter without the express sanction of Parliament. The metropolis must be looked at as a sort of Imperial concern, and he thought the question should not now be pressed.
LORD ELCHOstill maintained the opinion he had expressed that it would have been better for the public if the whole plan of these buildings had been laid before Parliament and nothing left to hap-hazard.
MR. CANDLISHsaid, he objected to hon. Members in Committee of Supply airing any mortal crotchet they wished. He wished to ask the Chief Commissioner of Works, whether the building for the Home and Colonial Office would be completed for the sum originally estimated—namely, £285,000?
LORD ELCHOexpressed his regret that the hon. Member for Sunderland should have thought it right to make remarks which amounted to a censure upon the conduct of the Chairman of Committees.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that the contract made was such as to fully justify the conclusion that the work would be carried out for the estimated cost; but, owing to the recent strikes, the progress of the building was now stopped, and any observations he made now must be accepted subject to what might happen in the future.
Vote agreed to.
(7.) £9,133, to complete the sum for the Sheriff Court Houses, Scotland.
(8.) £37,250, to complete the sum for the Enlargement of the National Gallery.
MR. COWPER - TEMPLEasked, whether the area of the new building was such that there would be space enough to admit of the concentration of all the national pictures, including those that were at South Kensington or elsewhere?
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, that was another instance of the disappearance of a comprehensive scheme. Some years ago, when the idea was that the National Gallery was to be permanently enlarged, schemes and designs were placed before a Committee, and Mr. Barry was appointed architect; but he was informed that nothing was being contracted for now but certain ugly plain brick galleries. Was it intended to stop there, or was a building to be produced which would be worthy of the nation? If not, we should have another example of the works of one Government abandoned by the next, and of an ulterior expenditure greater than it need have been.
MR. M. CHAMBERSsaid, he should like to know whether space would be provided for pictures over and above those already possessed by the nation, because he believed there were many pictures in the hands of private owners who would present them to the nation if due provision were made for exhibiting them. For instance, he had one by Sir Joshua Reynolds which he would gladly give to the nation if it could be hung in a proper place in the National Gallery; and he had reason to believe there were others who would also enrich the national collection if it were likely that their pictures would be properly exhibited.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he should be glad to understand whether the money now asked for would be spent in such additions to the National Gallery as could afterwards be incorporated into any new building which it might be decided to erect, or whether they would be mere temporary erections for the passing necessities of the day?
MR. AYRTONsaid, that the additions to the National Gallery had been expressly designed in such a manner that, while they were intended to be permanent in themselves, they would also be capable of being incorporated into any structure that might hereafter take the place of the present National Gallery. They were planned on a scale that was considered sufficiently large for the immediate wants of the Gallery, and for any that were likely to arise for some time to come; and he could therefore assure his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. M. Chambers) that no difficulty would be interposed to the acceptance of the picture which he had been good enough to offer to the nation. There would also be ample room for any other treasures of art that the friends of his hon. and learned Friend might be disposed to present to the collection.
MR. RYLANDSwished to know whether the new buildings would be fire proof?
MR. AYRTONsaid, that the new buildings would be fire proof, and that great precautions had been taken to prevent the pictures in the present building from being destroyed or injured by fire.
Vote agreed to.
(9.) £14,750, to complete the sum for the Glasgow University Buildings.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he did not wish to oppose the Vote, but would merely remark to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. M'Laren) that it showed that expenditure of large sums for public buildings was not confined to London.
MR. M'LARENsaid, that in the absence of the hon. Members for Glasgow, he wished to explain that this Vote was the result of a bargain entered into between the inhabitants of Glasgow and the Treasury. The inhabitants undertook to raise £120,000 if the Treasury

459
contributed an equal sum. The amount raised in Glasgow considerably exceeded the sum originally fixed, and if the hon. Gentleman would look at a Return which he (Mr. M'Laren) obtained a few years ago, he would find that the proportion of the taxation paid by Scotland was more than any return which she got in this or in any other way out of the national Exchequer.
Vote agreed to.
(10.) £8,200, to complete the sum for the Industrial Museum, Edinburgh.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, that this was another proof of the assistance given out of the Imperial funds to the public buildings of Scotland. He should like to know how much Edinburgh had subscribed as a rate in aid?
MR. M'LARENsaid, the Treasury laid it down as a condition that the street 25 feet wide, opposite the Museum, should be made 70 feet wide. That the local authorities had done at a cost of £40,000.
Vote agreed to.
(11.) £35,000, to complete the sum for Burlington House.
LORD ELCHOremarked that on a former occasion the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Hampshire proposed that the National Gallery should be removed to Burlington House, and that the Royal Academy should be left in possession of the present National Gallery, on the understanding that they were to put a new front to it, and make it an ornament to the metropolis. His hon. Friend opposite was aware that this plan was defeated by a party vote.
MR. CANDLISHbelieved the statement of the noble Lord was substantially true, but remarked that, generally speaking, matters of art or science were not made party questions.
Vote agreed to.
(12.) £128,889, to complete the sum for the Post Office and Inland Revenue, Buildings.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEexpressed a hope that the right hon. Gentleman would give some explanation of the delay which had occurred in completing the new Post Office buildings at St. Martin's-le-Grand?
MR. MACFIEcomplained of the want of sufficient postal and telegraphic accommodation at Leith.
MR. WHITWELLwished to know whether the Post Office proceeded on any definite rules in determining what towns should have new buildings? The accommodation at Kendal was very insufficient for the amount of business transacted.
MR. RYLANDSsaid, there was not suitable post office accommodation at Warrington. Care ought to be taken that proper post office buildings were erected in all large boroughs.
MR. AYRTONreplied, that it could hardly be said that any definite rule existed in regard to the erection of new post office buildings. There was however, no favouritism, and the urgency of each individual case was taken into consideration. Generally speaking, it might be said that the Post Office authorities and the Board of Works did not build if they could possibly avoid doing so; and that they did not purchase premises if they could hire them at a reasonable rent. The contract for the great work of the new Post Office in St. Martin's-le-Grand was to have been completed on the 31st of December last; but great difficulty was experienced at the commencement of the work in procuring the granite required for the foundation of the building. There was, consequently, some delay in beginning the work, and this circumstance had prevented its being completed in the specified period. The building, he regretted to say, was not likely to be ready for occupation for some little time to come. He believed the delay could not have been avoided by the contractor, and therefore it was not deemed necessary to take any severe steps against him.
LORD ELCHOremarked that the requirements of Sunderland had been carefully considered in the present Estimate.
MR. CANDLISHsaid, the expenditure at Sunderland arose from the Post Office having been ill-advised enough to buy an old shop, as also from the increase of population and the addition of telegraphic business.
VISCOUNT BURYhoped the Berwick Post Office would be remembered next year.
MR. M. CHAMBERSsaid, he thought a great deal too much money was spent upon post office buildings in different

