Sitting of 19 July 1897

QUESTIONS.

  LANCASTER BOROUGH POLICE COURT.
  MR. E. H. PIGKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that on the 5th instant, in the Lancaster Borough Police Court, the Chief Constable persisted in acting as an advocate for the prosecution, after objection taken, on a charge of assault, in which he was not the informant; and whether, having regard to the numerous cases in which police officers act in this manner, contrary to law, he will issue a circular upon the subject?
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY, Lancashire, Blackpool): The hon. Member does not describe with perfect accuracy the course followed by the Chief Constable in this case. The objection taken by the defendants' solicitor was, to use his own words, purely a matter of etiquette, and he withdrew it before the proceedings in the case began. It appears to have been

  391
  due to an oversight only that the information was laid by someone other than the police, who had really taken up the case, and I am quite satisfied, after making inquiry and reading the published reports of the proceedings, with the Chief Constable's action. I am not aware that there are numerous cases in which police officers act as advocates contrary to the law, and I see no reason for issuing a circular.

  CHRIST'S HOSPITAL, HORSHAM.
  MR. C. T. GILES: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Thirsk, as a Charity Commissioner, whether the bills of quantities for the school buildings of Christ's Hospital on the new site at Horsham have been completed; and, if so, whether they exceed the estimate; whether the expenditure of £20,000 sanctioned by the Commissioners for the work of draining roads, levelling, and planting, is now expected to be insufficient owing to the soil being so deep and strong a clay; whether, since the acquisition of the Horsham site, the number of scholars has considerably decreased; and, if so, to what extent; and the Governing Body has been obliged to sell stock to meet the current expenses of the school, and, if so, to what amount; and whether, having regard to the great interest taken by the public in this National institution, he will take steps to provide that the names of the members constituting the Governing Body and Committees, and their proceedings, be no longer kept secret but be published from time to time?
  MR. GRANT LAWSON: The bills of quantities for the school buildings on the new site at Horsham have not, so far as the Commissioners know, yet been completed. The Commissioners are not aware that the expenditure of £20,000 for draining roads, levelling, and planting, is now expected to be insufficient. A reduction in the number of boys has been found necessary during the period of transition through which the hospital is passing, and it is understood that the Council of Almoners do not propose to fill the boys' school to its full extent before its removal to Horsham. The number of girls have been considerably
  392
  increased since the purchase of the Horsham site in 1892. The total number of scholars is now about 200 less than in 1892. Sales of stock to the amount of about £12,070 were made for meeting current expenses of the first two years (1891 and 1892) in which the scheme was in operation. Since 1892 no stock has been sold for that purpose. The Commissioners understand that printed lists of the Governors and Council of Almoners may be purchased at the counting-house of the hospital in Newgate Street. The Commissioners have no reason to believe that the practice of the hospital in respect to the publication of names and proceedings differs from that of most other charities, and they have no power to make the suggested provisions.
  MR. J. H. JOHNSTONEasked whether the Commissioners had any reason to suppose that the decrease in the number of scholars at Christ's Hospital was due to the fact that the bills of quantities were in excess of the estimates or that the expenses of laying out the grounds were more that the £20,000 allowed; and whether it was not the fact that Collier's School at Horsham, which stood on similar soil, had at the present time 99 out of the 100 scholars which it was built to accommodate four years ago.
  MR. GRANT LAWSONsaid that he had no personal knowledge of Collier's School, but he had no reason to doubt that the facts stated by the hon. Member were correct, and that as the bills of quantities had not yet been sent in nor the cost of laying out the grounds finally ascertained, he could hardly suppose that the decrease in the number of scholars at Christ's Hospital was due to either of those considerations.

  KENT SUMMER ASSIZES.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is to be a summer assize for Kent; whether he is aware that the last assizes began at Maidstone on 29th May, and that the next arranged begins on 16th November, or a period of a few days over six lunar months; and whether he will make inquiries so as to prevent the wrongs already referred to through

  393
  innocent persons being detained without trial for many months?
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: The assize which began on May 29th, but was held substantially in June, was the summer assize. I am aware that the next assize will not begin till November 16th; but I can only say that, though the interval is a long one, the assize arrangements were settled after the fullest consideration of all the difficulties and different interests involved. I do not know what inquiries the hon. Member wishes me to make, but it by no means follows, if there are cases of innocent persons being detained without trial for many months, that the assize arrangements are responsible for the detention.

  FACTORIES AND WORKSHOPS ACT (PARTICULARS SECTION).
  *SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has refused to extend the Particulars Section (sub-sec. 6), sec. 40, of the Factories and Workshops Act, 1895, to the Felt Hatters and Trimmers Union; whether a large number of employers already supply particulars to all their workpeople in this industry; and whether it would therefore be well to generalise this agreement by the substitution of the Particulars Section for the voluntary arrangement?
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: Yes, it is true that I have not seen my way to extend the provisions of the Particulars Section to the Felt Hat trade. I have inquired very fully into the question, but I find that, owing to the nature of the particulars required in this industry, no order which it is within my power to make could be effectively enforced. I am not prepared to make an order which could not be effectively enforced and yet might have the effect of disturbing the voluntary arrangement for supplying particulars which, as the right hon. Baronet suggests, now prevails in the greater part of the trade.

  TRALEE TOWN COMMISSIONERS.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the Town
  394
  Commissioners of Tralee have obtained the consent of the Local Government Board to borrow some £16,000 for the purpose of paying off their debt to the Board of Works incurred by drainage, waterworks, etc.; that the Board of Works refuse to accept the repayment of this £16,000 under Treasury regulations, except at a premium of 13 to 14 per cent.; and whether, in view of the circumstances that the Tralee Town Commissioners only received £100 sterling for every £100 of stock advanced by the Treasury to the Board of Works, the Treasury regulations will be relaxed in their favour, so as to enable them to repay no more than the sum of money they received?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. R. W. HANBURY, Preston): The facts are as stated in the Question, except that the amount of the loans outstanding is £13,451, not £16,000. One of the conditions on which they were advanced was that their repayment should be spread over a given number of years varying from 30 to 50, and neither of the contracting parties has any power or right to break this condition without the consent of the other. As I have frequently explained in answer to similar questions, so long as the market price of Local Loans Stock is considerably above par, as at present, the solvency of the Local Loans Fund might be seriously affected by premature repayments of local loans at par only, and it is therefore only just to the taxpayer, on whom the loss would otherwise ultimately fall, not to allow such premature repayment except on condition that it is made not at par but at the current market price of the stock.

  ILLEGAL, TRAWLING (SCOTTISH WATERS.)
  MR. J.G.WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government has any intention of approaching the signatories to the North Sea Convention, with a view to an extension of the limit for illegal trawling from three to thirteen miles; and, if so, will he state when it is proposed to move in the matter?
  *THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. G. CURZON, Lancashire, Southport):

  395
  I think that this is the third time during the present Session that I have answered the same question from the hon. Member in the negative.
  MR. WEIR: May I remind the right hon. Gentleman that this is the third time I have asked him whether the Foreign Office have taken any steps in the matter. To-day I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Foreign Office have any intention of taking any steps in the matter; will the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of my Question which has not been put before?
  *MR. CURZON: I apologise to the hon. Gentleman if I misunderstood his Question. I now answer his second Question as I answered the first.
  MR. WEIR: The right hon. Gentleman has no intention. Very well. I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state whether the contract for the Scottish Fishery Board's new cruiser, which was to be finished on the 1st inst., has yet been signed; and, if not, will he state the cause of the delay?
  *THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire): No contract has yet been signed, as the first offers received were not satisfactory. The Fishery Board are anxious to get a vessel suitable for the work required, and negotiations for the purpose have been somewhat more protracted than was expected.
  CAPTAIN PIRIE: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the great importance of the scientific investigations carried on by the Fishery Board to the fishing industry, he will urge upon the Government the necessity of carrying out the recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee on Sea Fisheries, 1893, to supply the Board immediately with an efficient seagoing vessel to replace the small and ill-equipped Garland, which has been for some years used for this work by the Board, and has also been reported upon by it as inadequate for the requirements of the present time?
  *THE LORD ADVOCATE: As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, there is no money at the disposal of the Fishery Board to carry out the proposed change within this financial year. The question will receive consideration.

  ASSAULT BY A MAGISTRATE (HYDE).
  SIR JOHN BRUNNER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been directed to the ease of Mr. James Shenton, a Justice of the Peace for the County of Chester, and a member of the Hyde Town Council, who was fined the maximum penalty that could be imposed—namely, £3 and £2 costs, by the Hyde Borough magistrates, on Wednesday the 7th of July, for an assault committed upon Mr. A. P. Whitehead, also a member of the Hyde Town Council, at a meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Council on the 16th of June; and whether it is his intention to call the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the conduct of Mr. Shenton on this occasion?
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: The Lord Chancellor has informed me that he is already making inquiry into this matter.

  LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF BOMBAY.
  SIR JAMES FERGUSSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India what are the bodies to whom the privilege of election for the Governor's selection to the Legislative Council of Bombay has been granted; and, whether any, and what changes have been made since the seats were originally allocated?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord GEORGE HAMILTON, Middlesex, Ealing): The eight bodies who enjoy the privilege of nominating members of the Bombay Legislative Council, subject to the Governor's approval, are at present as follows: 1. Bombay Corporation. 2. Bombay University. 3. Deccan Sardars. 4. Sind Landholders. 5. Municipalities of the Northern Division. 6. Local Boards in the Southern Division. 7. Bombay Chamber of Commerce. 8. Local Boards in the Central Division. The only material change that has been made since the seats were first allocated is that the Local Boards in the Central Division of which Poona is the chief have been substituted, as a nominating body, for the Karachi Chamber of Commerce.

  GRENADIER GUARDS.
  MAJOR RASCH: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War how many non-commissioned officers and men will have to be drafted into the 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards from the 2nd and 3rd Battalions to make up the Gibraltar strength of 978, in view of the fact that no recruits with less than three months' service are to go to Gibraltar; and, how many men there will then be in thn Ist Battalion Grenadier Guards with under one year's service?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK, Surrey, Guildford): It will not be possible to answer this Question until some day in September, when the battalion for embarkation will be medically inspected.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what will be the strength of the Second and Third Battalions Grenadier Guards on the departure of the First Battalion for Gibraltar?
  MR. BRODRICK: Too many contingencies, between the present time and the date for the first battalion to embark, are involved for me to hazard a reply to this Question. Much must depend on recruiting, which is at present exceptionally brisk.

  BEHRING SEA FISHERIES.
  MR. MICHAEL DAVITT: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) how many British gunboats have been ordered for patrol service in the Baring Seas during the past three years in connection with the obligations assumed by Her Majesty's Government under the Arbitration of Paris in the matter of preserving the sea] herds from extermination, and what are the number and description of the British boats at present engaged in these seas on that duty; (2) whether he can state how many gunboats have been employed in performing a like service for the United States Government within the same period; (3) what steps, if any, have been taken by Her Majesty's Government to keep firearms out of Canadian sealers in closed waters since the date of the Paris Arbitration; for what reason was the
  398
  Report of the British Commission withheld until after the Report of the American Commission had been made public; (5) can he state on what grounds the request of the United States Government for a conference to consider the need for more adequate regulations for the prevention of the commercial extermination of fur seals in the Behring Seas was declined by Her Majesty's Government; and (6) when will the correspondence between the two Governments on this whole question be presented to the House.
  MR CURZON: In answer to paragraph 1, two gunboats were employed in 1895, three in 1896, and two are employed during the present year, namely, the Pheasant, first-class gunboat, and the Wild Swan, sloop; but the Admiralty have been asked whether a third vessel can be spared for the service. In reply to paragraph 2, the United States Government have not employed gunboats on this service, but six revenue cutters were so employed in 1895, six in 1896, and five during the present year. With regard to paragraph 3, in 1891 an agreement was made for the sealing up of the arms of British sealers entering Behring Sea, but it was. decided in 1895 not to renew this agreement, as it had not been found in practice to protect British sealers from unnecessary interference. The Paris Award regulations contain no provisions forbidding the possession of arms. Arrangements were, however, made, by which vessels clearing direct from British Columbia were furnished with certificates that they had no firearms on board, and also for the deposit by vessels front the Asiatic side of their arms at some rendezvous before entering Behring Sea. The Report of Professor Thomson was not withheld, as is suggested in paragraph 4 of the Question, but some delay occurred in its completion, owing partly to the professional duties of the author at Dundee, and partly to tire necessity of his waiting for certain notes and information with which he had asked Mr. Macoun, the agent of the Dominion Government, to furnish him. In reply to paragraph 5, Her Majesty's Government felt it would be premature to enter upon a conference for a revision of the regulations until accurate statistics, extending over a sufficient period, should have been obtained. The result of the

  399
  investigations conducted last year has been laid before Parliament. The investigations are being continued this season. The information available previous to 1896 was based on conjectures admitted to be of doubtful value. Her Majesty's Government are convinced that there is no immediate danger as regards the extinction of the seal herd. The correspondence will be laid at an early date.
  MR. DAVITT: Will the correspondence be produced before the close of the Session?
  MR. CURZON: I hesitate to give a promise, but I think it is unlikely.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether the regulations under the Paris Award were not concurred in by both Governments, as being satisfactory; and whether there was not a provision for their reconsideration at the end of five years, which would be next year?
  MR. CURZON: I will not pledge myself to the words of the phrase, "concurred in as being satisfactory," but they were certainly concurred in by both Governments. As to the second Question, that is so.

  RICHMOND LUNATIC ASYLUM, DUBLIN.
  Mr. PATRICK M'HUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that the Eastern disease, beri-beri, is at present prevalent in Richmond Lunatic Asylum, Dublin; how long has this institution been afflicted with this disease, and how many nurses have suffered from it: whether medical experts, including medical gentlemen of the highest eminence connected with the institution, attribute the existence of the disease to overcrowding: Is he aware that the Board of Control of Lunatic Asylums is responsible for the overcrowding: and will he take steps to secure that the Board of Control will not be permitted to stand in the way of necessary reforms in connection with this asylum?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. GERALE BALFOUR, Leeds, Central): Thirty-six patients and three nurses in the Richmond Asylum are at present suffering from the disease known as beri-beri. The disease first appeared in the institution about May
  400
  1894, and continued until October, after which no fresh cases occurred. There was no outbreak in 1895, but it reappeared in August 1896, since when the institution has not been entirely free from it, although it almost died out in the colder months. Ten nurses in all have suffered from it, viz., seven in 1896, and three during the present year. Medical experts are of opinion that the disease was fostered by overcrowding. It is the duty of the Board of Control to provide such accommodation as is necessary in the district asylums in Ireland. In consequence of the rapid increase of lunacy in the Richmond district, it was decided in 1892 to build an additional asylum for 1,200 patients at Portrane, and that work is now in progress. In 1893 and 1894 temporary buildings were erected at Richmond Asylum for 298 patients, and since then accommodation has been provided for 224 patients, and further buildings are now being erected, which, it is anticipated, will make the total accommodation sufficient for the number at present in the asylum. The Board of Control are anxious to aid and promote by every means in their power any reforms necessary for the improvement of the Richmond Asylum, and works are being carried out with the view of effecting that object.

  TRAVANCORE (STATE APPOINTMENTS).
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India (1) whether a class known as the Elavas are excluded from all appointments in the State of Travancore on the ground that they belong to a low caste, although they form over 16 per cent. of the population of the State, and contribute largely to its revenues; (2) whether they are denied admission to most of the Government schools in the State, and whether two graduates of the Madras University (of this class) have recently been compelled to take service under the Madras and Mysore Governments because they were denied positions in their own State; and (3) whether any, and, if so, what, steps have been taken by the Madras Government, through the Political Agent, to remedy this state of things in Travancore?
  LORD GEORGE HAMILTON: I have no precise information as to the first Question. As to the second, I find from the latest report I have received that 9,517 Elava boys and 1,368 Elava girls were under instruction in Travancore, representing eight per cent. of the total number of pupils. I have no information as to the two graduates referred to, and I must observe that in the internal administration of education and patronage in the Native states of India the British Government does not actively interfere. I have no objection, however, to calling the attention of the Madras Government to the Question asked by the hon. Member.

  TONGA COMMERCIAL REPORT.
  MR. J. F. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has observed at page 5 of the recently published annual Report of Consul Leefe (No. 1954) on the trade of Tonga, that the British workman is described as being misled by self-interested agitators who make their living out of him; that strikes are declared to be the offspring of trade unions, and that the latter organisations are said to produce a tyranny which results in the honest hardworking man being placed on an equality with scamps and loafers; and, whether it is part of the recognised official duty of a British Consul to embody lily such private political speculations in such uncompromising language in his annual Report to the Foreign Office?
  MR. CURZON: I have not detected any private political speculations in the Report in question. On the contrary, the Vice-Consul who wrote it in pursuance of the duty imposed on him to point out any circumstances calculated to act prejudicially to British trade abroad, expressed what I have no doubt was an impartial and honest opinion. which he also supported by a local illustration. It is not proposed to discourage Consular officers from such an expression of their views.

  STRANDING OF SS. "GLENGARRY."
  MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether it has been brought to his knowledge that the Somalis at
  402
  Ras Alula, on the East Coast of Africa, seized and demanded a ransom for one of the officers of the British steamship Glengarry which was temporarily stranded in the locality; (2) whether a treaty exists by which the Sultan at Ras Alula, in consideration of a monetary allowance, bound himself to protect and assist British shipwrecked mariners; and (3) whether the experience of the officer of the Glengarry is to be taken as a sample of the assistance and protection the Sultan is prepared to render
  MR. CURZON: We have no knowledge of the incident referred to in the Question, except that contained in the statement by a passenger in the vessel, which has been forwarded to me by the hon. Member. I am therefore not in a position to say whether the action of the Sultan or other chief constituted a breach of the treaty mentioned in the second paragraph.

  CRETE.
  MR. J. C. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in reference to the proposal of the Porte to dispatch a Turkish Army to Crete with a view to maintaining order, whether an official reply has yet been sent by the representatives of the Great Powers; and in the event of the Porte proceeding to dispatch troops to the island, will the Powers take action to prevent the Turkish troops from being landed?
  MR. CURZON: In a telegram dated the 15th inst., Sir P. Currie stated that the Turkish Foreign Minister had informed him that the intention of sending troops to Crete had been abandoned.
  MR. J. DILLON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs for what purpose the marching of European troops through Crete has been carried out; and whether, in view of the protests of the insurgent leaders, it is proposed to continue these operations?
  MR. CURZON: We have no information that the alleged marches through Crete have been carried out. The only march we have heard of was that of some Austrian and Italian troops from Canea to Platania, both of which places are on the sea coast.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the blockade of Crete is still in force; and, if so, for what purpose it is maintained?
  MR. CURZON: The blockade of Crete has not been formally raised, since it was considered desirable to prevent the possible importation of arms or volunteers to join the insurgents. But with this exception it has been so far relaxed as to be practically inoperative.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the European Admirals will allow Djevad Pasha to remain in Crete as Military Commander?
  MR. CURZON: Djevad Pasha has not yet started for Crete; nor is it known for certain whether he will. His arrival at the present juncture might give rise to false impressions, and it is hoped therefore that it will not be persisted in. [Laughter.]

  ORDNANCE FACTORIES.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, whether his attention has been called to paragraph 6, page 234, of the Annual Account of the Ordnance Factories, in which it is stated under the heading semi-manufacture that a loss is involved in the excess of production of articles which accumulate in the semi-manufacture, and whether there is now a strict adherence to instructions that only the number of articles actually ordered on the extracts are to be put in hand; and, will he state who is responsible for disregarding the orders issued to the Ordnance Factories?
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. POWELL-WILLIAMS, Birmingham, S.): The cases referred to arose under a former administration of the Factories dating back from 15 to 30 years, and they are dealt with in the second Report of 1897 of the Public Accounts' Committee, at page 76.
  Mr. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state who is responsible for the deficiency of 4,960 feet cube of ash plank of the value of £909. 6s. ld., referred to in the Annual Account of the Ordnance Factories, page 230, par. 10; whether any
  404
  explanation of this deficiency can be given; and, whether any steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of any such irregularity?
  MR. POWELL - WILLIAMS: The apparent deficiency was explained to the Committee, on Public Accounts. The stacks of timber were very old, and from their construction did not admit of accurate stock taking. As stated to the Committee, steps have been taken to secure accurate stock taking in future.
  Ma. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state why the War Office failed to furnish a reply to the request of the Auditor General of Public Accounts, made on the 10th March 1897, as to whether certain forgings of the book value of £1,920 remaining in the Central Store, to which they had been transferred from the Gun Factory and Laboratory in April 1889, are still serviceable; will he state when a reply will be forwarded; and, whether these forgings are still serviceable for the purpose for which they were originally intended?
  MR. POWELL-WILLIAMS: The Question of the Auditor General was answered on the 5th April; and on the 5th May the case was explained to the Public Accounts Committee. The greater part of these forgings are still available for the purpose for which they were intended. Some have been already used.

  PAUPERS (COUNTY ASYLUMS).
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state under what circumstances a person in a county asylum, who is classified as a pauper under Sec. 3 of the Lunacy Act, 1891, is entitled to be classified as a private patient?
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: As soon as the asylum authorities have reasonable grounds for believing either that the patient is entitled to property which will be available for his maintenance and sufficient to render him no longer even partly chargeable to a Union, county or borough, or that an undertaking has been given by a friend or

  405
  relative to provide a sum sufficient for the purpose, he would no longer be classed as a pauper.

  EXPLOSIVES ACT (IRELAND).
  MR. MICHAEL AUSTINI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been directed to the proceedings of the Magistrates at Newcastle West Petty Sessions on 25th June last, in reappointing the Clerk of Petty Sessions as Inspector of Explosives, under the Explosives Act, for six months at a salary of £50, his remuneration prior to resigning being £5 per year, although the duties of an inspector are discharged by the constabulary gratuitously; whether the appointment of a Clerk of Petty Sessions as Inspector of Explosives, under The Explosives Act, 1875, is in accordance with the Order issued by the Lords Justices, bearing date 29th July 1891; and will the proceedings of the Magistrates be annulled, and instructions given to Major Rolleston, R.M., that they had no power to make such an appointment involving an expenditure out of the Poor Rates?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: My attention has been drawn to a report of the proceedings of the Magistrates on the occasion referred to. Mr. Dawson having, on the 25th June, resigned the position of local Inspector under the Explosives Act, it is not competent for him to accept re-election to that office without the approval of Government, as pointed out in the Order of 29th July, 1891. It has been the policy of Government, since that date, to refuse to sanction, in every case, the employment of a Petty Sessions Clerk to act as Inspector for the purposes of the Explosives Act, and no exception to the invariable rule will be made in the present instance. The Magistrates will accordingly be informed that Mr. Dawson will not be permitted to continue to act in the capacity referred to. Henceforth the duties of Inspectors under the Act in this district will be performed by the Constabulary gratuitously.

  ALDERSHOT REVIEW.
  MAJOR RASCH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether at the Aldershot Review the average
  406
  strength of the 4-gun field batteries was 48 men and 48 horses; whether in the Field Organisation. 166 men and 131 horses are the regulation strength; whether these batteries are included in the Second Army Corps, and what number of men and horses in each battery would be wanted to complete for foreign service; and where would he propose to obtain them
  MR. BRODRICK: The average strength parade of the three field batteries which, on the 1st inst., paraded with four guns each was, per battery, 52 men and 48 horses. The average strength at Aldershot of the same batteries was, per bat cry, 136 men and 70 horses. Their war strength would be 166 men and 131 horses, and on mobilisation this strength would be completed from the Reserve. Two of these batteries which had just been placed On the six-gun establishment, turned out only four guns. that day as they had not completed their strength.

  POST OFFICE SORTER (HENRY WYSE).
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, will he explain the circumstances under which Mr. Michael Voyse, of Waterford, after 12 months' training in London, was dismissed on the ground that he failed to pass the medical examination; and whether he can have the circumstances of the ease inquired into with a view to reconsideration?
  MR. HANBURY: The person referred to appears to be Henry Wyse, not Michael Voyse. He competed in the examination for sorter, London, in September 1894, and obtained his Civil Service certificate in November of the same year. After temporary employment in London as an acting sorter he was appointed a sorter on probation in July 1895. When, on the completion of the first period of his probation in the following January he was, in the usual course, medically examined, it was found that he was suffering from. phthisis, and was quite unfit for duty, and it was necessary to cancel his appointment. Applications for re-employment were made on behalf of Wyse, and it was arranged to give him some nominal appointment in the Waterford office, in the hope that his health might sufficiently improve to allow

  407
  of his appointment there. With this view he was medically examined from time to time, and the Medical Officer at Waterford ultimately reported that he was physically disqualified for an established appointment, and it became necessary to discontinue his services at the Waterford office. The circumstances of the case do not appear to justify any hope that the decision already arrived at can be altered.

  BANKRUPTCY CASE (GALWAY).
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that, in the case of John P. Fogarty, of Galway, adjudged bankrupt on the 2nd of May 1893, the lease of his property, with all his other effects, was handed over to Messrs. Casey and Clay, solicitors for the creditors, by the Bank of Ireland, on the 24th April 1893; also that, by an order of Court before Judge Boyd, on the 20th of February 1894, it was directed that the assignees should give the bankrupt (Mr. Fogarty) the lease of his premises, 13, Dominick Street, Galway; whether he can say why the order of court was disobeyed; and has he any power to enforce compliance with the orders of the Court; and, if so, will he take action in the matter?
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. J. ATKINSON, Londonderry, N.): The facts are not exactly as stated in the Question. On the 24th February 1894, an order was made by Judge Boyd that the assignees might be at liberty within the time prescribed to elect whether they would take interest in the premises under the lease, and in the event of their electing not to take such interest, that they should deliver up the lease to the bankrupt. The assignees elected not to take the lessee's interest, and the lease was duly deposited by Messrs. Casey and Clay with the official assignees with a view of being handed over to the bankrupt. It unfortunately got mislaid; but I am informed will now be handed over on application. The bankrupt suffered no damage, as he has always been in possession of the premises, his interest in which is stated to be of no value. I have no power to have enforced orders such as these.

  SPRAYING POTATOES (IRELAND).
  MR. THOMAS CURRAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the correspondence between the Congested Districts Board and the Guardians of the Boyle Union, in reference to the spraying of potatoes in the barony of Coolavin; and whether, in view of the importance of encouraging the spraying of the potato crop, he will use his influence with the Congested Districts Board to induce them to accede to the request of the Board of Guardians of Boyle?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The application of the Guardians was that the Congested Districts Board should supply potato spraying machines for the use of farmers in certain parts of the Union. The Board replied that the state of their funds prevented them from entertaining the application. It would, in any case, be rather late now to begin spraying operations. In 1896 the Board expended the sum of £1,371 in supplying, free of cost, spraying material to small farmers in congested districts who had either individually, or in partnership consisting of not more than six, purchased a spraying machine. This year the Board are applying a sum of £1,000 for the same purpose.

  SHIPWRECKED CREW (SS. "TRAVELLER").
  MR. T. R. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will make inquiry into the alleged neglect and ill-treatment of the shipwrecked crew of the ship Traveller by the authorities of Rodrigues?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,): My attention has been drawn to newspaper reports on this subject, and I will ask the Governor of Mauritius to make a full inquiry into the matter.

  CROOKHAVEN FISHERY PIER.
  MR. JAMES GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the condition of the Crookhaven fishery pier;

  409
  is he aware that Mr. McCarthy, a local boat owner, has expended a sum of money on it in order to prevent it from tumbling down; and whether, in view of the fact that Crookhaven is an important fishing station, he will recommend that the pier be put into an efficient state of repair, and also that Mr. McCarthy be recouped the amount of his outlay on it?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: My attention lots been drawn to the statements and claim made by Mr. McCarthy, and I am making inquiry into the matter.

  MURDER OF ARMENIAN BELIEF AGENT.
  MR. F. S. STEVENSON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the statements that the murderers of Yussaf Yunan are men of straw, instructions will be sent to Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople to press for the recovery of the stolen £500 direct from the Porte, instead of acquiescing in the Turkish proposal to recover the SUM in question by the sale of the murderer's goods; whether he will use every effort to secure that an adequate pension or compassionate allowance shall be paid to the dependants of Yussuf Yunan; and whether the sentences passed on the murderers have yet been carried out?
  MR. CURZON: I have no information to add to that which I gave to the hon. Member in an answer on the 15th, in which I said that orders had been sent by the Porte for the recovery of the money. If these measures prove ineffective it may become necessary to demand restitution direct from the Porte. I do not know if there are any special grounds in this case why a pension or allowance should be demanded for the dependents of the murdered man. Such a demand would appear to be of an unusual, character.

  TURKISH TROOPS IN THESSALY.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether the Government have any information as to the reported barbarous conduct of the Turkish troops in Thessaly; (2) whether three Greek notables of Larissa have been sent as prisoners by order of the Porte to a
  410
  fortress in the Dardanelles because they refused to sign a petition, in favour of the retention of Thessaly as a Turkish province; whether he has any confirmation of the report as to the discovery of the headless bodies of Greek peasants, murdered near Larissa as they were gathering their harvest; and (3) whether these and other alleged breaches of the armistice have been brought to the notice of the Turkish Government and the Ambassadors at Constantinople?
  MR. CURZON: Mr. Eliot, of Her Majesty's Embassy at Constantinople, who has lately visited the scene of war in Thessaly, reported to Her Majesty's Ambassador that the general conclusion at which he had arrived with regard to the districts of Larissa and Volo was that in all places where the natives remained the Turks had carefully preserved their lives and property, and were doing their best by equitable administration to encourage the return of fugitives. But where the population had taken flight, as they had done in most places, pillage, probably the work of irregulars, had occurred very soon after their departure, and only the walls of houses were left standing. Her Majesty's Government have no confirmation of the incidents mentioned in paragraphs two and three of the Question.

  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  MR. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the Lord Advecate whether, under the Education (Scotland) Bill, it will be in the power of the Scotch Education Department to pay the aid grant to Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, and other denominational associations for distribution among the schools belonging to their particular denomination?
  *THE LORD ADVOCATE: Under the second clause of the Bill, the conditions according to which the grant to Voluntary Schools will be distributed must be set forth in the Scotch Education Code, which is annually submitted to Parliament for approval.
  MR. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate what is, the amount separately for the last two years by which the grant has been reduced for Board Schools and Voluntary Schools in Scotland respectively under Section (32) (a) of the Code?
  *THE LORD ADVOCATE: In the year ended 30th September 1895, the reductions under Article (32) (a) of the Code in day schools under Boards amounted to £5,894 10s. 101, and in Voluntary Schools to £1,422 13s. 10d. In the following year the amounts were £4,495 10s. 7d. and £1,353 13s. 8d. respectively.
  CAPTAIN SINCLAIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the expression "Voluntary School" in the Education (Scotland) Bill, includes any schools not falling under the description "II. State Aided Schools (Non-Public)," in the Return recently presented to the House [C. 8492]?
  *THE LORD ADVOCATE: The expression "Voluntary School" in the Education (Scotland) Bill does not include any school not falling under the description "State Aided Schools (Non-Public)" in the Return referred to.

  BUTTER-MAKING (IRELAND).
  MR. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that only two itinerant dairy maids are employed by the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland to teach butter-making; and whether he will consider of increasing the number, in view of the number of places where such teaching is desirable?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: In addition to the two itinerant dairy maids employed exclusively at visiting the local centres, the services of the principal dairy maid of the Albert Agricultural Institution, Glasnevin, are granted at times when she can be spared from the institution as itinerant dairy maid. The Commissioners have had under careful consideration the progress of the work for which the services of these dairy maids were sanctioned by the Treasury, and they are satisfied that the value of their instruction is becoming year by year more recognised throughout the country, as practical experience of the good resulting from such instruction extends. The itinerant dairy maids are only sent to localities where local committees are formed to guarantee the necessary supply of milk, and suitable accommodation, etc., and the question of increasing the number of dairy maids
  412
  must depend largely on the increase in the number of the demands for their services. It has not been deemed necessary, so far, to ask sanction for new appointments, but in case the number of places for which demands are received should warrant such application, the Commissioners would be prepared to submit a. representation on the matter to the Irish Government.

  COOKERY AND LAUNDRY TEACHING (IRELAND).
  MR. KNOX: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Government refused to allow the sum expended by the National Education Board in Ireland in fees for cookery and laundry teaching to be increased from £500 to £1,100 a year; whether he is aware that the demand for further instructors in these subjects is very great; and could he state the amount expended in teaching these subjects in England?
  *MR. HANBURY: Yes, Sir an expenditure which was sanctioned for three years as an experiment was proposed to be more than doubled before one year's results could be ascertained. The Treasury could hardly be expected to entertain such a proposal. I am not aware either of the extent of the demand for such instruction, or of the success which has attended it hitherto. In England about £400 per annum is spent on an Inspectress of Cookery and Laundry Work, but no provision is made from vet ed moneys for teaching these subjects.

  NATIONAL SCHOOLS (KERRY).
  MR. PATRIK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that, under the will of the late R. T. Reid, of Bombay, £9,435 was appropriated to the advancement of education in the county Kerry, and that the trustees of the Reid estate authorised a scheme of prizes to be awarded out of the proceeds of the bequest by the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, part of which provided prizes to male monitors of National Schools in Kerry; (2) whether these prizes have been done away with for this and future years; and, if so, could he state by whose authority, and what is now done

  413
  with the money which was so apportioned by the Reid trustees; and (3) what equivalent, if any, is given to the Kerry monitors?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The facts are correctly stated in the first paragraph. The prizes have not been done away with, nor has such a course of action been contemplated. The only change that has occurred has been to relieve the monitors who have completed three years' service from attendance at the July examinations at the district centres. Arrangements for testing these monitors have been under consideration, and will shortly be decided, after which the prizes will be duly distributed.

  POST OFFICE CYCLES.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether an allowance is made to a number of head post offices for the purpose of enabling telegraph messengers to obtain bicycles, in order to aid in the expeditious delivery of telegrams; and, if so, whether the object of this grant is to cover the actual cost of hire for a specified time or to enable messengers attached to those offices to which this allowance is made to become the owners of cycles by obtaining them on the instalment principle; what is the amount of the grant made to the Enniskillen Post Office under this head; whether he is aware that the postmaster and senior clerk respectively of that office, on the allowance being authorised, provided two solid-tyred cycles of an old pattern, which they compel the messengers to use, and withhold the allowance on the ground of hiring those machines to the messengers' staff, and whether this is in accordance with the instructions relative to the expenditure of this allowance; and also that the senior clerk of this office compels messengers to use his solid-tyred cycle in the delivery of porterage messages, and for the use of which he obtains half of the porterage charges; and what notice he intends to take of the matter?
  MR. HANBURY: Allowances are made to a number of head post offices for the delivery of telegrams by cycle. In most cases the allowances are paid direct to messengers who have bicycles of their
  414
  own. Possibly some of these bicycles are purchased on the instalment principle, but the Department has no knowledge on this subject. The object of the grant is simply to remunerate the boys for placing the machines at the disposal of the Department. In other cases the allowances are given to postmasters. In the case of Enniskillen, two allowances of 3s. 6d. a week each have been made to the postmaster. The Postmaster General has received a report on the arrangements to which the hon. Member has called attention, but he has found it necessary to ask for further information. He will communicate with the hon. Member on the subject as soon as he is in a position to do so.

  LONG VACATION.
  MR. D. H. COGHILL: I beg to ask the Attorney General whether he will take steps to carry out the frequently expressed desire of the great bulk of the legal profession for shortening the Long Vacation by fixing its commencement for the 1st of August and its termination for the 30th of September in each year?
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir RICHARD WEBSTER, Isle of Wight): As my hon. and learned Friend knows, I have no power to make arrangements few altering the dates of the commencement or termination of the Long Vacation.

  LONDON SCHOOL BOARD ELECTIONS.
  MR. GERALD LODER: I beg to ask the Attorney General whether those persons whose names are on the Parliamentary Register in respect of what is called the Service Franchise are entitled to vote at the election for the London School Board; and whether is aware that some returning officers have allowed such votes while others have not?
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: As the law at present stands, under the orders framed by the Education Department, am of opinion that persons whose only qualification is the Service Franchise are not entitled to vote at the election for the London School Board.