461
parts of the country. He noticed that they were asked to vote £5,000 for Colchester, £9,500 for Newcastle-on-Tyne, and £3,000 for Rochdale; and he wanted to know what course the Government adopted when it was proposed to build or enlarge a country post office? His impression was that, in most cases, the buildings might be erected for one-half the cost charged in the Estimates.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that the hon. and learned Gentleman had certainly been speaking from imagination, and assured him that every case of the kind was as carefully investigated as any case which he was called upon to plead. It must not be supposed that the expenditure originated with the inhabitants, for though requests were sometimes made to the Department, the reply always given was that they would be considered, meaning that they would not be considered as regarded local wishes, but would be considered in connection with the postal service. The surveyor of the Post Office reported on the requirements of each case, his report being considered by the Office of Works as well as by the Postmaster General, the surveyor of the former considering the matter in the light of economy of construction, and preparing the plans. Great care was taken that the exigencies of the Department were not exceeded, and these did not depend merely on the population, for a place might be an important centre of transmission and distribution, and yet have little local business. In cases where the largest expenditure was proposed, the building was for Inland Revenue as well as postal purposes, the two being combined when this could be done advantageously. The Surveyor of Works took care that the cost of these buildings was not excessive.
Vote agreed to.
(13.) £3,729, to complete the sum for the British Museum Buildings.
(14.) £31,805, to complete the sum for New Buildings for County Courts.
(15.) £25,896, to complete the sum for the Science and Art Department.
MR. RYLANDSinquired whether this Vote would complete the expenditure at present authorized upon the buildings at South Kensington?
MR. AYRTONstated that the cost of the buildings at South Kensington would
462
be kept strictly within the original estimate of £195,000. He must, however, express his fear that when those buildings were completed, a further large expenditure would be required to render them sightly, they being very unsightly at present.
Vote agreed to.
(16.) £95,710, to complete the sum for Surveys of the United Kingdom, &c.
VISCOUNT BURYsaid, he had a Motion on the Paper that night to call attention to the present state of the Ordnance Survey; but with the House so thinly attended as it then was, he would not take the course he otherwise would have done, and he would therefore confine himself to asking for information. The course of the survey hitherto had not run very smoothly, it having been declared "no child of mine" by various Departments, and he must therefore congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Commissioner of Works on the prosperous state which the survey had attained now that it had been taken up by his Department, where it bade fair to have a less stormy career than had previously attended it. The old 1-inch map of Great Britain begun in 1801, and which was the only one which had been completed, was found on examination to be so utterly inaccurate that it was impossible to improve it. In 1861 a Select Committee was appointed on that subject, which sat for two long Sessions and to which 14 thick Blue Books, besides other documents, were referred. The Committee digested the information thus placed before them, and recommended that Great Britain and Ireland should be surveyed on a scale of 25 inches to the mile. Since then that survey on the 25-inch scale had been continued, and there were also a 6-inch plan and a 1-inch map to be prepared pari passu with it. He should now confine himself merely to asking two questions. First, whether, as the 25-inch survey descended from the North down into a part of Yorkshire, and as it also ascended from the South up as far as the Thames, it was proposed to continue it pari passu along with the 6-inch plan and the 1-inch map? It had been thought it would be better to tinker up the old 1-inch map: but that map, having been constructed

463
with reference not to any one meridian but to three different meridians was, as he had intimated, stupendously inaccurate, and even if they were out hunting and wanted to find their way home it was very seldom they would find the road they wished to travel laid down on it as the right place. He therefore urged on the Government the absolute necessity—if they had not already decided on doing so—of proceeding with the 6-inch plan and the 1-inch map pari passu with the execution of the 25-inch survey. The Committee of 1861 recommended that a uniform sum yearly should be devoted to that work, and that it should be £90,000. They added, however, that the work would be much more rapidly done if £120,000 were voted. The Vote this year was over £125,000, and he was informed that at the present rate of progress the survey would be completed in nine or ten years on the three scales. He thought his right hon. Friend had exercised a wise discretion in bringing up the Vote to its present amount, and congratulated him upon the progress made in the survey. Great credit was also due to Sir Henry James for the admirable way in which the survey had been made; it was regarded throughout Europe as a model of scientific work. He should like to hear some account of the circumstances under which the survey was transferred from one Department of the State to another.
MR. HERMONsaid, it was of no use to have the survey unless some use could be made of it. Great difficulty was experienced in obtaining these maps in the country, and he would suggest that through the Post Office sets of the maps should be placed on sale in the various localities.
MR. WREN-HOSKYNSsaid, he very much regretted that when he recently brought this subject before the House, he had not carried his Motion to a division, for he had found throughout the country a great desire that the survey should proceed at a more rapid rate. Ireland had, perhaps, the most beautiful map in the world. It was so received at the Congress at Brussels, but while Ireland was done part on the 1-inch and part on the 6-inch scale, and Scotland had been done on the 25-inch scale, the survey in England was, as the noble Lord had said, to a large extent "stu-
464
pendously inaccurate," and as to many of our counties we were in a state of Cimmerian darkness. It was time to claim justice to England. Ours was the only country in Europe, except Greece, which had not a cadastral map, by means of which its land transfer could be accomplished. By a small increase in the staff he believed the survey could be completed in five or six years; but as matters stood he doubted whether the noble Lord was justified in assuming that it would be completed in nine years. He had been told in this House that the work would still occupy 13 years.
MR. STEVENSONsaid, he concurred with the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Hermon), that it was difficult to find an Ordnance map in any country district, and thought that if the Government engaged in the manufacture of maps, they should make the same arrangements which other map producers did to get rid of them, by allowing local stationers and others an adequate commission upon the sale.
MR. WHALLEYsupported the appeal which had been made for the utmost possible despatch in completing this work, which had up to the present time been executed in an admirable manner. It was impossible to proceed with sanitary works and numerous social reforms for the want of good reliable maps, and, therefore, no consideration could be urged superior to that of a speedy and economical completion of these maps.
MR. WHITWELLsaid, he had found that even in the metropolis it was difficult to procure the Ordnance maps. The Local Government Board ought to press for the completion of this work, since without the maps it would be impossible for Local Boards to execute the sewerage and other works which the Public Health Bill would require them to carry out.
LORD ELCHOsaid, he regarded the delay in this matter as owing to the faulty action of the House of Commons. Those who were conversant with it would recollect that after the Government which had charge of it had collected the opinions of those who were most competent to advise, an appeal was made to the House on the absurd argument that the sheets, if joined together, would cover so many acres, and the House carried away by that speech de-

465
cided to give up the cadastral survey. A Royal Commission was, however, moved for in the House of Lords, and that Commission decided in its favour. So that this House owed to the action of the other that which hon. Members were now anxious to have completed with all speed. A complaint had been made that England was behindhand in this matter, but the reason was, that she was beforehand when it was commenced. As regarded Scotland, there were now only three counties remaining to be finished on the largest scale, and as one of them was the county in which the capital was situate, a very strong feeling prevailed that the survey should be completed, and that desire was only reasonable.
MR. F. S. POWELLsaid, he wished to join his entreaties with those of hon. Members opposite in urging upon the Government the necessity of active and vigorous energy in this matter. It was a disgrace to them to be so far behind other countries in the completion of their surveys. There was no person, however, but must admit that as far as they had gone they had the most beautiful map in the world, and that a survey so well mapped out as that was, was really an addition to our national resources. It was well calculated to make our people well acquainted with the great power of this country and its wonderful facilities for mining and other enterprising operations. It appeared to him, however, to be highly necessary that our Local Board districts, our Poor Law Unions, and our numerous railways should be distinctly marked or laid down upon the maps. He concurred with the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Wren-Hoskyns) as to the importance of this subject in connection with the transfer of land. He knew the value of these maps in Yorkshire, where the 6-inch survey was completed, and he was anxious that other counties should possess the same advantage.
MR. AYRTONsaid, in reply to his noble Friend (Viscount Bury), who asked how he had got charge of that particular business, he would say that he had undertaken it in conformity with the wish of the Government, and under the authority of an Act of Parliament which, he had himself introduced. With respect to the other questions put to him, he should be sorry to re-open the question of the scale, which had been
466
settled years ago. He thought that the best thing they could now do was to adhere to the survey upon the basis which had up to this time been followed. With regard to the time necessary to complete this great work—proceeding upon the fact that £1,400,000 was to be the whole cost—it would take 14 years from April, 1870, at the rate of £100,000 a-year that had hitherto been voted for the purpose, to have the entire work completed—or 12 years from the present time. The Estimate for the present year, however, was £127,000, but only £100,000 of this was for the actual survey, the balance representing special services undertaken for various other Departments. As to the scale—the wild, and uncultivated, and mountainous parts of the country would be on the 6-inch scale; and all the cultivated and better inhabited parts on the 25-inch scale of map. As to accelerating the survey, that no doubt might be done by adding a large number of men to the present staff of operators, which, of course, would demand a much larger grant every year. That was a question simply of finance. In reference to the sale of maps when published, that was a question of much difficulty. No one trader would undertake to supply the Ordnance maps on the condition of having in hand such a one as every purchaser required. At one time it was gravely considered whether the Post Office might not be made the means of selling and distributing those maps. But when it was recollected that the performance of the duty properly would entail a considerable amount of knowledge, it was felt that such a duty would be quite inconsistent with the system under which the Post Office clerks were appointed. The Government since then fell back upon another proposal—namely, that of having special agents for the purpose throughout the country. That, however, was a subject which required further consideration. If it could be adopted, it seemed to him to be the best mode of facilitating the sale and distribution of the maps throughout the country. There should, of course, be a central depât established in order to carry out this proposal. When the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. F. S. Powell) spoke of having all the railways and the recent changes in the country corrected by these maps, he seemed not to be aware of the

467
difficulties of making those corrections and the magnitude of the task which they would impose. It appeared to him (Mr. Ayrton) to be much better for them to bring the present enterprize to a conclusion before they embarked in any other. His noble Friend (Viscount Bury) asked whether they were going to reproduce a 1-inch map for the supersession of the existing map. In reply, he (Mr. Ayrton) would tell him that that was a serious undertaking, but it was under the attention of the Government. He had every wish to proceed with the survey as rapidly as possible, but it could only be accelerated in proportion to the amount of money voted towards the work from year to year.
LORD ELCHOsaid, he must still ask what course it was intended to take with regard to those counties in Scotland—Fifeshire, Mid Lothian, and East Lothian—which had been referred to, the survey of which, on the cadastral scale, had not yet been completed?
MR. AYRTONsaid, that all the counties which came within the description given would come within the survey on that scale, but he could not say when the work would be done. That must be left very much to the discretion of the director of the survey, who was the best judge of the matter. Those counties, however, which were mineral or commercial, would have a preference over purely agricultural ones.
LORD ELCHOsaid, he wished to have a more distinct answer. What the counties of Scotland wished to know was, when the proper time for surveying them would come? Were their surveys to be stopped until the whole of England had been surveyed?
VISCOUNT BURYsaid, he did not think his noble Friend had a right to raise a cry of injustice to Scotland, when the whole of the agricultural parts of Scotland had been surveyed on a 25 and 6-inch scale, but some of the counties of England had not been surveyed on any scale. It was a necessity for England to have at least a 1-inch map. The Committee over which he presided recommended a 25-inch scale, but their only reason for doing so was that it could be published on any scale that might be desired. If his right hon. Friend would not give England a 1-inch map, then the Vote of £100,000 for a survey this year, as well as the like
468
expenditure for the last 10 or 15 years, would be perfectly useless.
MR. STEPHEN CAVEsaid, that all the parts of the new map should be published together as nearly at the same time as possible, or people would hesitate before buying it from not knowing which were the recent, and which the new portions. He suggested that it would be advantageous and economical to reinforce the sappers and miners now engaged in the survey by the necessary number of civilians competent to perform it.
COLONEL BARTTELOTurged the importance of expediting the publication of the survey. It was essential not only for private but for strategic purposes, scarcely a road being laid down correctly in the old survey.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he should be happy to answer any specific question which the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) would put to him, but he could not tell him the exact time when the survey of the Scottish counties he referred to would be taken in hand. To his noble Friend (Viscount Bury) he would say that until the Treasury had come to a decision as to reducing the 25-inch map to a 1-inch map, he could not say anything further on that point. As to employing civilians, upwards of 1,000 were already employed, the military force being comparatively small.
Vote agreed to.
(17.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £26,130, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1873, for constructing certain Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade."
MR. DAVIES MR. DAVIES moved to reduce the Vote by £700, the amount of the salary paid to a consulting engineer at Holy-head. There being an engineer employed on the works at £500, he contended it was unnecessary to have a consulting engineer.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £25,430, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1873, for constructing certain Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade."—(Mr. Davies.)
MR. WHITWELLasked for an explanation of the charge for Dover Har-

469
bour. The Vote required was £4,000, and the charges were stated at £2,200.
MR. BAXTERsaid, he was happy to be able to inform the Committee that the works at Holyhead were so far complete that the charge would disappear from the Estimates in a year or two. In fact, he expected that by that time the whole Vote would disappear. The charge for harbours, in fact, had been reduced from £67,000 to £35,000 by the abandonment of the Alderney works, a decision that had received the general approval of Parliament. With regard to Dover, a very large portion of the cost of maintenance and salaries was paid for by the railway companies. In the course of the year that expenditure would also be got rid of. The receipts at Dover were estimated at £1,000 per annum, and at Holyhead £1,500 per annum, and he believed those amounts would be found adequate for the maintenance of the two harbours.
MR. MUNTZcongratulated the Committee on the probability that these Votes would so soon disappear from the Estimates. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury had omitted to answer the question put to him relative to the consulting engineer at Holyhead, and unless the Committee divided upon the question, he was afraid they would find the charge in next year's Estimates.
MR. BAXTERreminded the Committee that the works at Holyhead were very important, and that they would be finished this year, so that the consulting engineer would disappear.
MR. CANDLISHrecommended the withdrawal of the Amendment, after the satisfying statement of the Secretary to the Treasury. He was glad to observe in the Vote an item of £360 for maintaining a light on the Island of Alderney, and would congratulate the shipping interest on the fact of this Vote being the precursor of the intention of the nation to relieve the shipping interest of about one-third of a million they had annually to pay for the maintenance of lights around our coast.
MR. GOLDNEYwished to know whether the consulting engineer at Holyhead would be continued after the completion of the works? Dover harbour had been constructed in an efficient manner without the aid of a consulting engineer.
MR. BAXTERsaid, he would undertake that before next year the whole Vote should be revised, and he hoped it would not appear again, at all events, not in this form and to this extent.
LORD ELCHOsaid, it should not be forgotten that the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Candlish), who had hailed with so much pleasure the Vote of £360 in the Estimates for the maintenance of a light at Alderney, and who looked upon it as the precursor of a charge of £360,000 being placed on the nation, was a great economist and a Member for a seaport town. It was, therefore, necessary that the Committee should be informed whether it was a permanent or a temporary charge.
COLONEL BARTTELOTasked for an explanation of the charge of £100 for St. Catherine, Jersey.
MR. BAXTERsaid, it was a charge for the maintenance of a light about which there was some dispute between the Treasury and the Board of Trade as to what fund it should be charged on. The light at Alderney had been left on the Estimate in consequence of the hurried manner in which the works there were closed.
MR. STEPHEN CAVEsaid, it would be as well that the Committee should be informed in what state Alderney harbour had been left, because he had been informed it was in a dangerous state, and that the danger was likely to be increased every year. Was the light wanted to warn shipping of danger, or was it placed there as an ordinary light to guide ships safely into the harbour?
MR. BAXTERsaid, the House had unanimously declined to vote the money which had been reported to be requisite, and the Government, therefore, did not press the Vote. The harbour was now, he believed, in a dangerous state; but it had never been otherwise, and in his opinion no money which could in reason be spent upon it would make it safe. He hoped no attempt would be made to reverse the decision of last year.
MR. DAVIESsaid, that under the circumstances he would not divide the Committee upon his Amendment.
MR. MUNTZsaid, he felt convinced that unless the Committee divided the whole thing would be forgotten, and the sum would appear next year in the Estimates as usual.
MR. PEELsaid, there was every reason to believe that before the close of the financial year these works would be completed, and that no further charge would have to be made on the Estimates for construction.
MR. GOLDNEYasked whether, when the works were completed, the consulting engineers would be retained?
MR. BAXTER: Certainly not.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(18.) £250, to complete the sum for Portland Harbour.
MR. GOLDNEYwished to know to what Department it belonged? He always understood it belonged to the Army.
MR. BAXTERsaid, it had been entirely handed over to the Navy.
Vote agreed to.
(19.) £6,250, to complete the sum for the Fire Brigade (Metropolis).
(20.) £26,433, to complete the sum for Rates for Government Property.
(21.) £2,250, to complete the sum for the Wellington Monument.
MR. J. GOLDSMIDwanted to be informed when this memorial would be completed? He had been told that the certificates of Mr. Hunt and Captain Galton as to the progress of the work were not altogether satisfactory.
MR. BAXTERthought it would be finished within a reasonable times.
MR. HERMONsuggested the postponement of the Vote till inquiries were made upon this point.
MR. J. GOLDSMIDsaid, that seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he now hoped the right hon. Gentleman could give the House and the country some information on the subject.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERreplied that he could give no information beyond that which he had supplied to the House on a recent occasion.
Vote agreed to.
House resumed.
Resolutions to be reported To-morrow, at Two of the clock;
Committee to sit again upon Wednesday.