  SECONDARY EDUCATION.
  MR. A. C. HUMPHREYS-OWEN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the dissatisfaction caused by the present procedure in respect of schemes laid before Parliament after approval by the Education Department in pursuance of the provisions of the Endowed Schools Acts, the Government will give effect to the suggestion of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, that such schemes may by a vote of each House be referred for consideration and amendment to a Committee of each House, or to a Joint Committee of both Houses?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.): In answer to the Question of the hon. Gentleman, I have to say that the proposal which he throws out is one which, as I understand, would require legislation, and I am not in a position to promise legislation on the subject at the present time.
  MR. HUMPHREYS - OWEN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether a Secondary Education Bill will be introduced by the Government, either in this House or in another place, for consideration during the Recess?
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education if the Government will introduce the promised Bill on Secondary Education during the present Session, in order that chambers of commerce and educational associations may have an opportunity of considering it during the Recess?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I understand from my noble Friend the President of the Council that he thinks it would not be possible to introduce this Measure in the course of the present Session.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  SIR W. HARCOURT: Will the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury tell us what will be the business for to-morrow, and so far as he can the further business for the week?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I hope to take to-morrow what remains—which is very little—of the
  416
  Committee stage of the Prison-made Goods Bill, the Water Bill, the Naval Works Bill, and after that the Second Reading of the Military Manœuvres Bill. Wednesday and Thursday will be devoted to Scotch business—the Scotch Education Bill, the Congested Districts Board Bill, and the Public Health Bill. The Army Estimates will be taken on Friday.
  MR. H. O. ARNOLD - FORSTER: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether in the event of the Colonial Vote not being reached to-night, it will be taken to-morrow?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: Under no circumstances will tomorrow be given to Supply, and I may express an earnest hope that the Debate on the Foreign Office Vote will be finished in time to allow us to have some discussion on the Colonial Vote to-night. [" Hear, hear !"]
  MR. H. LABOUCHERE: After what hour will the right hon. Gentleman not take the Colonial Office Vote?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I think I will not give a promise. [Laughter.]
  SIR J. LUBBOCK: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Indian Budget will be taken?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I shall carefully follow precedent in this matter. [Laughter.] I think there is no chance of our being able to take it until we reach the last week of the Session.

  WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE PETITION.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he desired to ask the Chairman of the Committee on Public Petitions (Sir C. Dalrymple) a Question of which he had given the hon. Member private notice—whether the Committee had considered the petition presented from the members of the Willesden and Harlesden Women's Association relative to women's franchise, presented on July 7 by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bodmin. (Mr. Courtney); whether that petition was couched in becoming, respectful, and temperate language, was free from offensive imputations on the character of Parliament, and was one which,

  417
  according to the Rules and the usual practice of the House, could be received?
  SIR CHARLES DALRYMPLE: The Committee on Public Petitions at their meeting on Wednesday last had under their consideration the petition presented on the 7th inst. by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bodmin. The Committee were of opinion that the expressions employed in the petition are unusual in tone, and they observed that while no decision of the House was taken at the moment of its presentation, when it was read at the Table these expressions were then the subject of remark and disapproval. The Committee, however, after full consideration decided not to take any further action in the matter. [Opposition cheers.]
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: May I ask the First Lord of the Treasury, as the Leader of the House, whether he proposes to take action in the matter?
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I have just heard my hon. Friend behind me read out to the House the decision arrived at upon this subject by the Committee responsible to the House for dealing with such questions, and I do not think it would be desirable to run counter to the decision arrived at. I am bound to say, however, that I think the petitioners have done themselves as much harm as they possibly could. [Ministerial cheers.]

  WELSH INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION.
  SIR G. OSBORNE MORGANgave notice that on an early day next Session he should ask leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1889, and some of the provisions of the Endowed Schools Acts incorporated therewith.
  MOTION.
    METROPOLITAN POLICE (BORROWING POWERS).
    Bill to extend the powers of the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Jesse Collings and Sir Matthew White Ridley; presented according ly and read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Thursday next, and to be printed.—[Bill 322.]
  ORDERS OF THE DAY.

    SUPPLY.
    [EIGHTEENTH ALLOTTED DAY.]
    Considered in Committee.
    [The CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS, Mr. J. W. LOWTHER, in the Chair.]
    CIVIL SERVICES ESTIMATES, 1897–8,

    CLASS II.

      FOREIGN OFFICE VOTE.
      TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN POWERS.
      Motion made, and Question proposed,—
      "That a sum, not exceeding £49,705, 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 1898, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs."
      *SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: I do not think any one will consider that it is premature or inopportune at this period of the Session to ask the Government for some explanation of the present state of things in Eastern Europe. It is now nearly two years ago since what may be called the Eastern Question has been the charge of the Six Powers, ordinarily called the Concert of Europe, or, as Lord Salisbury has preferred to call them, the Federal Legislature of Europe which gives the law to Europe. We have to ask what is the result of the Concert and the outcome of the Federal Legislature. There are three questions, all of great importance, which have arisen in the East. There was first the question of Armenia, We know how far the question of Armenia was dealt with by the Concert of Europe. We were told at the time that Armenia and the Asiatic provinces of Turkey were to receive reforms which were to be approved by the Concert of Europe. The first question we should like to ask is, What is the situation of those reforms? How far have they been given effect to by the

      419
      Federal Legislature of Europe? What is the law which they have passed on this subject? The next question that the Concert of Europe undertook was the settlement of Crete. It is more than a. year ago since that question, which was supposed to have been settled in the previous year, broke out in a shape which led to a military and naval occupation of Crete by the Six Powers. The third question is a more recent one, and relates to the terms of peace as between the Sultan of Turkey and Greece; and with reference to that also I desire to ask for some explanation from Her Majesty's Government. First of all) what were the pledges which the Government have given to this House and the country on the part of the Concert with which they were acting? The Government pledged themselves, first,, that no part of the territory which had been removed from Turkish rule should be restored to the dominion of the Sultan. That is a general pledge. With reference to Crete, they pledged themselves to establish an absolute autonomy for Crete, to the removal of the Turkish troops and to the appointment of a. Christian Governor. What progress has been made in the fulfilment of any of those declarations? The. French Minister for Foreign Affairs spoke of Crete in relation to the Powers as "a deposit." He said that Crete had been given into the hands of the Six Powers to deal with, and had been removed from the authority of the Sultan; and I was surprised, a few minutes ago, to hear the Under Secretary stating with extraordinary calmness that he hoped the Sultan was not going to send Djevad Pasha to Crete, as it might give a false impression. It is an intention which was declared by the Sultan himself, who considered the Powers had made such a mess in Crete that it was time to take the matter in hand and send a large body of troops to do that which the Powers had been unable to accomplish. It is only within the last 48 hours that the Sultan has abandoned—if he has abandoned at all—the intention of re-taking Crete out of the hands of the Six Powers. I have seen it stated that the Sultan proposes to send 12,000 additional troops, and that is the accomplishment of the undertaking that the Turkish troops should be removed ! What is the present condition? In The Times this morning there is an account,
      420
      writen by their own correspondent at Canea, of the disturbances in Canea. It says: —
      "Here in Canea the situation is again growing critical. Emboldened by the glad news that the Porte contemplates sending troops and that Djevad Pasha is coming to Crete, the Turkish authorities, in concert with the leaders of the Mahomedan population, put all sorts of obstacles in the way of the international authorities, in order to frustrate the work of Europe. Accordingly, acting on a definite plan, the Mahomedans have assumed a defiant attitude towards the European police and show their temper to the helpless native Christians. Peaceful citizens and peasants within the town and in the outskirts are freely insulted. Christian goods and produce are boycotted or trampled under foot. Mahomedans attempting to deal with Christians or serve Christian interests are thrashed by the populace, sometimes even by gendarmes. Mahomedan servants and shop boys cannot be had for Christian families, while boatmen and porters, the only means of conveyance available in the towns, who are all Mahomedans, refuse to serve Christian masters. In short, there is a systematic reign of intimidation towards the native Christians and counteraction of the measures adopted by the European authorities. To cope with such a critical situation the naval and military authorities contemplate adopting severe measures, but the coexistence of a hostile Turkish Administration will render all efforts futile. This state of things should be stopped without delay by suspending the Acting Vali and appointing a provisional Governor from among the European officers here, who are already familiar with the condition of the island."
      Then there is another telegram: —
      "Canea, July 17: —In consequence of the events of the past few days, and the turbulent conduct of the Mahomedan population, it has been intimated that, if a European soldier is maltreated, the foreign Admirals will be compelled to bombard the town, first withdrawing the European troops and taking all foreign subjects and protégés on board the warships."
      But why is this defence only for the European soldiers and the foreign subjects? What is to become of the Christian subjects?
      *THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. G. CURZON, Lancashire, Southport): We know nothing about it. We have had no information on the subject.
      *SIR W. HARCOURT: It is a great pity that statements of this kind are going forth. [Ministerial' cheers.] It is very curious that, after a year of the "deposit" of the island of Crete in the hands of the Powers, this should be the

      421
      report of The Times correspondent. am not making· any charge; I am simply asking what information the Government have on this subject and the behaviour of the Turkish troops to the native population in Crete. If there is anything at all corresponding with such statements as these, what steps are the Government taking for the removal of the Turkish troops? Then comes the important question of the terms of peace between the Sultan and the Greeks in Thessaly. I should like to have from the Government a definite declaration of their policy in this matter. Do they adhere to the declarations which they have so often made that no territory which has passed away from the rule of the Turk should be again restored to the dominion of the Sultan? If so, how far are the Government able to state the present position of the peace negotiations, and how soon do they expect that they will be brought to a satisfactory conclusion I ask this with no desire to embarrass the Government in regard to those negotiations, which every one must desire to see terminated at the earliest period. I am not going in what I am now saying into old controversies. I observe that here and elsewhere it is said that, whether the Great Powers of Europe have done anything or not, at any rate, they have not made war. Well, it is extremely satisfactory that the Six Powers of Europe are not disposed to make war upon one another, but that is not settling the Eastern Question. [" Hear, hear !"] It is no satisfaction to the Armenians to be told that the Six Powers have not made war upon one another; it is no satisfaction to the people of Crete to say that what the Concert has done for them is not to make war upon one another. Surely there is something more to be done than the passing of a self-denying ordinance on the part of those Great Powers. [Cheers.] All I desire in the meantime is to ask the right hon. Gentleman how these things stand at present in the East—first, reform in Asia Minor; secondly, the evacuation of Crete; and thirdly, the peace between the Sultan and the Greeks. I hope the right hon. Gentleman wilt be able to give to the House and the country satisfactory explanations and assurances upon those subjects.
      *SIR CHARLES DILKEdesired to raise two or
      422
      three questions concerning another part of the world. Egypt was pressing forward, under the advice of Her Majesty's Government and with the support of the British troops, up the valley of the Nile. The Government, owing to French claims, would be forced, above Khartoum, to proceed by the right bank of the Nile. On the right bank there was but a narrow strip of territory between the Nile and the dominions claimed by Menelik, and hence the enormous importance of the arrangement which hail lately been concluded between the Government and the Emperor of Abyssinia. He was not aware whether the Government themselves yet knew fully all that that agreement contained, but if they could communicate anything about it, it was information which the House ought to have. The statements made last year by the Government as to the immediate object of the then expedition had turned out to be erroneous and misleading. [` Hear, hear !"] They told the House that the province of Dongola was the granary of Egypt. Now there had lately been laid before the House two reports, sent through Lord Cromer, showing how utterly erroneous the statements to that effect were. The Times, which gave one of those re ports, summed it up by saying that its conclusions, unfortunately, were not very encouraging; and from the other report it appeared that there never were at any time more than 90,000 acres of land that could be cultivated in the whole province of Dongola, that only 30,000 were cultivated now, and that the 90,000 acres could only be cultivated by slave labour. His own view in regard to these expeditions, which he admitted was probably that of the minority in the House and the country, might be given in the words of Lord Lansdowne at Bristol, when he said:—
      "We must insist that we shall embark in no Quixotic enterprises, even if all the Christian virtues are invoked in support of them."
      [Cheers.] Turning to our position in the further East, he could not see there, any more than in connection with Crete and Greece, any sign of what the hon, and gallant Member for the Wirral Division of Cheshire called the "strong and resolute wilt of Lord Salisbury." What had

      423
      happened in Corea was a sort of test case as regards our influence in northern China. The Leader of the House went out of his way in February 1896 to invite Russia to occupy a port in the northern Pacific. In considering these matters we must never have out of our minds what was the character of our interest and trade in northern China. The right hon. Gentleman spoke of extending a welcome to Russia obtaining a port, which was a port of China, only reachable by cutting off a portion of northern China and exposing it to Russian domination in a way which had since been made public by a treaty which was no longer denied. He also said it was a transaction from which British commerce would be a gainer. That was a very questionable statement. He questioned whether the bringing of any additional countries under Russian domination, and especially any portion of the Empire of China, in which we hitherto had done 80 per cent. of the total trade, could be conducive to British trade. There appeared to be some uncertainty in the policy of the Government, and very shortly afterwards British marines were landed at Corea, nominally on the excuse of protecting British property against possible danger, but really, he thought, to manifest British interest in the future of Corea. The Russians had landed a force of marines at Corea, and we landed British marines at the same time, thus showing our continued interest in Corea. After that came another curious development of our policy—the fuss we made over Li Hung Chang, certainly a case now admitted to be one which on another occasion Lord Salisbury had described as putting our money on the wrong horse. Since that time the policy so well expressed by the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs in his remarkable book, "Problems of the Far East," seemed to have been abandoned, and Corea, left to its fate, came under Russian influence together with the whole of Northern China. There was a Blue-book which contained assurances which had been received from Russia with regard to the future of Corea. Russia pledged herself not to occupy or to interfere with Corean territory. But there was a very large Russian staff at the present time drilling the Corean troops and the palace
      424
      guard. Russia had obtained concessions in Corea for the working of timber and the mining of gold; she had made over the railway to be constructed to a French company, and she had received a special frontier tariff. He thus failed to see any sign of that strong and resolute will in the conduct of foreign affairs which the hon. Member for Wirral described. As to Crete and Greece, Lord Salisbury. the other day told the country that the Concert of Europe had localised the war. On the contrary, some of the Powers had made the war. The Sultan and the King of Greece had been on the point of coming to terms, and used the same language as to what had happened—namely, that they had been on the point of coming to an agreement which the King of Greece believed would be satisfactory to the Greek kingdom, but that the Powers stepped in and made the war. He made that statement on a former occasion, and he reaffirmed it now. He did not say that the Government knew it, but some of the Powers made that. war inevitable, and the only sense in which they had localised the war which some of the Powers made was that they had prevented the Slav States from joining in the war. They had interfered against one side. Up to the present time it had taken about 70 days for the Concert of Europe to make peace. They had told Greece to put herself in their hands, and they would set to work and negotiate peace with Turkey. Seventy days had elapsed; and we were being played with as a cat played with a mouse. Meantime a poor Power was being starved and her future destroyed by the stress laid upon her by the Turkish occupation. The Turks were acting in Thessaly as if they were at home. When the war broke out the Powers insisted that neither Party should gain territory. [Mr. CURZON: "No, the aggressor."] He preferred his own way of stating the case; and he remembered vividly the declarations made on behalf he believed of our own Government, and certainly on behalf of the Powers in the Concert, that neither was to be allowed to gain territory. Lord Salisbury said that no territory which had been Greek should be allowed to revert to Turkish rule; and the Turks themselves, in their circular in declaring war, said they did not intend to take an inch of territory.

      425
      Now, however, consideration was being given to a rectification of strategic frontiers, which meant some cession of territory, and the Turks were acting in defiance of the will of Europe. The Turks. had cut the grain crops and they had appointed bishops, a marked act of sovereignty in the East of Europe, and a subject of first-class political importance. But there was no sign whatever on their part to move; on the contrary, they were reinforcing the army of occupation. He pointed out that as soon as the critical position of the Eastern Question was moved from Armenia to Crete this country became all-powerful. It needed only a little courage—[cheers]—because there was not the faintest risk of war. We could have imposed our own terms as to Turkish policy in the islands, and we ought to have rejoiced when we saw the critical situation moved from Armenia to Crete, because the position was moved from a place where we were powerless to one where we were powerful. There was not much credit to be taken for maintaining peace between the Powers, because it was never in jeopardy for an instant. Lord Salisbury said that the war was not caused by Germany and Russia, but that it was caused by some Members of the House of Commons who sent a telegram to the King of Greece. [Ministerial cheers.] He doubted whether Lord Salisbury could have made himself acquainted with the terms of the telegram. It was an absolutely necessary expression of opinion[" Oh !"]—by those who had not turned their backs, as some had done, on the traditional policy of this country. [" Hear, hear !"] His view was that the King of Greece could not have acted in Crete but as he did act; that under incredible provocation during a period of six months he had held his hand and restrained others, while the Powers had encouraged him to believe that reforms would be carried out; and when nothing was done except to violate promises in favour of one side and against the other, he had only one course open. At all events, his action in Crete was action which in every previous case of the kind this country had approved; and they would have been false to their views had they refrained from expressing their sympathy. [" Hear, hear !"] Lord Salisbury had described
      426
      the Greek occupation of Crete as a filibustering expedition. Did he hold the same view of Lord Palmerston's action with regard to Sicily? [" Hear, hear !"] Greece, he held, was fighting the battle of Western civilisation, which as regarded our influence in the farther East, was the battle of this country. ["Hear, hear!] She had been crushed by the two Emperors' combination; but it had been fatal to British influence and a reversal of all our past policy. He failed to see in this case, any more than in the case of China, any sign of the strong and resolute will of Lord Salisbury. [Cheers.]
      *SIR ELLIS ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid although he could not in all respects endorse the details of the policy which Her Majesty's Government had pursued with regard to the Eastern Question, and with regard to Turkey and Greece, yet he must take the strongest exception to the views which had been put forward by the right hon. Baronet. The right hon. Gentleman was a great master of detail, that was to say, he was very particular that other should be accurate in their statements but as he had had occasion to point out before, the right hon. Baronet was not always so accurate with regard to his own details. Now, in his speech that day he had made three statements which were at variance with facts. He had stated that Lord Salisbury said that no territory which was Greek should ever become part of Turkey. What he believed Lord Salisbury said was that no territory which was Christian should come under the Mussulman rule—a different statement —he thought it an unfortunate statement — [Nationalist laughter]—but a very different one. He would give his reasons for thinking so hereafter. In. the second place the right hon. Gentleman said that the Great Powers jointly issued a Note to the effect that neither of the b coming combatants should obtain any accession of territory. That was not the fact. The Great Powers stated that in no case should the aggressor, whichever side was the aggressor, obtain any accession of territory; and that too was a very different statement from what the right hon. Gentleman had said. In the third place, the right hon. Gentleman put words into

      427
      some proclamation of the Turkish. Government that they "would not take an inch of territory." He believed that no such expression was used by the Porte. The Sultan did say that he undertook the war without any desire of aggrandisement; but that again was a. very different statement from that made by the right lion. Baronet. He now came to the main part of the right hon. Baronet's speech, in which he dealt with the policy and conduct of the Greek Government towards Crete and towards the Powers. He hardly thought that even the right hon. Baronet would have had the hardihood to reproduce in that House such a tissue of distorted views and statements as he had just before then. Similar statements were frequently made six or eight months ago, before the world knew the truth with regard to these matters. The right hon. Baronet tried to make it appear that Greece by her intervention and by sending Colonel Vassos and his forces to Crete wished to promote civilisation and restore peace. A more extraordinary perversion of fact was never put before the House. The whole of the right hon. Gentleman's premises were incorrect. When the Greeks began to interfere in Crete—and it was an interference first private or semi-official, and then afterwards official by the dispatch of Colonel Vassos—Crete was settling down into a state of order and satisfaction. [" Oh!"] The Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs—who was necessarily well acquainted with what took place in Crete—had told the House that the insurgents, or rather the Cretan Christians, through their leaders accepted the autonomous constitution offered by the Powers with gratitude, and were prepared to be satisfied with it. That statement had been repeated by M. Hanotaux in the French. Chamber, and he believed it had been repeated by the Foreign. Ministers of other countries. The fact was that the interference of Greece was not to preserve order and peace or to promote the Christian civilisation of Crete, but it was to prevent the Cretans getting autonomy. The one thing which Greece and the Greek Government dreaded more than. anything else was the establishment of autonomy in Crete, because they knew that autonomy in Crete would be a deadly blow to Greek ambition. [" Hear, hear !"] Had the Cretans
      428
      been in the enjoyment of autonomy only a few months, they would have been so pleased and satisfied that the probability of Crete coming under Grecian rule would have disappeared for ever. So they sent agitators and rifles into the island, and when that proved insufficient the Greek Government deliberately sent Colonel Vassos with 4,000 men. The intervention. of Colonel Vassos turned Crete into a perfect pandemonium of blood and ruin. ["Hear, hear!"] That was the fact with regard to the intervention of Greece in Crete which the right hon. Gentleman had wholly distorted and perverted. The Greeks, with a recklessness that was quite unpardonable and which had recoiled upon themselves, lost all sense of responsibility in the later phases of the Cretan affair. They decided to go on in their course of aggression and provocation against Turkey, hoping that some European intervention would occur at the last moment to save them from the consequences of their folly. Eventually they resolved upon the fatal course of mobilising their army in Thessaly, and allowing those piratical incursions across the Thessalian border which thoroughly justified Turkey in declaring war. The point of view from which he approached this question was quite different to that of the right hon. Baronet and of the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition —["hear, hear!"]—who opened the Debate on the subject in a speech, he was bound to say, of remarkable moderation for him. [Laughter.] It was quite clear that the responsible Members of the Opposition did not feel *heir position very encouraging with regard to this question. They realised the fact that public opinion, which they once thought to be wildly with them, was now wholly indifferent if not against them. Therefore, the speech of the right hon. Gentleman was exceedingly moderate in tone, and he hoped he would take no offence if he said that it was rather devoid of interest. [Cheers and laughter.] But the danger in which we stood at present was, in his opinion, a very different one from that which had been put forward by the right hon. Gentlemen opposite. At this moment the British Government was taking the lead in a policy of menace, if not of coercion towards the Ottoman Empire. [" Oh !"

      429
      and "No "] It was quite true that the Sovereigns of other Great Powers —Austria and Russia—had addressed messages to the Government of Turkey advising the Sultan to accept the decisions of the Great Powers with regard to the Thessalian frontier. But the tone and language of those messages was very different from the tone and language which the British Government had used towards the Turkish Government. [" Hear, hear !"] Now he could not for the life of him see why the British Government should take the lead in the coercion of Turkey at the present moment. He could not see why we should pull the chesnuts out of the fire for Russia. Of course it was very grateful to the Government of Russia, which had made several mistakes of late in the East and had lost some of its influence in the Ottoman Empire and at Constantinople — it was grateful to the Government of Russia to see the British Government taking the lead in depriving the Turks of what they at all events, were justified in considering the legitimate fruits of their action. But why should we do it? What did we gain? In the first place, our demands on Turkey were unjust. Turkey had asked, he believed—he addressed a question the other day to his right hon. Friend the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs in order to be satisfied as to the truth of this statement but he believed that Turkey had expressed a willingness to accept a very moderate increase of territory, to accept the line of the Peneus in Northern Thessaly—this line, if accepted, would give Turkey less than one-sixth of the territory which she gave up to Greece some years ago. It was, he understood, a good line of division between the two countries. Why should the British Government take the lead in preventing Turkey having this slight accession of territory? What had we to gain by it? The Turks were clearly in the right in the war. They were the provoked mid the attacked party. They conducted the war with courage and skill. Their troops behaved well throughout, and their generals had shown the greatest possible humanity towards the conquered Greeks. Why, then, under the circumstances, should the Government of this country take the lead in endeavouring to coerce Turkey
      430
      and prevent her from getting this slight accession of territory? There was no use in shutting one's eyes to the fact that if we did it we should be guilty of something worse than Midsummer madness. ["Hear, hear!"] The British Government controlled the greatest number of Mussulman subjects under any One Government in the world. There were 60 million Mussulman subjects of the Queen in India, and in these days when information spreads so rapidly it was no longer safe to adopt a policy which was repugnant to them. There had recently been a great development of cohesion and solidarity among Mussulmans throughout the world. For this statement he had the authority of Professor Arminius Vambery, who conversed with him on the subject some weeks ago. The present situation in India, was such as to cause some anxiety, and in these circum stances the Government ought to be most careful not to do anything having the appearance of coercion and attack directed against the Sultan, who was regarded by the great majority of the Mussulmans of the East as the Caliph of their religion. Considerable subscriptions had been sent from India to help Turkey in her struggle against Greece, and numerous offers had been made by Mussulmans to provide for the orphans of their co-religionists murdered by the Cretan Christians. ["Hear, hear!"] When every act of the Turkish. Government was vilified and denounced on the other side of the House, and when even the Ambassador at Constantinople had said at a meeting of the representatives of the Great Powers that England was determined to prevent any territory which had been Christian from ever becoming Mussulman, he was justified in uttering this warning warning to the Government. ["Hear, hear!"] A consideration that it would, be well now to bear in mind was that the war with Greece had shown how great was the military strength of Turkey. The value of Turkey as a military ally was now obvious. [Ironical Nationalist cheers.] Two of the most powerful countries in Europe were showing how highly they estimated the value of the Turkish alliance. ["Hear, hear!"] There was a great deal of jealousy between Russia and Germany with, regard to their respective influence at Constantinople.

      431
      That jealousy had arisen because Germany had deliberately adopted a policy of wise protection towards the Ottoman Empire with a view to securing its military alliance. The right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean said that the British Government had accepted the policy of war between Turkey and Greece because it had been imposed upon them by Russia and Germany. There never was a more preposterous idea. There was no alliance between Russia and Germany with regard to Greece or Turkey; but there had been a plot on the part of Russia to break up the Ottoman Empire, and it would have been carried into effect but for the action of the German Monarch. [" Hear, hear !"] If we had at Constantinople an agent who was on even fairly good terms with the Sultan and his Government, the jealousy between Germany and Russia might be turned to our advantage, and the Christian subjects of the Porte might be benefited. If there should ever be a struggle between Germany on the one side and Russia and France on the other, half the Russian power would be paralysed by the fact that Germany had gained the alliance of Turkey; and the result would be victory for Germany. Supposing Russia were to obtain the control of the fighting power of Turkey we could not hold India for any long period against a combined Russian and Turkish attack. So the Turkish forces represented at this moment the balance of power both in Europe and the East. For these reasons he urged the Government to be exceedingly cautious about adopting a policy of hostility towards Turkey. With regard to Armenia and the question of reforms, he was glad to know that the position had been very much improved. [Nationalist cries of "Oh!"] Eighteen months ago the state of affairs in Armenia was terrible, but he was glad to say that during the last 15 months there had been but two painful disturbances. [Derisive Nationalist cheers.] If hon. Members preferred, he would say that there had been only two massacres. In the case of Tokat, which was greatly exaggerated at first, the number of killed being 83, not 700 as at first suggested. The Turkish Government took immediate action, and the military governor, the heads of the police, and other responsible persons were suspended, arrested,
      432
      and tried. Sentences were passed, and excepting the capital sentences they had all been carried out. That showed great improvement in the action of the Ottoman authorities. With, regard to the capital sentences, it should be remembered that it was not always easy for a Monarch to enforce the death penalty. A case in point was that of Major Lothaire, who was guilty of cold-blooded murder. Major Lothaire was acquitted by the Belgian Courts. Even the King of the Belgians dared not punish Major Lothaire, because the public opinion of the country was on the culprit's side. Then there was 'the recent case of the filibusters into Cuba, who, though taken red-handed, were acquitted in the United States by the tribunal that tried them. When such failures of justice occurred in highly-civilised States, it being found impossible to disregard public opinion, surely some allowance ought to be made for the Turkish Government if it hesitated to carry out the death penalty in the case to which he had referred. He believed that the condition of Armenia had greatly improved, and that it was the desire of the Turkish Government that it should be still further improved. He was glad to know that this country was able now to look in a fairer and less passionate manner at the difficulties which undoubtedly hampered the Turkish Government. Those difficulties were enormous and unparalleled. [Cheers, and Nationalist laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite would sympathise with him when he said that the English Government had found difficulty in governing Ireland; but the Turkish Government had not one, but twenty Irelands to govern. [Nationalist cheers and laughter.] In that empire there was such a collection of diverse races and creeds as was not to be found in any other parts of the world, some of them the wildest and the most difficult to govern in the world. The policy of Turkey in the past had been to allow perfect liberty of religion to all, and that very moderation had given rise to the very difficulties the Turks had now to encounter. If Turkey had followed the same policy as Russia, namely, of forcing into one religion all the people, nine-twentieths of their difficulties would

      433
      never have occurred. The Turks had always followed a policy of moderation. Hon. Members might go into any town in Asia Minor and might see a. Christian procession passing through the streets with a cross at its head and choristers chanting the service, and yet Protestant missionaries could not speak their views in the streets of Cork. [Cheers, and Nationalist laughter.] He considered the proposals put forward by the Turkish Government with regard to the terms of peace had been exceedingly moderate. [" Hear, hear !"] He believed the amount of the indemnity had been practically accepted by the Great Powers. Though the abolition of the capitulations had not been accepted, he believed considerable modifications had been agreed on. There remained only the question of boundary and even on that, he believed, there was no dispute that Turkey should be put in possession of such a military boundary as would secure her against further attack by Greece. He hoped that if the Turkish demands were not to be conceded, at all events Her Majesty's Government would allow some other Power to take the lead in an attitude of hostility to Turkey. This country dared not appear before the world as the coercers of Turkey. Whatever might be the reasons for refusing the demands of the Turkish Government, he hoped no more would be heard of the statement that they could not be allowed because they were made by a Mahomedan power against Christians. [" Hear, hear !"] The late war had shown that Lord Beaconsfield in 1878 did not put his money on the wrong horse. [Cheers.]
      MR. F. S. STEVENSONsaid the hon. Member who had just sat down had made a distinct attack on the representative of this country at Constantinople. The hon. Member had referred three times to the unfortunate attitude of our Ambassador; but he should hardly think such speeches as that of the hon. Member would strengthen the hands of the Government in this matter. The hon. Member had attributed to Sir Philip Currie the statement that no territory taken from Moslem Power rule should be restored.
      *SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: I said that if Sir Philip Currie said that it was an unfortunate utterance. If he did not say it I should rejoice exceedingly.
      MR. STEVENSONsaid that what Sir Philip Currie did say was that no territory taken from the Turkish rule should ever be restored. ["Hear, hear!"] There was a great distinction between those two statements, because one involved a question of race and religion, while the other had reference only to the notorious action of the Turkish Government in the past. Then the hon. Member made what he supposed he would call a hypothetical attack on the Government when he said they were now taking the initiative in regard to the coercion of Turkey; but in the absence of any information the Committee must assume the attack of the hon. Gentleman to be premature. He would rejoice if there were some foundation for such an attack. It was very much to be hoped that the Government had taken the opportunity of shewing something of that initiative in which they had been so lacking. The hon. Gentleman also indulged in controversial statements with regard to the origin of the Greco-Turkish war, into which it was hardly necessary to enter; but in any case he did not think that either the hon. Member or any hon. Member who had spoken, had been able to contradict the statements as to the origin of the war made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean. It certainly remained the fact that the action taken by Greece in regard to Crete, which gained for them so much sympathy in this country, was not the action that directly promoted the war. The raid into Turkish territory, which was undertaken against the wishes of the Greek Government, could hardly be looked upon as a justification for the war. The Greek Government had no more responsibility for that raid than the British Government had for the Jameson raid. [" Hear, hear !"] What began the war was the action of the Turks in firing on Greeks in the Gulf of Arta. Although, no doubt, the origin of the war might give rise to some controversy, it could not be denied that the Sultan was the aggressor. [" Hear, hear !" and "Oh!"] He thought the Committee ought to press the Under Secretary for information as to what was going on now in Constantinople with regard to the terms of peace. As far as could be gathered, the attitude of the British Government and the Powers was a very reasonable

      435
      attitude, namely, that not one inch of inhabited territory in Thessaly should be handed back to the Porte. If that was the view they held he did not think any reasonable fault could be found with it; but unfortunately the incidents of the last few months gave no guarantee for the hope that if any resistance was offered by the Porte, they would take any steps to prevent that territory remaining in the occupation of Turkey. Then there was also the question of the indemnity. In that case also he thought the time had arrived when an authoritative statement on the subject should be made by a responsible Member of the Government. The wildest rumours had been flying about as to the amount of the indemnity and if it was to be £4,000,000, not only did it appear to be a sum very much in excess of any damage that might have been incurred by Turkey, but it did not take into account the loss incurred by the Greek Government and the inhabitants of Thessaly, owing to the loss of the harvest and the devastation caused by the war. Then. upon another matter concerned in the terms of peace the Powers should intervene, and that was the abrogation of the capitulations. This was a matter which he submitted ought not to be left to be decided between Turkey and Greece alone, it was a. matter in regard to which the Powers of Europe or those most interested in the welfare of the Greek kingdom ought to have a direct voice, more especially the three Powers who were parties to the Convention of 1830, by which the capitulations were established giving a guarantee to the Greek subjects of the Ottoman Empire, without which they would be in the same position as the Armenians. The capitulations should not be left to be abrogated under existing circumstances when Turkey had the "whip hand" of Greece; but England, France, and Russia should have direct voices in this matter. Although he did not wish to trench too much on controversial subjects, yet there was one matter mentioned by the hon. Member for Sheffield, who argued as a fact that should give rise to action on the part of the Government that we had only one ally of any consequence in the Eastern Mediterranean in the future and that was Turkey. But the hon. Member appeared to have left out of sight that
      436
      assuming that the Turkish Empire was not a permanent institution in the corporate life of Europe, then at all events the Greek element scattered along the coast of the Levant presented a basis for the establishment of progress and order, and he earnestly trusted that in any development of policy which the Government might pursue in the future, they would not leave out of sight that most important factor the Hellenic nation. One other matter had been mentioned, the state of affairs in Armenia. The hon. Member found some improvement in the fact that wholesale massacre had succeeded a much more gradual method of extermination. But a pamphlet issued a few weeks ago on the impartial authority of the head of the. French Missions to the East, founded on the information from their own organisation and information of French Consuls as well as from Armenian sources, showed that the improvement was entirely on the surface. There had been no recent massacres, but persecution was just as terrible as it was some months ago. There were isolated cases of ago murder, such as that of Yussuf Yunan, who was an agent of the Duke of Westminster's Armenian Committee. was killed in cold blood by persons employed by others in a. superior position, and not these last were arrested, but the tools who carried out the murder. They had been sentenced to death, but the sentence had been referred to the Court of Cassation at Constantinople, and there was reason to believe the Sultan would be influenced to exercise his power to pardon. In regard to the massacres at Tokat there was no evidence that the sentence imposed had been carried out. He entirely contravened and contradicted the statements of the hon. Member. There had simply been a lull in the massacres, but the system in the Ottoman Empire as applied to its Christian subjects, might still be described as a system of toleration tempered by massacre. ["Hear!"]
      *MR. CURZON: I have been asked a number of questions on a great variety of topics, but perhaps I may be allowed to postpone the answers to those dealing with matters in the East of Europe until I have replied on the other points. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean made inquiries with refer-

      437
      ence to the arrangement made with King Menelik. It is true, as I have before stated in reply to a question, that a treaty has been concluded on behalf of Her Majesty's Government by Mr. Rennell Rodd with that monarch. But it will not be in the public interest—and the right hon. Gentleman will readily appreciate this—that I should make any public statement of its contents at this moment. I hope in due time the treaty will be laid before the House, when hon. Members will have an opportunity of ascertaining what has taken place. The right hon. Baronet then asked some questions about Corea, and I do not in the least deprecate his allusion to British policy in regard to that part of the world. I am always very glad when I find Members taking a great interest in that which I think myself a most important subject of Imperial politics. ["Hear, hear!"] With regard to the views I have myself ventured to express, I do not know that they very substantially differ from those which have been entertained and acted upon by the present Government. The right hon. Gentleman asks us to state what are our interests in Corea. Well, I imagine that the independence of Corea is an international interest, but the right hon. Gentleman knows enough of the history of the Far East to know that Corea is feeble and has never been able to stand alone. For years, and even for centuries, she leaned upon China, and now, since the war is over, she, by virtue el a sort of common agreement, leans on Russia and Japan. The right lion. Baronet seemed to think that Corea had been abandoned to her fate, and that she was to be left to share the fate of Northern China, but I must say I do not agree with his account of recent incidents. British interests in Corea are, of course, not identical in character or in moment with the interests of the other Powers I have mentioned. We have not a contiguous frontier with Corea, as have Russia and China, and, in the second place, we do not gaze at her across the seas, as does Japan. We have, of course, commercial interests in Corea—interests which I should be the last to minimise, but interests not assessable at a very high figure, and which have never yet persuaded any British firm to embark on mercantile enterprise there. Our interests in Corea, other than commercial, are first, to see that the inde-
      438
      pendence of Corea is maintained, and that it is not territorially or administratively absorbed into any of the surrounding states; secondly, that Corean territory and Corean harbours are not made the base of schemes for territorial or political aggrandisement, so as to disturb the balance of power in the Far East and give to any one Power a maritime supremacy in the Eastern seas. Commercial expansion is a thing we must expect, and which we must endeavour with the means at our disposal to meet, but any such attempts as I have been describing by any Power would find us ready to protect our own interests there. ["Hear, hear!"] Next I turn to the subject of Armenia, about which the Leader of the Opposition has asked me questions. To answer all these questions fully would cover a wide area and would be difficult within reasonable limits of time. I do not know from a perusal of the reports that I can describe the state of affairs as very reassuring. No doubt great distress continues to prevail, more especially in the eastern provinces of Asiatic Turkey. The Turkish tax-gatherer has never been distinguished for bowels of compassion; there is widespread deficiency of supplies, the Kurds are never altogether under control, and the gendarmerie, being unpaid, help themselves to what they can. That is one side, and, I think, a most distressing and deplorable side of the question. On the other hand, there are some relieving features. A considerable number of Turkish officials who have been proved guilty of participation in massacre, persecution, or disorder have been deprived of their posts. We have concurrent testimony from a great many quarters that high officials, civil and military, have exerted themselves to the utmost of their ability, in co-operation with the Consuls, to prevent the recurrence of disturbances and to bring about a more tranquil state of affairs. Then, again, the forced conversions so greatly complained of some two years ago have entirely ceased, and no obstacle has been put in the way of these unhappy persons reverting to the practices of their own religion. The British military Consuls in all parts of the country have rendered absolutely invaluable assistance by travelling about among the people and keeping on friendly terms with Turkish