PARLIAMENTARY AND MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS BILL.

  LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
  Lords' Amendments further considered.
  Amendments, from Amendments in page 13, line 23, to Amendment in page 13, line 38, agreed to.
  Several Amendments disagreed to, and two consequential Amendments made to the Bill.
  Page 19, line 36, at end of Clause 33, add—
  ("and shall continue in force till the thirty-first day of December one thousand eight hundred and eighty, and no longer, unless Parliament shall otherwise determine; and on the said day the Acts in the fourth, fifth, and sixth schedules shall be thereupon revived; provided that such revival shall not affect any act done, any rights acquired, any liability or penalty incurred, or any proceeding pending under this Act, but such proceeding shall be carried on as if this Act had continued in force"),
  the next Amendment, being read a second time.
  MR. W. E. FORSTER, in moving that the House disagree from the Lords' Amendment which would have the effect of making this Bill merely temporary in its character, said, that having considered the measure so carefully, having entered upon the matter with so much deliberation, and having discussed every provision of the Bill with so much minuteness, they could hardly condemn a future Parliament to repeat the same process over again.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth disagree with The Lords in the said Amendment."—(Mr. William Edward Forster.)
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he must appeal to the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government to retain the Amendment. The argument, from the unusual nature of the proposition, broke down. The right hon. Gentleman, at the instance of the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Dickinson), had recently given a temporary character to the Bishop's Resignation Continuance Act, thus affording a valuable precedent in this case. But a precedent still more direct was afforded by the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, one in pari materia with the present measure, which would expire this year if not

  473
  renewed. Those who, like the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford, not merely admired, but passionately loved the Ballot, must wish for an opportunity of enabling those who now opposed the measure to be able hereafter publicly to avow their error, and to do penance in white sheets hereafter, if the Ballot hobby proved a success; while those, on the other hand, who opposed the Ballot, were equally anxious that an opportunity should be reserved, if need be, for coming back hereafter to the old English method of election. He should, therefore, divide the House upon the question.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSONsaid, there was an old Conservative maxim about the danger of taking your machinery to pieces too often; and he had heard no argument to convince him that the machinery of the Ballot ought to be taken to pieces at the end of eight years. That Act would either do good or do harm. If it worked well, why should it be put an end to? If it did harm, it would be easy to introduce a Bill to repeal it without waiting for this period of eight years. They had had several interminable debates on the subject, and many of them would not be there probably in 1880. It would therefore be cruel to provide for their successors the trouble which they had themselves gone through. Last year the House of Lords threw out the Ballot Bill on the plea that they had not time to discuss it; but in so acting they did themselves injustice, for this year they were able to discuss the present Bill in about seven hours. Let not hon. Members be deluded about the matter; let them show respect for themselves, and give to the people the precious gift of freedom of representation. They might lose the Bill altogether; but it would not be long before another Bill, purged of the imperfections which the hon. Member for Whitehaven (Mr. C. Bentinck) had laboured so hard to introduce into the present Bill, would be passed. If the House of Lords prevented the passing of the Bill, he, for one, had confidence in the Government, and believed that they would stand to their guns and appeal to the country. Never since the Reform Bill of 1832 could the Government go to the country with so just and righteous a cause—in fact, the Prime Minister might say as Sir James Graham
  474
  said in one of his speeches—"Let hon. Gentlemen, if they wish, go to the country with the cry of 'Up with the Lords and down with the Commons,' and I, for one, have no fear for the result."
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he had just been charged with making the Ballot Bill what it was, and so far as it was a good Bill he admitted the charge. He would observe that the hon. Member (Sir Wilfrid Lawson) was one of those who wished to inflict pains and penalties and imprisonment on anyone who did not vote as they liked. Why, the hon. Member himself was an ultra-Liberal upon every question but the land question, and he had very good reason for that exception.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: Will the hon. Gentleman mention what he means?
  MR CAVENDISH BENTINCK: The land question.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I wish to know what vote of mine upon the land question he refers to?
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK: Upon the Ballot question he has always been in favour of pains and penalties.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I repeat my question.
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Whitehaven (Mr. C. Bentinck) appears to be addressing merely a portion of the House; he must address himself to the Chair.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK, in continuation, said, that when he was interrupted, it was natural that he should reply to the interruption; but he would now address himself to the Chair to the question raised by his hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Beresford Hope). The experiment now proposed to be made was a novel one, and should be treated as such. What was the course of the Government upon the Education question in 1870? At the last moment the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, who was a new convert to the principle of the Ballot, determined to have the Ballot introduced into that Bill not as a compulsory, but as a permissive Ballot. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster) complied with that determination, but how? He proposed that the Ballot should be not compulsory, but permissive. The right hon. Gentleman maintained that it would be quite sufficient that a man might vote in secret if he thought fit.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he must correct the hon. Gentleman upon a question of fact; the Ballot upon the Education Bill was introduced for the metropolis, and it was not permissive, but compulsory.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKbegged the right hon. Gentleman's pardon, and he would read his words if he had an opportunity, but he had not them by him at that moment. On the 14th and 21st July, 1870, the right hon. Gentleman argued against the hon. Baronet (Sir Charles Dilke) that it should not be a compulsory Ballot. ["No, no!"] He maintained that the right hon. Gentleman did do so; and the Ballot under the Education Act was at that moment a permissive Ballot. That being so, how could the right hon. Gentleman resist the Amendment of the Lords? Why should not the same principle be introduced into that Bill as was introduced into the Education Act by the right hon. Gentleman at the last moment? It was desirable that that Bill should not be permanent, as the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government changed his opinions so suddenly. Having done it, why should he not change it again? They could not tell what his opinion might be eight years or one year hence. No man was more changeable in his opinions than the present Prime Minister. Upon those grounds he should support the view of his hon. Friend (Mr. Beresford Hope).
  MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, the hon. Member who has just sat down must recollect that those who meet him in debate do not meet him on equal terms. He never makes any mistakes; he is not subject to any human infirmity; he knows what a man can deny, and what not; and when he asserts that my right hon. Friend cannot deny a certain statement, and when my right hon. Friend does deny it, the hon. Member continues with unabated confidence to assert that my right hon. Friend had not denied it. The hon. Member's means of acquiring knowledge are derived from higher sources than are available to us—sources of which we know nothing, and to which we have no access. We must approach him as infirm mortals, and any humble suggestions we make must be submitted to his infallible judgment. If he disapprove, we must submit to whatever chastisement he in the plenitude of his
  476
  wisdom may think proper to inflict. The hon. Member says that the Education. Ballot is permissive, and he is so positive of that, that I am disposed to believe that my right hon. Friend knows nothing of the matter, that he never read the Education Bill, that he had no concern in framing it, and that if he ever read it he must have read it backwards, or with the paper turned upside down. I make these reservations, for without them I should scarcely dare to comment on what the hon. Member has said. I will not speak of it according to my recollection. The hon. Member says that no one can tell what opinion I may hold next year, and that therefore my recollection of last year cannot be worth much. I am the mere being of to-day. I cannot tell what I may do in the future, and how can I know anything of the past? Still, I will say that the Education Ballot was compulsory, not permissive; and the reason it was made temporary was that we found the Ballot to prevail in the metropolis, and open voting in the country, and we objected to recognizing the arrangement either for open or for secret voting until we had settled the question of the Parliamentary Ballot. We did not wish to prejudge the great question of the Parliamentary Ballot. We meant to make the Parliamentary Ballot compulsory, and that that should become the model. The hon. Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Beresford Hope) is more amenable to reason and argument, for he has founded himself on the fact that I agreed, in deference to the representations of my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Dickinson), that the Bishops Resignation Bill should be a temporary, not a permanent, measure. Why was that done? It was done on this very ground—that the details had never been submitted to the prolonged consideration of this House, and it was admitted that they might require to be further modified. Therefore it was made a temporary Act. Will my hon. Friend, of all men, be the man to say that the details of the Ballot Act have not been submitted to prolonged consideration? We spent half the Session of 1871 on the Ballot Bill. We have spent half the Session of 1872 on the Ballot Bill. The wisdom of "another place" has undone in minutes that which it took us months to create; and not unnaturally with re-