      439
      officers and with all classes. It is worthy of mention, perhaps, that since the lamentable incidents at Tokat in March last—though there may have been isolated cases of murder—there has not been any organised attack on Christians on a large scale in any part of Asiatic Turkey. As regards the reforms which were secured by the Powers more than a year ago, they have been put into operation in parts of Asia Minor, but I do not know that the result has been altogether satisfactory. Christians have in some cases been appointed in due proportions to the police and the gendarmerie; but so far as I can gather from our reports, although the experiment has been tried, it has not been particularly successful, and in many cases the Armenians thus appointed have subsequently resigned. Now I turn to the wider and perhaps the more important questions opened up in the majority of the speeches to which I have listened; and many as have been the occasions on which we have discussed this Greek question this Session, and wide as have been the differences of opinion by which we have been separated, I do not think there ought to be any difficulty on the present occasion in finding a common basis of agreement at which the bulk of us can arrive. I was encouraged in that hypothesis by the tone of the interrogatories addressed to us by the Leader of the Opposition, and I do not know that there has been anything in subsequent speeches to detract from the tone with which this Debate was initiated. I shall not myself say anything about the events that led to the war except to comment on one observation that fell from the right hon. Baronet (Sir C. Dilke). He introduced, I think, not for the first time, a very strange story to the effect that an agreement between Greece and Turkey was on the verge of being arrived at when, through the malevolent intervention of some other Power or Powers, this happy arrangement broke down and war ensued. It is a very remarkable thing that Sir Edwin Egerton at Athens, who has enjoyed in the highest degree the confidence of the Greek Government, and Sir Philip Currie at Constantinople, who has been by no means remiss in providing us with authoritative information of what is pass-
      440
      ing there, do not seem to have heard one word of this suggested arrangement. I really think the right hon. Baronet—who has put forward time after time, and repeated, with an air of authority suggesting the highest sources of information for what he says, this story in the House —ought to be prepared to enlighten Her Majesty's Government, who are in deep ignorance of the matter, as to what those sources of information are, so that we may estimate them at their proper value. I will say nothing more about the events prior to the war, nor do I desire to say anything about the responsibility that may be claimed by, or may legitimately be placed upon, either this party or that for the war. Such a discussion now can, I think only lead to recrimination, which would divert our attention from the main point at issue, which is what has been happening since the war was over, and since the Powers have taken the interests of Greece into their hands. What the Committee, I think, expects me to endeavour to tell them is the manner in which the Powers have been discharging the obligations which they assumed at the close of the war, which to some extent were imposed upon them by the exigencies of the moment, but which also, I admit, were the natural legacy of the whole of their policy during the past year. Hitherto our discussions of this question have always been divided into the two separate topics of Crete and the mainland, and as there is an essential difference, both in character and in treatment, between the two, perhaps the Committee will allow me to observe that distinction in what I have to say. As regards Crete, after the war the Greek troops were withdrawn, and the last batch of them left the Cretan shores on the 26th of May. Simultaneously, the blockade, although it was retained as a necessary measure of police to prevent arms and armed volunteers from entering the country, was relaxed as to merchandise and provisions, and therefore practically it may be said to have ceased to exist.
      MR. J. DILLON: Are provisions free to go in now?
      *MR. CURZON: I believe so. More recently the Admirals have reported to us a decided change in the attitude and approach of the insurgent leaders. Frequent and friendly negotiations have taken place between the Ad-

      441
      mirals and these men. The old cry of "Annexation or death," which used to figure at their interviews, has now ceased to be heard, and autonomy, involving the appointment of a European Governor, the cessation of all Turkish control in the internal administration of the island, and the ultimate withdrawal of the Turkish troops, is now more widely understood and more generally appreciated by them. We hear of the Christians meeting at the present moment to elect delegates for the forthcoming Assembly, and although, of course, this Assembly will, so far as at present can be judged, only represent the Christian element in the island, at the same time it will be able to voice their opinion and ought to be able to lend material assistance to the Powers. The Admirals have given free passage to those of the inhabitants who desire to go to and from the meetings for the purpose of electing these delegates, and I believe the election is proceeding satisfactorily.
      SIR W. HARCOURT: The right hon. Gentleman has mentioned this Assembly. Will he state when the Assembly is expected to meet?
      *MR. CURZON: Of course, this Assembly is rather an informal and irregular thing, because, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, the original Assembly represented the whole of the island, and contained delegates both of the Moslems and Christians. The Christians, no doubt with a desire to show their intention to meet the Admirals, are electing deputies to represent their opinions. Whether the delegates so elected can legitimately be called the General Assembly it is difficult to say. I was about to allude to the two localities in which special and local disturbances have, or are said to have, taken place. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition read out from The Times a long telegram from a correspondent of that paper, which appeared this morning, as to the incidents of disorder that are occurring—that are said to be occurring—in Canea. So far we know nothing of them. Of course, I cannot say whether they be or be not true, but it is remarkable that, although we had, only yesterday, telegrams from our Consul, who is now at Canea, he said nothing whatever about them, and gave us no intimation whatever that matters there had reached, or
      442
      were likely to reach, the rather critical state which was described by this correspondent. But as regards Candia I should like to say a word. The situation at Candia is very exceptional. There are in the town something like 52,000 Mahomedans, of whom less than one-half are the normal population, while the remainder arc fugitives who have been driven within the walls from all parts of the interior. The force of European and of Turkish soldiers who are stationed there is really inadequate to keep this great host in perfect control. There has been, no doubt, as I think some previous speaker has remarked, a considerable revival of Turkish feeling—a natural, I think perhaps a pardonable, revival—owing to the success of their main campaign on the Continent. At Candia the trouble has, in the main, centred around two points—the water supply and the grazing area. The water supply has over and over again been cut by the Christians, threatening, of course, the Moslems in the town with starvation. On the other hand, the Moslems in the town have not been able to take their cattle outside the walls to find grazing or fodder for their sustenance. Ambuscades have been constantly laid by the Christians, who have waylaid and have decapitated unhappy and innocent Moslem peasants. Thereupon the Moslems have retaliated by nocturnal raids, sweeping down on some of these Christian villages and making short work of their inhabitants. The water supply question has, I am glad to say, practically been settled by agreement between the Admirals and the insurgents. The sources of water and the intervening channels have been visited by a force from the town—on one occasion a mixed Italian and English force marched out without molestation as far as nine miles into the interior—and our latest information is that water is flowing freely and without interruption from either side. But the same cannot be said about the grazing difficulty. This grazing question is very acute. The Committee must remember that the lands outside the town of Candia are lands belonging to the Moslems—["hear, hear!"]—who have been driven from them inside the walls. These poor people creep out at night, under cover of darkness, to visit their old homes. They find

      443
      their houses pulled down; they find the crops which they sowed reaped by others and they find every trace, it may be, of their own property swept away. ["Hear, hear!"] That is a situation which wholly apart from the question of the religious sect of the different parties, must appeal to the sympathies of any inan—[cheers]—and the Committee will understand that it requires the utmost tact, and I may even say statecraft, on the part of Colonel Chermside to cope with a situation of that description. ["Hear, hear!"] He has really, on the whole, been most successful. Open plundering has been suppressed; wherever he has had a chance he has given warning of these raids to the party likely to be attacked, and they have, I think, been successfully frustrated. Since July 16 an order has been procured from the Turkish, authorities that no man shall be allowed to carry arms without written permission. The Admirals have agreed that the irregular troops in the outposts, who were, the Committee must remember, Cretans of Mahomedan faith, should be replaced, where possible, by Turkish regulars, experience showing that where the latter have been stationed few or no disorders have broken out. Nevertheless, I must admit that the situation at Candia is one of some danger, and is likely so to continue for some time. As long as the abnormal conditions on the one hand, of this congested population and, on the other hand, of scarcity of food supply continue, so long I think must we have some trouble in the town. I turn from that to the larger question—about which I have been asked some questions—of the future government of the island. The Powers have not receded from any one of the declarations and engagements they have publicly made in that respect, and if I be asked here how it arises that the autonomy Which they have promised has not been definitely and finally set up, I think the answer is a very simple one. For the moment the representatives of the Powers are engaged upon a task undoubtedly of more immediate and urgent importance et Constantinople. They are endeavouring to arrange the conditions of a permanent peace between the combatants in the late war, and to relieve Greece on the one hand and Turkey on the other from the strain and expense of maintain-
      444
      ing on the one side a large number of refugees at Athens, and on the other side a great army on the footing of war in the plains of Thessaly. These negotiations would, in the opinion of the Government, only be complicated, and might be endangered, if the Ambassadors endeavoured to do two things at the same time. Let them first discharge the more important task which is now immediately occupying their energies, and then let' them take the question of Crete in hand. Meanwhile, as I have endeavoured to show by reference to what is passing in Crete, I think the problem in that island is to scone extent solving itself. I should not like, however, to give the Committee the impression that the Powers have, in the mean- time, forgotten this question of autonomy. On the contrary, they have been considering among themselves, and they have agreed among themselves, as to the bases of such autonomy. They have agreed on the appointment of a European Governor, and hon. Members will see the name of a candidate of the highest eminence and reputation for statesmanship, mentioned in the newspapers. Whether or not M. Droz will accept the post, I do not know, but the attitude of the Government has been throughout that they were quite willing to accept any governor, civil or military, although their own personal preference was for a military rather than a civil governor, whose name recommended itself to the Powers. The Powers have also agreed in principle to the enrolment of a gendarmerie and to the principle of a loan to enable the new rigime, when it is started, to be set afoot. Also they have agreed to a convocation of the General Assembly, which I have already mentioned, and to the progressive reduction of the Turkish troops. These principles have been acquiesced in without exception by all the Powers. Naturally, there has been some difference of opinion as to detail, but there is a substantial agreement on the bases which I have mentioned. A question was put to me as to how it is that the Turkish troops have not already left the island, or are not at the present moment in process of departure. I have already stated that the discussions at Constantinople have turned for the moment upon more important points; but I think it

      445
      would be futile, and more than futile— that it would be dangerous—to remove the Turkish troops before you have something to put in their place. ["Hear, hear!"] Let the new governor be established, let him be supplied with an ample force, and I think the question of the removal of the Turkish troops will have reached a more satisfactory stage. There remains only one more difficulty with regard to Crete which I should like to mention. In the towns there are congregated at the present moment some 10,000 Mahomedan families. These people have been driven from the interior. Their homes and their crops have been confiscated or destroyed. On the other hand, they are residing for the most part in houses belonging to the Christians. The restitution of these unhappy people to their homes in the country will undoubtedly be a task of the greatest difficulty. They can only go back under military protection, and when they arrive at their old homes they will find ruin staring them in the face. But it may be that by some exchange of property between the two religious bodies in the island, by the aggregation of the Mussulmans in certain towns or portions of the island, and by giving assistance to those who wish to emigrate, the difficulty may be overcome. In the meantime it is no good ignoring these difficulties which we have before us, and it is perfectly plain that the difficulty of the interior of Crete is not a Gordian knot which can be cut by a slash of the sword, but is one which will require the patient manipulation and delicate unravelling of skilful diplomatic fingers. I do not say that the condition of the island is satisfactory, but I do say it, contains elements of greater hope than I was able to point out on the last occasion when I addressed the House. It cannot surely be expected that in an island which has suffered from chronic disturbance for over 2,000 years, Mahomedans and Christians should join hands and consent to dwell together in unity at the first appearance of European forces. I turn now to a subject of vastly greater importance namely the negotiations for the settlement of a permanent peace between Turkey and Greece. It is well known that at the beginning the Porte asked for the restitution of the old frontier which existed at the time of the Berlin Treaty.
      446
      The Porte also asked for an indemnity of ten millions Turkish pounds, and for the abolition of the capitulations under which Greek subjects live and trade in so many parts of the Ottoman dominions. From the first the Powers united in resisting these demands, and were in agreement as to the modified conditions which they are prepared to concede. Upon these lines the negotiations have tranquilly, though I dare say slowly, proceeded. Although I am not in a position to say that the line for the strategical rectification of the Thessalian frontier agreed to by the Military Attachés has been finally accepted by the Porte, the principle which underlies it has, I believe, been acquiesced in. Financial experts have been appointed to examine into the financial resources of Greece. with a view to determining the maximum indemnity which that country is capable of paying, and the largest sum that she can reasonably be expected to set apart from year to year for the interest upon the indemnity loan. These conclusions have also been accepted in principle. Finally, the Dragomans of the various Embassies have been engaged in drawing up a list of the abuses in the capitulations of which I spoke, which have been discussed with the legal advisers of the Porte, and about which there is a disposition to arrive at a conclusion on both sides. I should mention, as correcting some false impressions given by two or three previous speakers, that what Lord Salisbury has throughout laid special stress upon has been the impossibility of handing back settled Christian territory to Turkish rule. He has insisted upon the principle, upon which all the Powers are agreed with him, that if any small groups of Christians are included within the strategical line sketched out by the Military Attachés, they shall be allowed the option of emigrating and accepting compensation awarded to them, by an impartial tribunal. It is quite true that the progress cannot be described as rapid. Speed is not a characteristic which is ever predicable of the progress of diplomatic negotiations at Constantinople. But circumstances for the moment there render these delays peculiarly explicable in character. There is a military, and I think also a militant, party in Constantinople, and the Sultan has advisers who do not take the same view of his

      447
      obligations as the Great Powers do. There is the solid fact that there is a large army of many thousands of men still on the plains of Thessaly. There is the sentiment of religious fanaticism which, has been aroused by the recent conflict and stimulated by the victory in which that conflict resulted. No doubt there is among many sections of the Turkish people a feeling, a revived sense, of military power which their easy successes have brought about. All these are factors which are perfectly obvious and which cannot be lost sight of in estimating the complexity of the situation with which the Powers are called upon to deal. These are all of them, of course, obstacles to a rapid issue of the negotiations now in progress. But possibly from one point of view they have not been without advantage, because I think that all these difficulties, delays, and obstacles have tended still more to emphasise the sentiments of agreement with which the Great Powers have been acting. ["Hear, hear!"] In the two months of negotiation of which I have been speaking I cannot remember any occasion on which there has been any substantial disagreement—I think I may carry it further, and say any disagreement at alt—on the points connected with those negotiations between the Powers at Constantinople. [Cheers.] The Governments and their representatives have been acting in absolute harmony, and I see no reason whatever why that harmony should not be continued. [Cheers.] Of course, we have heard to-night, and no doubt we shall hear again, the familiar accusations against the Concert of Europe. They are taunted with delays for which they are not responsible. There are Gentlemen in this House, and there are writers in the newspapers, who attempt to attach to them the odium of a situation which I maintain they did nothing, themselves to provoke. ["Hear, hear!"] I do not expect such hon. Gentlemen to stay their hands, but I do invite them for one moment to consider what the situation of Greece would have been at this moment if there had been no Concert of Europe to intervene. [Cheers.] It is perfectly true that the peace negotiations may be proceeding somewhat slowly at Constantinople. But for the Concert of Europe much severer terms might have been dictated by a
      448
      victorious Turkish General at the Acropolis. Take, again, the question of evacuation. But for the Concert of Europe it might not have been the evacuation of Thessaly, but of Attica itself, that would have been at stake. Take, again, the question of the indemnity. It might not have been the amount that Greece could pay, but the amount that Turkey chose to exact. I will not, therefore, for my own part admit the failure with which the Concert of Europe has been arraigned. They could not prevent, and they never undertook to prevent, war between Greece and Turkey. What they did do was to prevent the conflagration extending over a much wider area. The Leader of the Opposition made great fun of the Concert, and sail, "You claim for yourselves that you prevented each other from flying at each other's throats." No, that is not the claim. The claim is that the Concert prevented other and smaller States of Europe from flying at each other's throats, or from trying to get their share of the spoils—from which condition of things a situation of great danger to the peace of Europe must have arisen, and in which, one after another, the Great Powers might have become involved. That is the claim which the Powers make for themselves. In the meantime, they did exert themselves, as soon as opportunity presented itself to them, to intervene to bring the war to a conclusion. The whole object of my remarks to-night has been to impress on the Committee that the Powers are endeavouring at Constantinople to arrange terms which shall be reasonable for the victorious and moderate for the vanquished. [Cheers.] I do not know that it is particularly my duty to answer those taunts or to defend the Concert of Europe. After all, the Concert of Europe will be judged by the permanent verdict of history—[Opposition cheers]—and not by the transient impression of the House of Commons. [Cheers.] What, I imagine, a Secretary or Under Secretary, whoever he may be, speaking on behalf of his Government in the Chamber of which he is a Member, has got to do is to deal with is the conduct and responsibility of his own Government rather than with those of other Governments. On that issue I feel no alarm whatever. [Cheers.] Of course, it is impossible while the negotiations