  477
  ference to the extreme rapidity of its conversations—for I can hardly call them more—and of its votes, added—"We have really considered this matter so little that we think proper to make it a temporary Bill." But it is not really proper or becoming to ask this House under existing circumstances to admit that we have not given sufficient consideration to the measure. I want to know what is sufficient consideration for a Parliamentary Bill if this has not had sufficient consideration? All human actions are subject to conditions of time and space, and unless the time bestowed in the manipulation of this measure is likely to lead us to definite and positive conclusions, I do not know on what measure of difficulty and importance we are likely to arrive at any definite conclusions at all. My hon. Friend also referred to the Corrupt Practices Act. Does he think that a parallel case? That Act referred to a question which had never been presented to the public mind of this country at all. It was a question within the four walls of this House, and I never recollect a case of a single measure when, irrespective of party, the experienced men and the able men of this House were more equally divided than they were in regard to the Corrupt Practices Act. It was a question with reference to which we had no guidance from experience, from public opinion, or from the multitude of proceedings carried on in Parliament year after year with little intermission for a generation; and it was, therefore, no analogy to the case before us. It is therefore the duty of this House to vindicate the reality, the seriousness, the laboriousness of its proceedings with regard to this Bill. What is the meaning of enacting that a measure of this kind shall subsist for eight years? If my hon. Friend had made a proposal of the kind at the commencement of the debates on the Ballot Bill last year it might have been worth listening to. My hon. Friend would then have released us from the necessity of almost immeasurable labours, and the freedom we should thus have obtained might have been applied in maturing other measures of great importance to the country, which are now obliged to wait for a more convenient season. But that has not been the case. The House has spent weary months both this year and last year upon maturing this Bill
  478
  with care and consideration in all its details, and the fact that in "another place" it has only been found necessary to spend a few hours in pulling to pieces that which we have done, really is and can be no argument why we should blot out from our recollections the nature and character of our own labours. I therefore trust that the House will agree with the Government and my right hon. Friend that we should disagree with this Amendment.
  MR. SPENCER WALPOLEsaid, he thought as the whole question had been so elaborately treated by the House on many previous occasions, it would not be reasonable that there should be any serious discussion of it at this, the last stage of the proceedings. But there were one or two observations he wished to make on what had fallen from his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government. The right hon. Gentleman had spoken of the Ballot under the Education Act being compulsory, but it was not a Ballot with compulsory secrecy. The alteration suggested by the hon. Member for Carlisle would apply to any Act; but there were many alterations and Amendments which might be made in a measure which had not succeeded. His right hon. Friend said there was no analogy between this and the Corrupt Practices Act, which was made temporary. Seeing that the best Parliamentary authorities were divided upon that question, the Bill was quite reasonably made a temporary measure, and it was as clear as possible that that measure was upon all fours with this. We were avowedly making an experiment, which might answer or might fail, in the conduct of Parliamentary elections; and Parliamentary authorities were still divided on the question whether this was a desirable alteration or not. In short, all the circumstances which applied to the Election Petitions Act applied to this Bill; and the only question was, whether it was reasonable that, as we were trying an experiment, we should do it by a temporary Act. If we found the experiment succeed, there would be no long discussion in this House when it was necessary to renew the Act; but as it might fail, it was only reasonable that Parliament should have an opportunity of re-considering the matter when the experiment had been tried.
  MR. OSBORNE MORGANsaid, it would be competent for the House next

  479
  Session to repeal the Act if the Amendment were rejected; but, if it were accepted, the House would have tied its hands for eight years. If this were a bad Bill, why should they be saddled with it for eight years? If it were a good Bill, the limitation was not needed.
  VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, that two false issues had been raised in the Ministerial speeches. Stress had been laid upon the short consideration given to the measure by the House of Lords; but it was important that the question should be decided in entire independence of a false issue of that kind. It was well known that an immense amount of time had been spent on the measure by the House of Commons, and the more discussion the House of Commons gave to a Bill, the more naturally would the Lords be able to come to a decision upon it in a short space of time. ["No, no!"] He quite understood the expression of disapprobation. The Prime Minister some time ago said that the Peers were so far removed from these matters that they looked down upon them, as it were, from a balloon; but as sensible men they all knew that the Peers had been carefully watching the discussions in this House on the subject, and it was a perfectly fair argument that the more matters were sifted in this House and discussed in the Press the less discussion would they require in the other House. The other false issue raised was that the opposition to this Bill rested on the alleged insufficiency of the discussions upon it in this House. He denied that entirely, and maintained that the opposition rested upon the fact that the matter had not been sufficiently discussed at the hustings, which was a perfectly different issue.
  MR. NEWDEGATE: Sir, it would be hard—very unjust—if this House were to refuse to the House of Lords the locus penitentiœ which they have provided for themselves by assigning a limit to the duration of this Act. It is true, as has been said by the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Viscount Sandon), that this subject has been discussed very fully in the House of Commons; but when I heard the description which the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council of Education gave us of his pains of parturition, during the last and present Session, I felt perfectly confident that if he had been subjected to
  480
  the same exertion in a third Session, he would have failed to reproduce and mature such a measure as this which we have now before us. I am confident, also, from the feebleness with which the debate on the other side has been conducted—if hon. Gentlemen opposite will forgive me—that the effect of the protracted discussions which have been carried on in this House upon this subject instead of adding to their confidence in the beneficent character of this measure has shaken the confidence of many who might have been confident before. But there is another reason for their hesitation. They begin to perceive that this measure is but the precursor, if it be made permanent, of other changes. I am confident, as was the late Lord Palmerston, that it is idle to expect that with secrecy of voting you will not stop short of household suffrage in the first instance and of manhood suffrage afterwards. There is no instance of any country having permanently adopted the Ballot without the franchise having been reduced to manhood suffrage. I challenge any hon. Member to cite an example to the contrary. Well, then, the House of Lords calculating that before the expiration of eight years there may be a House of Commons less headlong upon this subject than I am sorry to say the present House has been, have thought it prudent to provide for the termination of this Act, and thus to afford a future House of Commons the opportunity of reconsidering the revolution upon which you are now entering.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes 246; Noes 165: Majority 81.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK, amid considerable interruption and cries of "Order!" said: I crave the indulgence of the House to make a personal explanation. In the remarks which I felt it my duty to address to the House a short time ago I founded my argument on a speech delivered by the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council on the 21st of July, 1870. ["Chair!"]
  MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Member proposes to make a personal explanation, no doubt he will receive the indulgence of the House.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK: I wish merely to read a passage from the