      449
      are proceeding to lay full details on the Table of the House. But I hope I have gone as far in the way in the direction of confidence and disclosure as I could reasonably be expected to do. ["Hear, hear!"] The whole of my argument has been that we are at the present moment labouring to re-establish a condition of permanent peace in Eastern Europe, to mitigate the sufferings that have been entailed on Greece by her own rash acts. and to see that while Turkey receives the legitimate she does not receive more than the legitimate spoils to which she is entitled. To secure those ends the Government have been working during the past two months. They have not been working alone, and they do not propose to work alone. [Cheers.] They desire to secure those ends in conjunction with the other Powers: being perfectly convinced as I have so often said before, that any isolated action or any single-handed policy could only retard, and it might ultimately jeopardise, the results which they hope they are not over-sanguine in expecting the combined policy of Europe still to secure. [Cheers.]
      SIR EDWARD GREY, who was received with cheers: My first due is to thank the right hon. Gentleman for the clear and rapid statement he has made to the Committee, and for the full and fair way in which he has dealt, as I think, with an admirable selection of the points which are most interesting to the Committee at the present time. I do not know that what he has said invites any lengthened comment from me. I wish he could have told us something a little more hopeful in regard to Armenia, but I know I ought not to have expected it, because affairs in Crete and the war between Turkey and Greece have entirely thrown Armenia into the background, and the scheme of reform has not practically taken effect. The right hon. Gentleman told us that Christians had been employed in the police in Armenia, and that the attempt had not succeeded. It would be very interesting to know why it was the attempt did not succeed, because that was a point in the scheme of reform on which great hopes had been placed, and it would be well to know how far the particular point was worth pressing in the future. I must say that the statement of the right hon. Gentleman
      450
      in regard to Crete was much more favourable than the reports in the newspapers had led me to expect. I read only this morning in an article in The Times that not only was there no progress in Crete, but that things there were apparently going from bad to worse; and I gathered that not only was there a failure to secure the withdrawal of the Turkish troops from the island, but that Turkey was bent on sending fresh troops there, which had rendered both parties more disorderly—the Christians full of fear and apprehension of what was going to happen, and the Mahomedans thinking that things were surely coming round to their side. I hope the right hon. Gentleman's statement that the condition of things in Crete at the present time is better than it has been in the past will be thoroughly justified by events in the future. One thing I wish to make clear. If our criticism this evening has been moderate—and I do not intend to depart from that moderation—it must not be argued from it that we view the point which events have now reached with complete satisfaction. ["Hear, hear!"] I could wish that the right hon. Gentleman had not said so much in defence of the actions of the Concert of Europe. The Concert, no doubt, will, in the long run, be judged in history mainly by results. But if the historian were to judge the Concert to-day by the results achieved so far, I do not think the verdict would be a favourable one. ["Hear, hear!"] Indeed, I do not think that Lord Salisbury is quite satisfied with the action of the Concert. ["Hear, hear !"] It was only a few days ago that Lord Salisbury lamented that there had not been in the Concert some personality of the ascendency of Prince Bismarck, who might have made things move a little bit quicker. ["Hear, hear!"] Some of us have a doubt as to whether Lord Salisbury might not within the Concert have exercised more influence than he apparently has done. ["Hear, hear!"] But I do not wish to press that point tonight, first, because the results of Lord Salisbury's policy are still incomplete, and, secondly, because we have no authentic information before us yet as to what the policy of the Concert has really been. But as regards the action of the Concert as a whole—though I do not wish to say the responsibility

      451
      specially rests upon Her Majesty's Government—there is among the people of this country a widespread dissatisfaction with the slowness and feebleness of the action of the Concert. ["Hear, hear!"] I quite admit that the Concert has secured certain results of which the right hon. Gentleman has told us to-night, but we have to judge what we expected from the action of the Concert, not by those more or less negative results which have been achieved, but by the wider and higher aims of the Powers, and by the enormous strength they had behind them to carry them out; and judged by that standard I say the action of the Concert hitherto seems to me to have been slow and to have been feeble. [Cheers.] But is there any better prospect for the action of the Concert in the future? I can understand that it is possible that we may have some results from the Concert in future more pronounced and more effective than we have had in the past. It is possible, no doubt, that when war between Greece and Turkey first arose some members of the Concert with interests deeply concerned may have been seriously alarmed as to how far the disturbance would spread. They might have held even that if the Concert were to apply measures of coercion to the Sultan it might have been an encouragement to other States than Greece to take part in the war. But that danger has passed away; and we are told that on all points there is unanimity in the Concert of Europe—that none of the different Governments intends to separate from it, but that they are all determined to carry out the policy to which they have put their hands. But if it be convinced of that—if it be relieved from the great anxiety which may have been weighing on some of its members earlier in the year, then we have some reason, not only to hope, but to expect and to claim, that the results of the next few weeks will be more decisive and more effective than those earlier in the year have been. And though we shall never be
      452
      able to clear from our minds the suspicion that the Concert, as a united body, might, if it liked, have prevented some of the suffering which has occurred, yet in the end it may secure effectively those two points on which so much stress has been laid to-night — first, that no Christian territory is to be placed again under Turkish rule; and, secondly, that in Crete an effective autonomy should be established, which may remove in perhaps no distant time, not merely the present disturbances, but those causes of misgovernment, which I believe to be at the root of the disturbances in Crete, and which, as the right hon. Gentleman has reminded us, have continued now for hundreds of years. [Cheers.]
      *MR. T. W. LEGHsaid the criticism of the Government had been of so moderate a character that it was evident that right hon. Gentlemen opposite did not really disapprove of the Government's policy. As to the pacification of Crete, he did not think that the statement of the Under Secretary was particularly reassuring. Sir A. Billiotti attributed the delay in the pacification to the too-great indulgence which had been shown to the insurgents. At any rate, the Cretan Parliament which was about to meet was to be entirely Christian. That brought us no nearer to a solution of the difficulties if the Mussulman population was to be wholly excluded. As to the larger question between Greece and Turkey, the position was more promising. Of course, there was delay in the negotiations, and there was likely to be delay, considering that the amount of the indemnity was not yet settled, and considering the circumstances under which Thessaly was ceded to Greece in 1881. There was everything to be said for the Turks in this case. A grossly unprovoked attack was made upon them; but throughout the campaign their conduct had contrasted favourably with that of their antagonists. It was only fair that reparation should be made to them; and if it had been decided that the reparation

      453
      were not to take the form of territorial expansion a substantial indemnity ought to be paid. To that indemnity the historical hundred Members ought to contribute generously. [Cheers.] All the treaties governing action in Eastern Europe were formed on the assumption that the Turks were to be protected from the Russians; but those two Powers were now more closely united than any others in Europe. Turkey was in process of assimilation by Russia; Russia was not likely to allow the interference of other Powers; and if Russia would not act herself, the peace negotiations must naturally proceed slowly. He would not admit that it was our duty beyond any other Power to get the Greeks out of the difficulty in which they had placed themselves by their own folly. He would urge patience upon Gentlemen opposite, for he was convinced that if their leaders had been in power they would have pursued exactly the same course as Her Majesty's Government had done. ["Hear, hear!"]
      *MR. A. PEASEdrew attention to what he said was nothing less than a breach of faith on the part of Her Majesty's Government. The breach of faith was this, that they had over and over again promised the House of Commons that they would abolish the legal status of slavery in the Zanzibar Protectorate, and after they had been two years in office they had only partially abolished it in the island of Zanzibar and Pemba alone. The right lion. Member the Under Secretary had stated on June 24:—
      "That no Member of the Government had ever been asked to abolish the legal status of slavery except in the islands, that the Government had never given any other pledge, and he had never heard the question of the Main. land argued in that House."
      He would prove that these three statements were unfounded. Since March 8. 1895, he had in repeated questions, and in every speech he had delivered, argued in favour of abolition on the Mainland, and so late as January 19 last had pointed out how, in so far as the responsibility of the Government was concerned, the recognition of the legal status on the Mainland was worse than that on the islands where the Sultan shared the responsibility. Besides memorials presented to the Government on the subject
      454
      Bishop Tucker had authorised him to say that as recently as December 8, he had advocated the abolition on the Mainland, and t hat on Mr. Curzon himself. Bishop Tucker stated that the slavery is exactly the same kind of agricultural slavery as that which exists upon the islands. How could Mr. Curzon come down to the House and assert the Government had never been even asked to abolish it? Mr. Chamberlain in March 1895, was asked—
      "whether it was consistent with all that we had done and said in the past, that what was practically the British flag should fly over slavery?"
      The hon. Baronet, who was then Tinder Secretary, stated:—
      "that the Government had asked for a Report as to the best way of doing it, and this thing had got to be done."
      The Report makes it clear that the quest ion of Mainland abolition was included. Mr. Piggott was asked by Mr. Hardinge to, report on the Mainland, and in the Blue-book, Africa No. 7, his letter, dated August 1, 1895, commenced:—
      "I have the honour to report on the question of the abolition of slavery in the British Protectorate in East Africa."
      The Leader of the Opposition, when Leader of the House in 1895, stated:—
      "It was the duty of the Government to use their exertions at the earliest possible moment to put an end to slavery both in Zanzibar and elsewhere,"
      and the present First Lord of the Treasury, in. the Debate on August 21, 1895, used these words: —
      "We are called upon to lay a detailed plan before the Committee with regard to the particular machinery and methods by which the abolition of slavery in East Africa is to be accomplished. The question of slavery on the East Coast of Africa is one that has long engaged the attention of Governments, and in Ice Debate of last February we pressed this question on the Government of the day,"
      and it was only on the understanding that the Government would deal with the gigantic evil without delay that the hon. Member for North Cork withdrew his Motion.
      *MR. CURZONasked the hon. Member to quote any words of his on the part of the Government to abolish the status of slavery on the mainland. That was a definite challenge.
      *MR. J. A. PEASE: I accept it. The hon. Member went on to trace the course of events in relation to the question from the time of the late Government, and coming to the present year stated that at the beginning of the Session he moved an Amendment to the Address drawing attention to the situation on the Mainland as being worse than on the islands, and it was only on account of the pledge then given by the right hon. Gentleman that he withdrew the Amendment to the Address. He accepted the challenge of the right hon. Gentleman, and here were his words:—
      "The Government bad arrived at a decision of policy, and that decision was in strict fulfilment of the engagements which he had entered into more than once in that House. The pledge which had been given was that Mr. Hardinge would receive instructions to abolish the legal status of slavery in the Protectorate of Pemba and Zanzibar."
      *MR. CURZON: Is the hoe. Member quoting from "Hansard."
      *MR. J. A. PEASE: I am quoting from "Hansard"—[cheers]—of 19th January 1897.
      "That these would be a complete fulfilment of the pledges which he had given, the House might rest assured."
      That was that the legal status of slavery would be abolished in the Protectorate. There had not only not been a complete fulfilment in regard to the Mainland, but he held that the Government had not carried out their pledge and secured complete abolition with regard even to the islands. The right hon. Gentleman on 24th June defended the inaction of the Government on several grounds. Tie said there were more slaves legally held in the islands than on the Mainland; that he. had not heard of any grievance or hardship; that if a slave desired to escape he could obtain his freedom more readily on the Mainland, and that the Government had had only two years' absolute control over this district. He held that the Government had done nothing in the
      456
      two years during which they had complete control. Then he argued with regard to compensation, and said that if the policy of compensation was applied to the mainland, the question would assume enormous proportions. That was an argument why the Government did not apply their policy of abolition of the legal status of slavery over the administrative area over which they had direct control. Then he went on to argue that certain control had been given by the Sultan to the possessors of legally held slaves, and so the Government could not ignore that guarantee. But that did not prevent the Government from taking subsequent action, and for eight years they had recognised legally held slaves and taken no steps to bring the institution to a conclusion. The right hon. Gentleman used an expression which conveyed an inaccurate version of Sir John Kirk's views. He said that Sir John Kirk saw no necessity for taking similar steps on the mainland. That was rather a shock to hon. Members who always regarded Sir John Kirk as a keen abolitionist. He took the liberty of writing to Sir John Kirk, who replied: —
      "I have for long urged the Government to take the step of abolishing the legal status of slavery."
      And again: —
      "I am glad to be able.… to state my views as to slavery on the mainland."
      The only objection that Sir John Kirk had to the Government's action with regard to the abolition of slavery was that they had not gone far enough. All the concubines on the islands were still retained in the position of slaves, and, as any number of concubines could be retained, most of the women who were in the prime of life on those islands were still in a condition of bondage. With regard to the question of compensation, he wished to know what the Government were going to do on the mainland. The First Lord of the Treasury said the other day with regard to the abolition of the status on the mainland that the Government were going to carry out what they were in process of carrying out on the islands. All precedents really were against this principle of compensation, and he, wished to know whether the Government were going to ask the House for

      457
      a Vote in order to pay compensation to slaveholders on the mainland. The Under Secretary of State had said that the Government were carrying out the policy which had been advised by Sir John Kirk; but in a letter which he had received from Sir John Kirk that gentleman said,—
      "I object to female slaves being exempted from the operation of the new law and left in slavery, and I do not consider that any practical difficulty would have arisen had the law been made of universal application I regard the giving of compensation as not only needless, but most unwise."
      As to the question of fugitive slaves, the Government ought to have been aware of the illegality which was being pursued by their officers, and ought to have taken steps of their own accord in regard to it. It was obvious from a perusal of Lord Salisbury's Dispatch of 1889 that the giving up of these fugitive slaves had been part and parcel of Lord Salisbury's administration. In 1889 Lord Salisbury issued the following Dispatch to Colonel Euan Smith,—
      "I am directed by the Marquess of Salisbury to acquaint you that his Lordship approves your action in giving to each of the 550 runaway slaves a printed certificate of permission allowing them to continue in the mission station until claimed. I am at the same time to instruct you to warn all mission societies against harbouring runaway slaves, without making any exception. No legal right to do so can be claimed, and where a refuge and asylum are granted in extreme cases of peril and out of humanity it is done at the risk of the person giving the shelter."
      On June 25 the Under Secretary had stated that the documents produced on the previous evening were entirely new to Her Majesty's. Government. How could that be said, when he had read them in the House on June 3 to the right hon. Member, and the First Lord was also in his place. The Government had really ignored the matter until forced later on by a Vote in the House to take action. The attitude of the Government had been to belittle and minimise this evil of slavery. Over and over again the Under Secretary of State had used arguments indicating that the missionaries were opposed to the abolition; but he possessed letters from. these missionaries which were quoted in the Blue-books
      458
      showing that their views had been misconstrued and that they were opposed to the action of the Government and were in favour of the abolition of the legal status of slavery. The Government had long trifled with this question. Two years ago they pledged themselves to action, and little or nothing had been done on the mainland, while on the islands only about half the slaves had been liberated. He protested against. what he considered to be a breach of faith on the part of the Government, against the system of compensation which the Government had created, against the recognition of concubinage, and against the reasons 'which had been put forward by the Under Secretary of State in justification of the Government's inaction on the mainland.
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he conceived the answer to the hon. Member's charges would be that when we were in a foreign country that was under an authority which recognised slavery as an essential principle in regard to the rights of property, we must recognise it. He understood, however, that British subjects had been t prohibited from taking any part in the execution of the law which established slavery. With regard to the Far East, there was no doubt that Russia hail made enormous advances, but he did not share the apprehension of the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean, because, owing to the great distances, the advantage of access would be rather with the Power which sent goods by sea than' with the Power which had a single line railway. He was glad to see that the Armenian question had been put to sleep. The right hon. Baronet opposite who had spoken, and whom they were glad to see back again, did not seem even to have read the Blue-books. He wanted to know why the reform—the cardinal reform which involved the employment of Christian gendarmes or policemen, had not been carried out. If he had read the Blue-book he would see that the only reason why that reform had not been carried out was because the Christians absolutely refused to serve.
      Sin E. GREYsaid he had not asked why the reforms had not been carried out.
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid it had been perfectly well known that this proposed reform could never succeed. With regard to Crete, he understood that information was to be gathered from a one-sided assembly or convention of Christians.
      *MR. CURZONsaid that was not a correct impression. He had said that an assembly even of Christians alone would enable them at all events to ascertain what were the views of the Christians.
      MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid they must get the views of both sides if any settlement were to be arrived at. With regard to Candia, he understood that a sort of neutral zone had been established with great success. He understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that everybody in Candia was prohibited from carrying arms, but that surely did not include those engaged in protecting the neutral zone. As to the question of peace between Greece and Turkey, he said that the Concert had been denounced as useless, ineffective, and a failure. This might be so; but Turkey had accomplished what the Powers had failed to achieve. Colonel Vassos had been turned out of Crete and Greece had been kept in order by being vanquished in the field. He was glad to hear that the Concert meant to see that Turkey obtained her legitimate spoil of victory. This was a great advance in the education of the European Concert, though it seemed to him a little unreasonable that the settlement of Turkey's just claim must be subject to the condition that no settled Christian territory should be given back to Turkey. Greece had never been in full and lawful occupation of Thessaly, because she had failed to carry out her obligations, undertaken 16 years ago, to pay a portion of the debt. The Eastern Question was the European Question of "Who is to rule on the Bosphorus?" He was pleased to see signs of a returning sense of the importance of this question in the minds of Ministers. Turkey had been put to great peril and expense in the late war in order to carry out what the Concert of Europe had failed to obtain. No one could contend that she was not en titled to some indemnity, and if Turkey were entitled to an indemnity, the Sultan was entitled to occupy the conquered territory until that indemnity were forthcoming.
      MR.E.BECKETTsaid that, having been recently in the Sandwich Islands, he wished to call attention to the revolution in Hawaii. It was important that the circumstances should be known. The rightful ruler of Hawaii was the Queen, who at the Jubilee of 1887 was the guest of Her Majesty, who spoke English admirably, and who governed her country with moderation and success. This Queen was deposed by a kind of Nonconformist-Jameson raid. In a revolution the missionaries seized the Government of the Sandwich Islands, with the aid of United States blue-jackets and marines. The power was wrongfully seized by the missionaries, but, in accordance with an undertaking given by the missionaries to the Queen, the matter was referred to President Cleveland. Mr. Cleveland referred it to a Commissioner named Mr. Blunt, who was sent to the Sandwich Islands to make inquiries. Commissioner Blunt took evidence on the spot, and made a report. In consequence of that report, President Cleveland sent instructions to Mr. Willis, and stated that he wished the Queen to be restored by peaceful means. In order to restore the Queen, however, it would have been necessary to use force, and the missionaries organised a standing army of 250 men, which was described by an American newspaper correspondent as the—
      "so-called soldiers of a rotten Government and consisted of illiterate Portuguese, drunken Germans, and riff-raff beach-combers."
      In all the evidence available through public documents it was clear to his mind that the power had been wrongfully seized by the missionaries; it had been wrongfully upheld by the missionaries, and wrongfully used by the missionaries. The missionaries declared that gambling and betting were illegal, and the result was that horse-racing there, the favourite pastime, had been very nearly extinguished. The missionaries went further, and made attendance at church compulsory on Sundays. It was not wonderful that in these circumstances the missionaries became unpopular, because they governed regardless of stipulations, rites, customs, privileges, or wishes of the nation. Indeed, the missionary government was a usurpation of much