  481
  right hon. Gentleman's speech, as recorded in Hansard; but if the House does not think fit to hear it, I will not persevere. It consists only of a few lines, and it justifies the remarks I made. On the 21st of July, 1870, the right hon. Gentleman, speaking on the Elementary Education Bill, said—
  "He had, on behalf of the Education Department, to solve the very difficult question, as to what kind of Ballot ought ultimately to be adopted in reference to the election of Boards. There appeared to be two kinds of Ballot—in one the voter might have secrecy if he pleased; but in the other secret voting was compulsory, and it was because he understood his hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles Dilke)and those who thought like him, to mean that secrecy in the election of Boards ought to be of the compulsory kind, that he felt it would not be desirable for the Government to be hampered with that condition."—[3 Hansard, cciii. 657.]
  MR. W. E. FORSTER: I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the House, whether the explanation now made can be considered a personal one? Perhaps, I may be allowed in two or three words of really personal explanation to justify my statement. I think that what the hon. Member has just read completely justifies me. The statement he made a short time ago was that during the passing of the Education Act, I had advocated a permissive Ballot. But the speech from which he has read a portion in order to prove the correctness of his statement, shows that while engaged in the arduous task of carrying the Education Bill I rather demurred to having put upon me the difficulty of deciding what kind of Ballot should be the Ballot for the metropolis. But the House decided that that duty should be imposed on the Education Department, and we fulfilled it by a regulation enforcing Ballot for the metropolis. Therefore, there is nothing in what the hon. Member has stated which in the slightest degree justifies his previous statement.
  Lords' Amendment disagreed to.
  Several Amendments agreed to, and consequential Amendments made to the Bill.
  In page 25, line 34,
  MR. W. E. FORSTER MR. W. E. FORSTER moved to disagree to the Lords' Amendment to leave out the words, "and the declarations of inability to read," the object of the Motion being to require that illiterate voters shouid make a declaration of inability to read before a magistrate, and not merely
  482
  before the returning officer. Statements had been made on the other side of the House as to the danger of admitting the illiterate class of voters to an optional Ballot, and in order to limit that danger as far as possible, it seemed very desirable that this provision for a declaration should be retained.
  MR. GOLDNEYthought the provision for such a declaration was very objectionable. The magistrate before whom it was made had only to perform the official duty of receiving it, and would not subject the voter to any objection or questioning; and as there would be three days between the nomination and the polling, during which these declarations might be made, the election agents would have ample time to marshal together a number of such voters as would profess an inability to read or write, and thus practically secure for them a system of open voting which in all probability, among such a class of men, would lead to a great deal of bribery. He thought it would be a very unwise thing to disagree with the Lords' Amendment on this point.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, that the House had made it a point to lessen the distance which people had to go to the poll, but did nothing to lessen the difficulties in the way of the illiterate voter. If this provision for a declaration before a magistrate were insisted upon, it might entail a great deal of inconvenience and loss of time upon such of the illiterate voters as lived a long way from a magistrate, and who would have to go several miles in order to make their declaration. He thought it would be just as well to provide that the declaration should be made before the presiding officer, who would be just as well able to take it as a magistrate. It might be urged that the magistrate would make an examination into the voter's statement of his inability to read; but there was no provision of that sort in the Bill, and if the presiding officer could be trusted to show the illiterate voter how to fill up his paper, he could also be trusted to receive the declaration.
  MR. GLADSTONEsaid, it was not a question of trusting the presiding officer, because it was impossible for anyone to ascertain whether the voter's statement was true or not; but what was material was, that they should be upon their guard lest the machinations of those en-

  483
  gaged in conducting elections should multiply and extend to a class of persons who pretended an inability to read or write, and who were, therefore, compelled virtually to vote openly, under the old system, with all the facilities which it gave for intimidation. With regard to the distance the voter would have to travel to make his declaration before a magistrate, those cases would be very few indeed in which he would have to go several miles, and even if he had to do that, those who were connected with the conduct of elections would be able to give legitimate facilities for access to magistrates. If the voter went before a magistrate he would do a serious and deliberate act, and would consider well before making the declaration. On the other hand, if they were to accept his slip-shod verbal statement as he passed into the booth, it would be possible to thrust into this class a multitude of pretended illiterate voters, and so to maintain the exercise of undue influence.
  MR. HUNTsaid, he understood the right hon. Gentleman to mean that magistrates would attend at the polling-places to receive the declaration of illiterate voters. ["No, no!"] At any rate, he believed that under the provision of the Government partizan magistrates would attend at the polling-places to prevent votes being lost. Thus, magistrates would be led to engage more in these matters than they did at present, and he did not think that desirable. The provision would merely cause a great deal of unnecessary trouble. If the provision was intended to prevent electors from voting it would be better to say so at once, and introduce an educational test. It would be quite sufficient that this declaration should be made before the presiding officer.
  MR. GREENEalso opposed the proposal of the Government as being ineffective.
  Lords' Amendment disagreed to.
  Page 24, lines 25 and 26, leave out ("produces such a declaration as hereinafter mentioned"), and insert ("declares.")
  The next Amendment being read a second time;
  Motion made, and Question, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment," put, and agreed to.
  Several Amendments disagreed to, and consequential Amendments made to the Bill.
  Several Amendments amended, and agreed to.
  MR. CHARLEYsaid, he wished to be permitted to express a hope that the Lords would insist upon their Amendments. Perhaps the Lords would be urged to give way, on the ground that the Bill had come up to them twice, but this was no argument, since the Bill had been sent up on both occasions by the same House of Commons, and since the majority for the second reading had dwindled from 94 to 58.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he had now to move—
  "That a Committee be appointed to draw up Reasons to be assigned to The Lords for disagreeing with the Amendments to which this House hath disagreed; the Committee to consist of himself, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Bruce, Mr. Cardwell, the Attorney and Solicitor General, the Marquess of Hartington, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General for Ireland, Mr. Stansfeld, Mr. Winterbotham, Mr. A. Peel, Mr. Glyn, and Mr. Adam."
  He should have made the Motion without saying a word, had it not been for the remarks of the hon. Gentleman opposite, who had expressed a hope that the Lords would adhere to their Amendments. It struck him as hardly in accordance with the usual mode in which they conducted their deliberations, that that House should express a wish that the Lords should do one thing or another. But as the hon. Member had made that statement, he might be permitted to state that he had not the slightest doubt that the Lords, in the exercise of their constitutional duty, and with that patriotism which they had generally shown in regard to the public welfare, whatever had been their individual opinions, would consider two or three facts. They would remember that this was a Bill affecting the election of Members of that House by their constituencies; that that House had, by repeated and large majorities, declared their adhesion to the measure; that there was no doubt amongst the majority of the Members of that House professedly stated—and he believed there was no doubt amongst the minority of that House also—that the large majority of the constituencies of England were in favour of the measure; and that more time and deliberation had been spent upon the

  485
  principle and details of that Bill than almost on any other measure that had ever been brought before that House. He had not the slightest doubt that these facts would be considered, and also this fact—that in deference to the opinion of the other House of Parliament, the majority of that House had made a concession, of the necessity of which they were not themselves convinced, simply in order that the measure should be passed into law, and that the constituencies of the country should have the opportunity of what the Government considered to be a real security for freedom of votes.
  Motion agreed to.
  Committee appointed, "to draw up Reasons to be assigned to The Lords for disagreeing to the Amendments to which this House hath disagreed:" Mr. WILLIAM EDWARD FORSTER, Mr. GLADSTONE, Mr. Secretary BRUCE, Mr. Secretary CARDWELL, Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL, The Marquess of HARTINGTON, The LORD ADVOCATE, Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND, Mr. STANSFELD, Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, Mr. ARTHUR PEEL, Mr. GLYN, and Mr. ADAM:—To withdraw immediately; Three to be the quorum.