      461
      the same nature as if Dr. Jameson's raid had succeeded and the Government of the Transvaal were upheld by British bayonets. The proposed annexation of Hawaii by the -United States concerned ourselves, and must be looked upon from our point of view as well as from that of Hawaii. Hawaii was the most important coaling station in the Pacific. We had subsidised a line of steamers between Vancouver and Australia and were anxious to promote trade between Canada and Australia, and all the steamers must coal at Hawaii. It was not only the rights of British subjects in. Hawaii, but the rights of the British people which must be maintained, and considering the importance of Hawaii as a coaling station it would be unfortunate if America took possession of it and established herself there. If we could look on America as an absolutely friendly Power it would not matter so much, but in view of recent occurrences which had agitated the public mind it was difficult to assume that America was, and always would remain, a friendly Power. The basis of good relations between countries was reciprocity of good feeling, and that good feeling was likely to be disturbed if one used provocative and insulting language towards the other. When we had so recently exhibited our great strength to the world, it became us to be slow to wrath, and in shaping our policy in the future the persistent unfriendliness of America should be taken into account.
      Mu. JAMES BRYCEsaid he was acquainted with Hawaii, and took an interest in its affairs. He regretted what the hon. Member had said. The hon. Member must have been misinformed when he said the revolution in Hawaii was brought about by the missionaries. It was not at all the case, and the hon. Member must have been imposed upon by statements as to the puritanical character of the rule that the missionaries sought to establish.
      MR. BECKETTsaid he derived his information from people on the spot.
      MR. BRYCEsaid that even people on the spot were apt to exaggerate. He regretted to hear the hon. Member suggest that America should be regarded by us as an unfriendly Power. Such a suggestion should not be allowed to pass without emphatic protest. ["Hear, hear!"] He denied that there was an
      462
      unfriendly attitude towards England on the part of the bulk of the American people. But nothing would be more likely than a Debate deprecating the annexation of Hawaii to arouse the party of annexation in the United States. He believed the annexation of Hawaii would be injurious to America, and he approved of the policy the Government had followed in Hawaiian affairs as one of judicious reserve. He wished to repeat a question he had asked earlier in the Session as to a speech of M. Hanotaux, in which he said that in November 1895, one of the Powers suggested that the Powers should "enter the Dardanelles and seize in his Palace the man who had been responsible for so many calamities." He wished to know whether Great Britain was the Power that made that proposal, and in what Blue-books and where in them any reference to the proposal was to be found. Upon the speech the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had made that evening he had only a few observations to make. The Under Secretary had admitted that the position of things in Armenia and Asia Minor was bad and that the promised reforms were not satisfactory. No reforms would work satisfactorily unless placed under the supervision of an independent European Commission. Such a Commission was part of the scheme of reform proposed in May 1895, and unless it were adopted any so-called reforms would be valueless to improve the condition of the people. A series of articles as to the condition of the Eastern Christians had recently appeared in The Tablet, and he would be glad to know when they might expect the latest Consular reports bearing on the condition of the people during the last six months so that they might see how far the statements referred to were borne out by them. He hoped the Foreign Office was prepared to !ay these reports before Parliament as soon as possible. If they could be presented before the end of the Session so much the better. In reference to Greece, he would ask the right lion. Gentleman whether the offer to appoint M. Droz Governor-General of Crete had really been made or was in contemplation.
      *MR. CURZONreplied that he could not say that the offer had been authoritatively made, but the candidature of M. Droz had been seriously considered.
      MR. BRYCEsaid the only other question he desired to ask was why the irregular Mussulman troops, whose presence it was admitted had led to so much mischief, had not been removed from Crete? As to the result of the European Concert, they could not anticipate the favourable verdict of history. The result had been to destroy Crete, to make the Turks triumphant as they had not been for centuries before, to increase Mahomedan fanaticism over the whole of the East; to throw back civilisation in Asia Minor, Syria, and Armenia; and expose the whole of the Christian population of the East to even greater dangers than they had hitherto encountered. If, considering the effect of the Concert up to this date, anyone had confidence in its future results he must be a sanguine man. ["Hear, hear!"]
      *MR. CURZON,in replying, said there was no reluctance on the part of the Foreign Office to present the latest Consular reports about Armenia; but the recent labours of the Foreign Office in preparing Blue-books had been heavier they they had been for years. The Foreign Office had during the past year prepared four large Armenian Blue-books and three Cretan Bluebooks and was engaged on a fourth. The right hon. Gentleman asked him a question with regard to a subject which formed the topic of more than one Parliamentary question early in the Session —viz. as to certain proposals made in November 1895, by one of the Powers of Europe. He was afraid he had not much to add to what he had said before on the subject. The right hon. Gentleman asked what reply was given by the British Government. He could not at this distance of time charge his memory; he had no recollection of the proposal having bean made, and he could not therefore recall what reply was made by the British Government. But when the right hon. Gentleman proceeded to inquire why there was no mention made of it in the Blue-book, he thought it would be found that there were no papers or documents of any kind connected with it, and therefore there was nothing in the Blue-book. The only other observation he wished to make had reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Tyneside (Mr. J. A. Pease). That speech, he ventured to say, was most unusual in its
      464
      tone and almost offensive in its imputation of breach of faith against the present and the late Governments, and, as he gathered, he attributed personal dishonesty against himself.
      *MR. J. A. PEASE: I never attributed dishonesty.
      *MR. CURZON: It might be that the hon. Gentleman did not in actual words, but that was the meaning of what he said, and there was no ground for it. The point of the hon. Gentleman's remarks was that the promise to abolish the legal status of slavery in Zanzibar related in the case of the late Government and of the present Government to the protectorate on the Mainland, and was not confined to the islands. He was not responsible for the late Government, but the hon. Baronet who represented that Government was perfectly competent to say whether their promise did or did not extend to the Mainland, though his (Mr. Curzon's) impression was that it was confined to the islands. However, he was not concerned to speak for the late Government. But in the case of the present Government he could speak with confidence. He rose in his place and directly challenged the hon. Gentleman to quote any passage of any speech in which he had at any time promised on behalf of Her Majesty's Government that the abolition of the legal status of slavery they had undertaken to carry out in the islands should also be carried out on the Mainland; and the hon. Gentleman proceeded to read an extract from a speech which he alleged to have been delivered in that House. He (Mr. Curzon) asked if be were quoting from "Hansard," and he replied "Yes." He had furnished himself with "Hansard," and he had before him the passage. He found that the sentence which the hon. Gentleman read out did not occur in it. He might explain that the report of his speech in "Hansard" was not subsequently corrected by himself—it had no asterisk affixed to it, and therefore it might be taken to be a correct representation of what he said at the moment. The speech, which was made in the Debate on the Address at the beginning of the Session, on January 19, the occasion to which the hon. Gentleman referred, contained these words,—
      "The Government had arrived at a decision of policy, and that decision was in strict

      465
      fulfilment of the engagements which he had entered into more than once in that House. The pledge which had been given was that Mr. Hardinge would receive instructions to abolish the legal status of slavery in the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba."
      That was what he said; but the hon. Gentleman read in the word "Protectorate." He asked at once, "Does that come from "Hansard," and he replied "Yes." Here was "Hansard," and what had the hon. Gentleman to say in reply? [" Hear, hear !"]
      *MR. J. A. PEASE: My reply is that I thought I had taken it from "Hansard," but it may have been from The Times newspaper that I got it and copied it out. However, I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for having misquoted him. [" Hear, hear !"]
      *MR. CURZONsaid that of course he fully accepted the apology of the hon. Gentleman and would say nothing more about it, except that the House would agree that it was very hard that such a charge should be brought against the Government and against himself. Whether rightly or wrongly, the obligation the present Government had entered into had never been more for the moment than the abolition of the legal status of slavery on the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba. He said "for the moment" deliberately, because the Government had more than once stated that, in their opinion, this was a work which must be carried out by progressive steps. There was every reason to hope that they should be able to continue the movement to the mainland at no distant date: but there were reasons which he could not enter into at present why they had not so far been able to do so; although it remained a portion of the policy they had always adopted and still hoped to carry out. He had only risen to meet the particular charge of breach of faith.
      SIR EDWARD GREYsaid that he hail referred to the Debate, awl he did not find, as far as he was concerned, that he made any statement with regard to the mainland. He would like to point out that in the Debates on this question of slavery in East Africa certain misunderstanding had taken place, and an amount of heat had been generated which was really due, not to the particular line which had been taken by the Government, but to the line taken by some hon. and right hon.
      466
      Gentlemen on the other side when they were in Opposition. When the Liberal Government were in office they said that this question was one beset with difficulties, and that they required time to deal with these difficulties. But when they put forward that plea they were met by hon. Gentlemen opposite—notably by the present Secretary of State for the Colonies—with the demand that no time should be allowed them, and that they ought to overcome the difficulties at once. His complaint, as far as he had any complaint to make against the Government, was not with regard to their action. His complaint was that when they came into office they immediately claimed that their difficulties were very great, and said they must have the time which when in Opposition they had refused to grant their predecessors. He did not wish to raise that again, however. He wished to say plainly that this ought not to be a question for recrimination between different Governments. He fully recognised front the experience he had obtained when in office that the present Government must have great difficulties to deal with. He did not. complain because they had not disposed of the whole question with one sweep of the pen. He recognised that they had made a beginning, and that still further steps must conic in the course of time, and if that was their object and intention he, for one, should not take the line that was taken when the late Government was in office and say that it was unreasonable to put forward difficulties as a reason why a certain amount of time was necessary for the full achievement of the object both parties had in view. ["Hear, hear!"]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYappealed to the Committee to pass the Vote, so that they might have an opportunity of discussing the Colonial Vote that night.
      MR. HENRY LABOUCHEREsaid many Members on that side of the House would like to speak on the Vote. He himself had thought of making a few remarks after dinner. He imagined the probability was that the I right hon. Gentleman would be able to take the Vote that night.
      MR. MICHAEL DAVITTreferred to the speech of the hon. Member

      467
      for Whitby (Mr. Beckett) on the annexation of Hawaii by the United States, remarking that he wished to give an emphatic contradiction to almost every statement he had made. He had been to the Sandwich Islands, and from investigation he was certain that the missionaries had not fomented the revolution, and, with the exception of a small pro-English faction, all the white population were in favour of the annexation. As to the comparison between this revolution and Dr. Jameson's Raid, he would ask hon. Members whether the Raid would have been condemned had it been as successful as the revolution? The hon. Member talked about good feeling and reciprocity between Great Britain and America, and assumed that all the good feeling was on the side of England. Let him give the Committee a sample of the good feeling and gentlemanly language that obtained here in England with reference to America. A paper with a very wide circulation in London, read probably by more people in that city than any other, had said, within the last few days, dealing with this very question of the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands,—
      "Spain and Japan versus the United States. That is the latest report of the news agencies, which remains for the moment in the region of rumour; but the combination is possible and useful, and would give America a great deal of trouble. In the interests of humanity, the alliance would be desirable. Our Yankee friends want a little blood-letting to bring them down to a sensible international policy, and it would be best to have it done by any other hands rather than by those of England."
      He quite agreed with that; for England had tried her hand at blood-letting on America on several occasions in the past, and they knew on which side victory remained in the end. But if they wanted the Press and the statesmen of America to reciprocate good feeling, then he ventured to advise them to begin at home. [" Hear, hear "] He wished to call the attention of the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs to a matter less controversial—he referred to a memorial which had been addressed to Her Majesty by the Egyptian exiles in Ceylon. It was well known that these men had now been in banishment for 14 or I5 years, and in view of the fact that the Khedive was not opposed to their return, and that the only
      468
      opposition shown was by Lord Cromer, he sincerely hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would on behalf of the Government show that they were sensible to the appeal to their sympathy contained in the memorial of the exiles. He would only read one or two paragraphs from the petition, but what he would quote would appeal to the sympathy of every man in that House, irrespective of party differences: —
      "The memorialists are not now the active military leaders which they were 15 years ago; they are now old men, spirit-broken exiles; only desirous of seeing their beloved children and other relatives whom they left behind in Egypt when they were exiled. Some of those children during the past 15 years have married, and their children form another link to bind the memorialists to their old country. But your memorialists have no desire to return to Egypt; they feel that would be too much to ask. They are desirous of being as near to Egypt as circumstances would permit, and they humbly venture to suggest that, if they are allowed to leave Ceylon and reside in Cyprus, all that they wish for will be realised. Cyprus is so near to Egypt that the memorialists' children and grandchildren (the latter of whom they have never seen) will have no difficulty in visiting the memorialists occasionally; and the memorialists pledge their honour, as officers and gentlemen, that if they are allowed to live in Cyprus they will still keep their word, and abstain from all interference with political questions."
      He would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman not to give a harsh reply if he was called upon to say anything to this memorial. Surely these men, broken in spirit, aged beyond the possibility of entering into any other political conflicts, could not do any injury whatever to the interests of England in Egypt if allowed to go to Cyprus so as to be near their relatives when the end of their days arrived. Surely this great Empire, which was governed from that House, could afford to be lenient to men of this stamp. If any other country in the world had profited so much in Egypt as Great Britain had done by the patriotic revolution set going by these men, then he ventured to say, they would not have been left in exile as many months as they had been years.
      *MR. J. C. FLYNNdid not desire to prolong this Debate after the pathetic appeal which had been made to the Committee by the First Lord of the Treasury. He commented on the fact that, although the right hon. Members

      469
      of the Front Opposition Bench did not believe in the policy of the Government in regard to their conduct of affairs in Armenia, Crete, and Greece, yet the tone of their speeches was moderate. The speech of the Leader of the Opposition was the perfunctory performance of a man who had an uncongenial duty to discharge, and if he were a Member of the Opposition he should blush for his Leaders. He declared that the Concert of Europe, so far as it related to Armenia, Greece, and Crete, had been not only a failure but a disgrace. The hon. Knight who was Counsel-in-Ordinary to the Sultan of Turkey seemed to congratulate the world and this country on the fact that the condition of Armenia was nut so bad as it was. But two months had not elapsed since they had, by Questions, elicited from the Government the admission that there had occurred in Armenia, while the Concert of Europe remained inactive, a series of massacres and outrages at which civilisation stood aghast, and at which this country some years ago would have been prepared to draw the sword. So much— for the progress of civilisation and the policy of the Tory and Conservative Party? Turning to the affairs of Greece and Crete, he said it was not difficult to prove, front the Blue-books, that there was a decidedly pro-Mahomedan tone from first to last. With regard to two points in particular, the Christian Cretans had given every proof of their fair play and a desire to act with the Concert of Europe. But it had been impossible for them to act with the European Powers. The two points to which he wished to refer were, first, the reforms which were promised in Crete by the Porte last July or August, and, second, the reorganisation of the gendarmerie. Had a single one of the reforms so promised been carried out by the Porte from that day to this? No. The Blue-book teemed with instances which showed that the Porte had determined to secretly instigate arid foment disorder, with the result that the reforms were never carried out. With regard to the gendarmerie, if the Bluebooks proved anything they proved that the representatives both of the Christians and Mahomedans were most anxious for the reorganisation of the gendarmerie.
      470
      It was proposed that a strong foreign element should be introduced into the gendarmerie. The Porte opposed that all along. Finally it yielded, but it yielded when it was too late. The gendarmerie so formed had since been disbanded, and of course it could have no part in the pacification of the island or in repressing the disorder and outrage there. This last work of the Concert of Europe had been a blunder, and a bad blunder, because of lack of courage, and because they had failed to speak to the tyrant of the Ottoman Empire in the language of Christians, or men, or of politicians who realised the age in which we lived.
      MR. E. WALLACEthought that it would be most unfortunate if an impression should go forth that there was a sort of careless feeling on the Cretan question among the leaders of the Opposition. If such an impression were to be given it might have a bad effect on the negotiations at Constantinople. It would be unfortunate for the interests of Greece, Armenia, and Crete if it should be thought in Turkey that there was not a deep feeling here for the people of those countries. He wished the Government to understand that there was a strong disinclination to give to the Sultan an unlimited lease of power. The people of this country had rot forgotten the Armenian massacres; neither had they forgotten the inability of the Concert of Europe to prevent those massacres, or, apparently, to take such steps as would prevent their recurrence in future. He was glad, therefore, that the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had been able to announce authoritatively that at last in Crete the dominion of the Sultan was going to cease for ever. At the same time he was a little disconcerted when he considered what was actually going on in Crete. There was there a very peculiar form of government, not known to Aristotle or John Stuart Mill. lie had heard of an aristocracy and a democracy, but this was a new form of government which would perhaps be known hereafter as an admiralocracy. [Laughter.] It was rather difficult to obtain information in that House as to what was really going on, because the Under Secretary seemed disposed to keep them as much in the dark as possible. The right hon. Gentleman's answers consisted for the most

      471
      part of "No, Sir," and "Don't know, Sir." [Laughter.] His answers were variations, skilfully played, upon those two discouraging strains. But government by "jolly tar" did not appear to him to make directly for democratic freedom. These maritime gentlemen seemed to govern the island in the interests of Turkey. They had been made aware that leave had been asked by the Government of this country from the Government of Turkey to occupy and protect Crete. Having no dialectical sophistry or scholastic subtlety they understood from that that they were to govern the island in such a way that the Power that had given the leave would not be disappointed. Apparently the whole of their policy was to put down the insurrection—that was, the uprising of the insurgents, who were provoked beyond measure by apprehensions of oppression and the traditions of the oppression which their predecessors had suffered. In one of his earlier Dispatches Lord Salisbury said that if England joined in blockading Crete she would really be taking the part of the Sultan. He wanted to know how the change in Lord Salisbury's views was brought about. How was it that the Government who had refused to blockade the insurgents in July consented to blockade them in February? What were the circumstances which justified the Prime Minister in so complete a reversal of the policy of liberty which he had stood up for a few months previously? The Cretans, it should be remembered, were striving to free themselves from the yoke of a unique tyrant and despot. He trusted that the Government were really going to drive the Sultan out of Crete and to erect a true autonomy, properly safeguarded. He could not, however, help feeling grave doubts as to the establishment of a form of autonomy which would be pleasant to Russia, agreeable to Germany, and which would throw Austria into raptures. [Laughter.] In fact, he was not sure that real autonomy was possible in Crete at the present moment, because there had been such exasperation between the two parties that whichever party obtained political predominance it would be under a strong temptation to be unjust to the minority, and he did not want to see Mussulmans oppressed any more than he wanted to see Christians oppressed.
      472
      ["Hear, hear!"] In the circumstances, therefore, it was possible that the autonomy invented by the Powers would be so restricted as not to amount to autonomy at all. He trusted that the Government would leave no stone unturned, force if necssary being resorted to, in order to put the people of Crete into the position to which they were entitled.
      [After the usual interval, Mr. GRANT LAWSON took the Chair.]
      MR. BRYN ROBERTSsaid he rose for the purpose of uttering a sentence or two in support of the appeal made by the hon. Member for South Mayo on behalf of the Egyptian exiles. He doubted whether any solid reason could be urged against allowing them to return to Cyprus on their giving an undertaking not to interfere henceforth in politics—an undertaking which, in fact, they had given. He would urge the Government in this matter to emulate the example set by President Kruger in the case of the revolutionists in the Transvaal. He did not wait 15 years to show his clemency, but almost immediately after sentence was passed he gave a free pardon to the revolutionists on their giving an undertaking not to interfere in the country's politics in the future. He thought they might with propriety follow that generous example and extend their clemency to Arabi Pasha and his fellow-conspirators. The present position in Egypt entitled them to do this with great security. Their position was irresistibly strong, and no one could suggest that there was the least possibility of the rebellion which was instigated by Arabi Pasha being again entered upon. In these circumstances he hoped the Government would show themselves, at any rate, as humane and generous as President Kruger.
      MR. DILLONsaid the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had given them an extremely rosy account of the con, dition of the island of Crete. If they had never heard a speech from the right hon. Gentleman on this subject before they might attach some importance to his statement in this respect, but for more than a year they had been listening to cheerful and encouraging accounts from him of the condition of Crete, and, he regretted to say, his