  METROPOLITAN TRAMWAYS PROVISIONAL ORDERS SUSPENSION BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. ARTHUR PEEL, Bill to enable the Board of Trade to dispense with certain provisions of "The Tramways Act, 1870," in respect of certain Provisional Orders, ordered to be brought in by Mr. ARTHUR PEEL and Mr. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 219.]

  LOCAL TAXATION ACCOUNTS BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. PELL, Bill to provide for the annual presentation to Parliament of an account of all sums received and expended by all Local Authorities raising or expending Rates in England and Wales, ordered to be brought in by Mr. PELL, Sir MASSEY LOPES, Mr. CLARE READ, and Mr. ROWLAND WINN.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 220.]

  DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND) SUPPLEMENTAL (NO. 2) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. WILLIAM HENRY GLADSTONE, Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under "The Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Act, 1863," and the Acts amending the same, relating to Mulkear River Drainage District, ordered to be brought in by Mr. WILLIAM HENRY GLADSTONE and Mr. BAXTER.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 218.]
  House adjourned at a quarter after Two o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Court of Chancery (Funds)* (161)
Committee—Report—Elementary Education Act (1870) Amendment* (126).
Report—Trusts of Benefices and Churches (151); Bankruptcy (Ireland) Amendment* (175); Debtors (Ireland)* (175).
Third Reading—Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 2)* (134); Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act (1870) Amendment (No. 2)* (172), and passed.

TREATY OF WASHINGTON. TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION (GENEVA). THE INDIRECT CLAIMS.

  CORRESPONDENCE.
  Argument or Summary showing the points and referring to the evidence relied upon by the Government of Her Britannic Majesty in answer to the claims of the United States presented to Tribunal of Arbitration constituted under Article I. of the Treaty concluded at Washington on the 8th May 1871 between Her Britannic Majesty and the United States of America—North America, No. 11. (1872): And
  Correspondence respecting the proceedings of the Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva.—North America, No. 10. (1872):
  Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

TRUSTS OF BENEFICES AND CHURCHES BILL.—(No. 151.)
(The Lord Bishop of Carlisle.)

REPORT OF AMENDMENTS.
Order of the Day for receiving the Report of the Amendment, read.
Moved, That the Report of the Amendment be now received.—(The Lord Bishop of Carlisle.)
LORD PORTMANsaid, he regarded the Bill as one which invaded the principles of lay patronage in ecclesiastical livings. Under the provisions of the Bill a corporation sole—that is in plain English a bishop or a rector in perpetual succession, and not as limited now to the individual named in the deed—might become the trustee of trusts already existing, as well as of those which might hereafter be created. If corporations

415
sole were allowed to become trustees of benefices, they would—or, at any rate, might—absorb the whole control of them, because they would be the electors of the successors to all the lay vacancies in the trust, and might fill them all with corporations sole; while, at the same time, corporations were peculiarly disqualified for the office of trustees, seeing that they were neither liable nor responsible for the discharge of their duties. The Bill was uncalled for under the existing system of trusteeship; there was no mischief done, nor was there any real grievance to redress. The operation of the Bill ought, at any rate, to be simply prospective, and should not be permitted to apply to trusts already in existence. He begged to move that the Report be received that day three months.
An Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this day three months.")—(The Lord Portman.)
THE BISHOP OF CARLISLEsaid, the noble Lord (Lord Portman) had misapprehended the meaning and working of the Bill as much as it was possible for them to be misapprehended. In the first place, the Bill had been introduced in order to remove doubts which had been raised by counsel as to the validity of certain trusts for the exercise of ecclesiastical patronage. The noble Lord said there was no grievance to remedy; but he could assure their Lordships that in his own diocese there was a practical grievance which stood in the way of the formation of a "Peel district." In his diocese certain wealthy inhabitants had subscribed money for the formation of such a district. They wished the incumbent to be a member of the trusts by virtue of his office, and also that his successors should in the same way be members of it. This was the wish of the persons who had subscribed the money, and not the Bishop's wish. Under the Act of 1843 it was provided that those who subscribed for such a trust might have a corporation sole as trustee; they might have the Bishop himself, or the incumbent; or they might have a number of individuals to act as trustees; but the moment subscribers said—"We shall have both a corporation sole and a number of individuals for trustees," the lawyers stepped in and said—"You may not do
416
it." That might be good law, but it did not appear to him to be good common sense. To remove such an anomaly was the object of the Bill now before their Lordships. It had been drafted in the office of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and it had received the approval of the Earl of Chichester, who was so well known in connection with that Commission. If the Bill did not pass, serious consequences would ensue, because a number of trusts which now existed, and which had been framed in ignorance of the law as it was now said to be, would be declared unsound, and both the Bishops and the patrons would be placed in a very embarrassing position. He hoped their Lordships would not interrupt the progress of the Bill.
THE BISHOP OF LONDONconcurred with the right rev. Prelate, in thinking that the noble Lord misunderstood the scope of the Bill.
LORD CAIRNSsuggested that if the opinion of the House was to be taken by a division, it would be better to take it on the third reading, and after Notice. He had a good deal of objection to the Bill, because it would it would vest the trust in a corporation sole. If the trust were vested in an individual Bishop or an archdeacon, in whom the subscribers had confidence, it did not at all follow that they would have the same confidence in his successor. It might, perhaps, be better to have a fresh election of such a trustee by a majority of the survivors. He did not know whether the explanation of the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Carlisle) might not remove the objections to the Bill, and in order that this might be ascertained he suggested the postponement of the division.
LORD REDESDALEprotested against their Lordships dividing against the Bill without Notice.
LORD PORTMANsaid, the Earl of Harrow by had given the right rev. Prelate Notice that he would oppose the measure.
THE BISHOP OF CARLISLEreplied, that he had not by any means understood that the rejection of the Bill was to be moved.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that he had no doubt as to the occasion of the Bill, but whether the present measure was open to objection or not was a fair question for discussion. The

417
Bill was no doubt introduced to remedy what had occurred in the past, and to provide for the future. He did not then intend to discuss the merits of the Bill, but if it was to be discussed it ought to be done after full and careful deliberation. He thought it would not be right to reject the Bill at a stage as to which no Notice of objection had been given; and, therefore, he would support the reception of the Report, leaving himself open to adopt what course he thought best on the third reading.
Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn: Then the original Motion agreed to; Report received accordingly; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.
LORD POSTMANgave Notice that he would then move that the Bill be read a third time on that day six months.

COURT OF CHANCERY (FUNDS) BILL.
(The Lord Chancellor.)

(No. 43.) SECOND READING.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read
THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that the Bill, which had undergone much discussion in the House of Commons, had been introduced mainly in consequence of the suggestions contained in the Report of a Royal Commission which sat in 1864 to investigate the subject. That Commission was composed of persons who were connected or familiar with the various Departments of the Court of Chancery. It comprised the noble Duke now at the head of the India Office (the Duke of Argyll), the late Lord Kingsdown, himself (the Lord Chancellor), two eminent solicitors—Mr. Field, who had since died, and Mr. Cookson—Mr. Rogers, the very active intelligent Registrar of the Court of Chancery, Mr. Anderson, and Mr. Crawford, the then Governor of the Bank of England. From time to time there had been great accumulations of funds, until they amounted to £3,000,000 invested in stock and from £4,000,000 to £5,000,000 in cash or other securities, arising from the administration of various estates by the Court of Chancery, and which sums stand in the name of the Accountant General. The difference between the invested and non-invested sums arose
418
from the circumstance that when the parties did not like to run the risk of the investments rising or falling, the cash remained to the credit of the Accountant General, and no interest was paid to the suitors; where, however, the parties having the right to do so asked to have their money then in the hands of the Accountant General invested, the money was invested at the risk of the parties, the interest accruing was paid to them, and if when the money was sold out there was any loss the loss fell upon them. The result was that a sum of not less than £2,000,000 remained in the hands of the Accountant General uninvested. Again, the Court of Chancery was authorized by various Acts of Parliament to invest in the name of the Accountant General all monies belonging to the suitors, and thus large sums of money had from time to time accumulated from which the Court obtained a considerable profit. The interest upon those accumulations stood as security against any sudden fall in the funds. The Commissioners of 1864 recommended steps to be taken to secure to the suitors some interest for the monies they thus left in the hands of the Court. Accordingly under this Bill, it was proposed that upon all such money remaining as cash in the hands of the Accountant General the parties ultimately entitled to it should receive 2 per cent. They would be paid this interest and the principal sum would not be liable to any deduction by reason of a fall in stock. There were other advantages to the suitor. One of these was that checks under £25 would be cashed at the office in Chancery Lane; whereas at present suitors had to take them to the Bank of England. This facility would apply to more than half the checks that were drawn. There had hitherto been no mistakes except to an insignificant amount—a fact highly creditable to those who had selected the Accountant General; but suitors had no adequate security, while the Bill would give them the security of the Consolidated Fund. The measure likewise proposed to take the whole of the existing staff of the Accountant General's Office to the Paymaster General's Office. All this could be done without changing the existing state of things. It also provided for an improved system of audit. The movement made by the Treasury last year was, in his (the Lord Chan-

419
cellor's) opinion, in the right direction, inasmuch as it was most desirable that the whole affairs of the Court, in regard to the suitors' funds, should be placed under one uniform system.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
LORD CAIRNSsaid, that no just exception could be taken to the principle of the Bill. As regarded suitors, it proposed nothing that was injurious and much that was beneficial. They would receive 2 per cent interest; whereas they now received nothing unless they undertook the risk of investing their money in the Funds, with the liability of having to sell out at a discount. They would also have the security of the Consolidated Fund. He thought also that the existing machinery of the Accountant General's Office, although well suited for times past, had become very old-fashioned, and required replacing by that which would work more easily and rapidly. He thought that were the funds to be invested in the manner proposed, not only the suitors, but the public also would be benefited by the change. Under these circumstances, he had no hesitation in supporting the second reading of the Bill.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he was glad to hear that the noble and learned Lord who had just spoken (Lord Cairns) entirely concurred in the general principle of this measure, which was the result of the somewhat laborious inquiry on this subject, in which he had had the honour of being associated with the noble and learned Lord upon the Woolsack some eight years ago. It had not been without some astonishment that he, an unlearned layman, had ascertained what had been the practice of the Court of Chancery with regard to the Suitors' Fund. During the whole time the money remained the subject of litigation the suitors did not receive a single farthing in the shape of interest—unless they preferred a special request that it should be invested, when they were compelled to take the risk of any depreciation in the price of stock. That practice had appeared to the Commissioners very unjust, and therefore they had unanimously recommended that some system should be adopted under which suitors might receive interest for their money during the time it formed the subject of litigation. So strong had been the objection
420
at one time to interfere with the Suitors' Fund in any way, that it had been scarcely hoped that Parliament would ever attempt to deal with the matter. By successive steps, however, the recommendations of the Commission had now obtained the universal assent of both sides of the House. The proposed change would confer a great benefit upon both the public and the suitors.
LORD OVERSTONEobjected very strongly to that portion of the Bill which would exempt a particular class of holders of public stock from paying income tax.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that there would be a charge for managing the fund, and the suitors would receive only 2 per cent, whilst the State would receive about 3 per cent, from which, however, income tax would be deducted; so that the gain of the State after all would not be very great. There were a vast number of small payments of £10 and less, and, considering the trouble that there would be in deducting income tax from these small sums, it had been considered better to pay them free of the tax.
LORD REDESDALEobserved, that this money was to be invested in Terminable Annuities; but he could not understand how when the Terminable Annuities ceased the suitors were to get their money.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday next.

FENIANISM.—QUESTION.

  EXPLANATION.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEasked the Secretary for the Colonies, How he reconciles the discrepancy between his statement made in this House on Monday, the 24th June, as reported in The Times of the 25th—
  "At no period since the Fenian raid had Fenianism been more quiescent, and at its headquarters across the Atlantic it had never been at a lower ebb,"
  and the statement contained in Enclosure No. 8, at end of page 9 (being a letter from the Privy Council of Canada to Lord Lisgar, dated 28th July, 1871), that the Committee must add "the fact that Fenian organization is still in full vigour," and whether the noble Earl

  421
  has since that date had any fresh information touching the Fenian organization; and, if so, whether he will lay it on the Table of the House? The noble Lord said he asked this Question because it appeared to him that Fenianism was in full vigour instead of being at a low ebb; and from what the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) in "another place" said the other night, it seemed that the Government was of the same opinion. This was also apparent from the fact that they had for several years not called out the Militia in Ireland, neither had they sanctioned Volunteer corps there; but, strange to say, under the new Army organization system they were forming an Irish Army, the only reasonable object of which must be an anticipation of the disintegration of the Empire.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he did not propose to follow up the noble Lord's Question as to the Irish Militia or the condition of Ireland by any reply, further than to say that he did not make his statement on that subject the other night specially as Colonial Secretary, but simply as speaking with reference to an Irish question. With regard to the Question now put to him by the noble Lord, he would begin with the first branch of it. He should have thought the question supplied an answer to itself, because it appeared that the statement of the Privy Council was made on the 28th of July, 1871; whereas his statement was made on the 24th of June, 1872. Therefore, he did not think he was bound to reconcile the two statements. At the same time, when he said that Fenianism was quiescent, he did not mean that the Fenian organization had entirely ceased to exist. He knew that it still continued to exist in the United States. The noble Lord asked him whether he had received any further information touching the Fenian organization, and, if so, whether he would lay it on the Table? Now, he believed it was matter of general notoriety, and might be ascertained from the ordinary sources of information, that the Fenian organization still existing in the United States was quiescent at the present time, and probably never was more quiescent than it was now. He had no further information on the subject to lay on the Table.

LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT (1870) AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.
(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)

(No. 172.) THIRD READING.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
Bill read 3a accordingly.
LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, he desired to move an Amendment which would render the Bill effectual for its object. He showed that under his proposal the Government would advance the whole of the purchase money to tenants not holding above the value of £20 a-year, but would in no case advance a larger sum than would cover 20 years' purchase, and that would be effected without involving a larger advance of public money than could be made by the present principle of the Bill, as in the few cases where advances had been made two-thirds of 30 years' purchase had been advanced. That would enable tenants in Ireland to arrive at what they most desired—fixity of tenure without any further loss to the Government and with a very little additional burden to the Exchequer and with honesty to landlords.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, he doubted whether such an Amendmen could be made in their Lordships' House; but if it were otherwise, he could not accept it on the part of the Government. As he understood its purport, it was that in the case of very small holdings where the tenant purchased under the Land Act of 1870 the State should supply him with the whole of the purchase-money, and not with a portion of it only, whenever the purchase-money did not exceed 20 years' purchase. Such an alteration would be entirely inconsistent with the intention of the Land Act of 1870, which went on the principle that if the tenant by his own thrift was able to contribute towards the purchase of his holding, the State would aid him with a definite proportion of the whole amount. The noble Lord's Amendment would be a departure from that principle, and would have a very mischievous effect. Another effect of the Amendment would be to give to small holders a statutory right to 20 years' purchase;

423
and as he doubted whether, in addition to those objections, the Amendment would have the effect contemplated by the noble Lord he trusted it would not be pressed.
Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
Bill passed.
House adjourned at Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.