      473
      cheerful anticipations had been sadly disappointed on every previous occasion. Nearly a year since they were triumphantly and truly informed that the Christians of Crete had accepted with gratitude the reforms which were obtained for them by the intervention of theEuropeanPowers, and which they hoped would lead to a real measure of self-government and security against the oppression under which they had suffered so long. Yet, though it could not be offered in excuse that the Greeks had interfered, from August to February Crete was left in a condition of chaos and disorder. The promised reforms were never brought into working order, and these unfortunate people, who had placed their whole hope in the pledges and promises of the European Powers, were most miserably and disastrously disappointed. The right hon. Gentleman gave as an excuse for the present condition of Crete and the delay in carrying out the autonomy, that it was quite impossible fur the Ambassadors of the Great Powers to carry on at the same time the negotiations for peace and the negotiations with regard to the Cretan question. He would ask the Government to remember that it was the condition of the Cretan population that brought about the war. If the Cretan question had been settled last autumn, or any time before the month of February last, there would never have been any war. Therefore one would suppose, after the lesson taught the Great Powers by the events of last winter and autumn, that their first care would be to settle the condition of the island, hut, just as in the past, the island proved equal to embarrassing the whole of Europe and threatened to plunge the whole of Europe into war, so, if it were now left in its present condition of chaos and disorder, it must, at any moment upset the negotiations at Constantinople and bring about a fresh outburst of disorder and insurrection. In these Debates the -Under Secretary had always been in the habit of treating any information coming from the newspapers with the utmost possible contempt. The right hon. Gentleman had always taken up the position that no attention was to be paid to it, and no reliance placed upon it until he was in a position to communicate the despatches which were received at the
      474
      Foreign Office. The Foreign Office was frequently three or four days, and sometimes even a week, behind in its news as compared with the Press; and, though he was far from saying that everything was true that appeared in the newspapers, he thought the position taken up by the right hon. Gentleman towards the Press in these matters was perfectly preposterous. They were now told in all the great London newspapers, without distinction of party, that, instead of improving, as the right hon. Gentleman asserted, the condition of affairs in Crete had been going from bad to worse, and that, both in Canea and Candia, a state of disorder and chaos reigned. Now it seemed that under the control of European troops the murder of Christians was a matter of indifference. The town of Canea was set fire to. They knew that only ten days ago the Mahomedans went round and deliberately set fire to Canea again. Now the right. hon. Gentleman told them that the Admirals would bombard it if any injury were done to the European soldiers. He did not believe that that view was founded upon facts, or adequate information. He could not remove from his. mind the fact stated in The Times, Standard, and other great newspapers, that the condition of Canea was in a condition of chaos. If that were true, it was clearly a matter for the attention of the European Powers. What was clear to him from reading the dispatches was that Colonel Chermside had taken up a pro-Turkish attitude. That was why they had failed to maintain order. Having read the. dispatches of February 1896 the hon. Member declared that the spirit there evinced, the protection of the Mussulmans and the assertion of the, Sultan's rule in Crete, still predominated to this present hour. The Admirals had shown a desire to open fire on the unfortunate Christians at the earliest moment. They had become responsible for good order in Crete six months ago, still they saw that the island was in a. state of disorder. They had heard of murders, but the excuse was that the Mahamedans had got out of hand. They were told that as soon as the Greek tromps left Crete order would be restored; but now, long after they had gone, they were told in The Times that things were going from bad to worse. The Greek troops had left Crete two months ago, but security for life and

      475
      property was much worse than it was when Colonel Vassos was there. It was not possible for them to put pressure on the Government, but it was no wonder British people had ceased to put faith in the European Powers in this matter. He hoped they would be permitted to see the Correspondence before the Session was over. The right. hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean had said the Government might count in those negotiations on the support of the House. That would depend upon the character of the negotiations. He presumed that in addition to the Irish Members there were on the Radical Benches hon. Members who would not support the Government if the Government were wrong, but would see that justice was done.
      MR. LABOUCHEREsaid possibly there were some Gentlemen who were of opinion that it was desirable that the House of Commons should exercise no control over our foreign relations; but no one would deny that that control, small as it always had been, had got considerably less during the present Parliament. The House was unable to raise matters of the greatest importance in regard to certain foreign relations until the facts were accomplished and the utility of discussing them had disappeared. He had always thought that it was desirable that the Minister for Foreign Affairs should be in the House of Commons. It had occurred often in Liberal Governments that the Minister for Foreign Affairs was not in the House of Commons; but in those Administrations the Prime Minister had always been in the House of Commons, and sharing as he did with the Foreign. Minister the direction of foreign affairs the Prime Minster had been able to tell the House clearly what was going on. The Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs was placed in a position of the greatest difficulty. The right hon. Gentleman did not speak on his own authority at all, but brought down from another place a cut and dry answer to a cut and dry question. Under these circumstances the House of Commons did not get all the information, they had a right to ask for. Then again a new Parliament had been called into existence. Lord Salisbury had said that the Concert of Europe was a federal Legislature of Europe. This federal Legislature decided not only the policy of Europe, but the
      476
      policy of this country in regard to European affairs. In this federal Legislature everyone was bound to follow the majority. If this country found itself in a minority it must not withdraw, because it was said the moment anyone withdrew the component parts of this federal Legislature would fall upon each other and go to war. And who were the majority? Three Emperors—three despots as Mr. Gladstone properly called them. [Cheers and laughter.] He had no doubt that Mr. Gladstone did not mean despots in the bad sense of the word. What the right hon. Gentleman meant was that in the countries over which these three gentlemen ruled there was not the same amount of liberty as, fortunately for us, there was in this country. We might have thought that France would join us in the federal Legislature, for France was a country that loved liberty; but, unfortunately, owing to the exigencies of the situation, France was dragged at the heels of one of the despots, with the result that if we maintained the principles which had always guided us we must always be in a minority, and being in a minority we must allow ourselves to be dragged at the tail of foreign reactionaries. The Concert had done nothing to stop the massacres in Armenia except to chatter, chatter, chatter. [Laughter.] Then came the Cretan question. The Cretans demanded that they should be annexed to Greece. We protested against the action of the Cretans in endeavouring to throw off the yoke of Turkey. Greece then interfered, and we protested against Greece. And so step by step we arrived at the point that we, who for years had protested against the cruelty exercised by Turkey over her subjects, actually bombarded the towns of the Cretans in order to enforce them to remain under the suzerainty of the Sultan. Then came the war between Greece and Turkey. We encouraged the Turks in every way possible to go to war, and we laid down the principle that it was the solemn duty of every respectable State in Europe to maintain the integrity of the Turkish Empire. He did not agree with hon. Gentlemen who spoke mildly of Her Majesty's Government. [Ministerial laughter.] He had the lowest and worst opinion of Her Majesty's Government in regard to its foreign policy. [Renewed laughter.]

      477
      Never had England sunk so low as it had of late years. [Ironical cheers.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite liked to swagger about the might and majesty of the British Empire; but the Government which they supported had cringed to Russia and to the Concert. [Laughter.] Why this country could not have withdrawn from the Concert he never understood. It was said that it would lead to war, but with whom no one could explain. The policy of Her Majesty's Government was as false from the mere point of view of personal interest as it was morally wicked. [Ironical laughter.] Russia had already established her authority on the shores of the Black Sea; and it was our policy to give a moral support to Greece so that Greece might form a barrier against Russian aggrandisement. [Laughter.] He could riot go into the whole question of Egypt. [Cheers, and laughter.] lie would only ask one question: When were we going to leave Egypt? [Laughter.] Would the right hon. Gentleman candidly and frankly tell him that? Lord Salisbury had said that Egypt was a serious danger to us, and now that Lord Salisbury was the autocrat of foreign affairs he ought to act on his convictions. That was what he complained of. His own principles and Lord Salisbury's were almost identical. [Laughter.] The difference between them was that while he was ready to stand by his principles, Lord Salisbury backed out of his when it came to action. And what was meant by "our conquest of the Soudan?" The country had a right to know why we were going there—why, in the name of common sense, the life of a single English soldier should be risked in reconquering the Soudan. It was a. valueless country, and it did not belong to Egypt. Egypt abandoned the Soudan, and since then there had been a native Government de facto in the country. [Laughter.] It might be a laid Government, but we could not go careering about the world rectifying bad Governments. [Ministerial cheers.] It was said that the Egyptians were to govern the Soudan, and at the same time our excuse for being in Egypt was that the Egyptians could not govern themselves. The fact was, we had a greedy desire to lay hold of all parts of the world, and we did not care more than a magpie whether what we grabbed was useful or
      478
      useless. [Laughter.] We were sending an expedition to the Soudan because we were afraid of some one else taking it. He should protest, as he always had protested, against any action on our part in regard to the Soudan, and he should always vote against any British or Indian money—and the Government were very fond of taking Indian money—being used for Soudan expeditions. It was very desirable that at the end of the Session the only opportunity of reviewing the policy of the Government should be seized. That policy should be laid before the country, and the more they knew of it the less they would like it. Little by little by its action in these matters the Government would "get the sack." Though the General Election might not be as soon as he wished, yet Members of the Opposition must continue to sap the position of the Government, and they would do themselves, their Party, and their country good by constantly calling attention to the wickedness, the iniquities, and the follies of the present Government. [Laughter.]
      MR. J. G. WEIRsaid that he wished to call attention two matters of vital importance to the People of Scotland and Great Britain generally. The first related especially to Scotland. It was a question of Scotch herrings—[laughter]—the duty on which, in Russia and Austria, was excessively heavy. He had asked the Government to try and obtain the reduction of the duties. The Under Secretary of Side for Foreign Affairs had referred him to the Lord Advocate, who in turn had referred him to the Foreign Secretary; and he had been generally bandied about from pillar to post. He wished to know what steps were to be taken, because this was a very important question, closely affecting a large section of the community. Last year the export of Scotch herrings was 1,148,000 barrels. The hon. Member, in order, as he said, to obtain some satisfactory information from the Government, was proceeding to move a reduction of the Vote, when—
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYclaimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
      Question put, "That the Question be now put."
      The Committee divided:—Ayes, 166; Noes, 73.—(Division List, 308.)
      Original Question put accordingly.
      MR. WEIRrose almost at the same time as did the CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS, and was met with cries of "Order!"
      Original Question having been again was put?
      MR. WEIR,seated and with his hat on, asked whether he had not moved the reduction of the Vote before the Closure was put.
      *THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSsaid the hon. Member was in error, the closure having been put before the hon. Member's Motion for reduction.
      Question put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported.
      MR. J. CALDWELLsaid he had challenged the Vote.

      COLONIAL OFFICE VOTE (BRITISH SOUTH AFRICA.)
      Motion made, and Question proposed,
      "That a sum, not exceeding £28,900, 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 1898, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, including a grant in aid of certain expenses ccnnected with emigration."
      MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he did not think he spoke in his own name only but in the name of many hon. Members on both sides of the House when he said that they regarded it as something approaching to a piece of sharp practice—[Opposition cheers] —that the Committee should be asked to consider this Vote under the circumstances at that time of night. What were the circumstances? Here was the one subject which of all other subjects
      480
      had been moving and agitating every class of society and every section of both Houses of Parliaiment for the last two years; there had been attempt after attempt to prevent any reasonable discussion of it in Parliament—[loud Opposition cheers]—attempts which up to that evening had met with success; it was now very near the end of the Session; they had been told that the days which would be given to them for discussion were numbered; there had been no question approaching in interest to the Colonial question in all its branches—he was interested in one great section of that question, but there were innumerable other matters of interest involved—and yet they were to be told that it showed adequate and reasonable respect to the House at a quarter-past 10 o'clock on a hot summer's night—[Ministerial laughter]—when only an hour and three-quarters of the legitimate time of the Committee was left for the purposes of discussion, for he believed that the time spent in discussion after 12 o'clock was wasted time—to ask them to discuss a question of such enormous importance. He did not think such methods would succeed. The whole of this South African matter ought to be discussed. They had been put off time after time by being told that this matter was sub judice, but now it was no longer sub judice. He had asked whether, if this Vote were not taken that day, any other opportunity of discussing the matter would be given, and he had been told that no pledge could be given. Within the last few days this matter had been complicated, and they were told that during the Recess the whole administration of the Chartered Company was to be dealt with by the Government in consultation with the directors of that company. [Opposition cheers.] But the majority of the directors had been shown to be unacquainted with the subject matter under discussion. And what was to be said about the minority of the directors, who were to be consulted by the Government as to how this part of Her Majesty's dominions was to be administered? It was shown that the minority had grossly abused the confidence placed in them by the House—[Opposition cheers] and in acting as directors they had done

      481
      things which the House and its Committee had condemned. He thought it was time that the House should have some discussion of this matter. [Cheers.] He had watched the course of the proceedings with reference to the South African Committee, and he had come to the conclusion that there had been throughout this matter a conflict of wealth and influence on one side, and national interests on the other. [Opposition cheers.] Up to the present time wealth, and influence, and position had triumphed, and national interests had gone to the wall. [Cheers.] He might be told that he was troubling the waters and interfering with a satisfactory settlement of the question—that it would be better to adopt the maxim, Quieta non movere. He was, however, strongly impressed with the fact that there was very great danger to the country now and in the future if they left the matter where it was. If the Session closed without a clear declaration on what had taken place the procedure would be raised into the rank of a precedent. It was all very well to say that there was the Report of a Committee, and that there were certain censures in some newspapers, and eulogiums in others. But that was not what the House wanted; they wanted a clear expression of opinion by the House of Commons that a proceeding of this kind was detrimental to the public welfare. Four or five years ago he declared his belief that it was impossible to intrust the prerogatives of a great country to a small knot of men who were avowedly acting with the object of making money, and the facts had more than justified his fears. [Opposition cheers.] He believed that the majority of the people at the back of all this business in favour of "letting things slide" were animated at the bottom by one consideration. They said— "There is some great public service which has been performed which ought to condone, if it does not excuse, the faults committer' The superstructure of the myth was built on one colossal delusion. It was believed outside the House that the prime mover in the South African policy had conferred some enormous boon on this country, that Mr. Rhodes had secured for this country some great boon which would not have been secured but for his efforts. [Ministerial cheers.]; But what were
      482
      the facts? The whole of the territory up to the Zambesi was, as far back as 1882 and 1883 in the power of Her Majesty's Government to, take for the mere trouble of dosing their grasp upon it. Sir Charles Warren had been sent up the country, and had made treaties with the chiefs; but Sir Hercules Robinson refrained, on the ground of expense, from annexing the territory. Then came the Chartered Company. Mr. Rhodes promised largely. What had he performed? He was to go out to South Africa to assuage the eternal feud between Englishmen and Dutchmen. But he had lighted a brand which might take a hundred years to extinguish. He was to conciliate the natives and restore confidence among the black population of South Africa. What had he done? He had succeeded in goading the most miserable race in South Africa— the Mashonas—into active and cruel war. He had started a great money-making concern, but not a farthing of dividend had been paid by the Chartered Company, and, unless he was wrongly informed, there was little prospect of any dividend being paid. It was said that Mr. Rhodes himself had become rich. But the commercial undertakings had failed. Mr. Rhodes had sneered at the British Government for its incapacity to understand, much less to grapple with, South African problems. But those parts of South Africa—Basutdland, the Lakes territory, and Nyassaland—which had the good fortune to be administered by Great Britain were the best-governed and best-administered parts of South Africa. It did not lie in the mouth of. Mr. Rhodes to make such sneers. If hon. Members would carry back their minds they could judge for themselves what had been the value to this country of the services of Mr. Rhodes since he undertook the functions of the Imperial Government. When they came to ask where the advantage lay as between Mr. Rhodes and President Kruger, he must be an enthusiastic admirer of Mr. Rhodes who was not prepared to admit that President Kruger had won all along the line. [Cries of "No, No!" and "Hear, hear !"] He thought there was no dispute about that. It was true that President Kruger had more than once refrained from carrying out his intentions of doing things that were unjust to this country. Restraint

      483
      had been put upon him by the Colonial Office and not by Mr. Rhodes. This was a summary of what they owed to Mr. Rhodes. But there was one thing above all they owed to Mr. Rhodes, but ought to thank him least of all for—the introduction of the influence of money in directing and controlling the prerogative of a great nation. He had justified the imputation that money had been the greatest factor in his policy. Lastly, Mr. Rhodes had taught them that it was possible for a gentleman in his position, trusted by his Government, to deceive his superiors, to deceive his equals, and, worst of all to deceive and trick his subordinates. Unless there was a great contra to all this, which he himself did not understand, it was about time that this Rhodes myth was dropped. ["Hear, hear!"] They would be told that these things were all bygones, but he wanted the possibility of the recurrence of these things provided against. There had been no inquiry into the matters he himself was most concerned about. If it had been desired that it should be fruitless. the inquiry could not have been constituted or conducted in a way more calculated to render it so. Holding that view he could only wonder that the result had not been still more unsatisfactory. As to the charge of par-tisanship—
      *THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSsaid the hon. Member would not be in order in discussing the composition of the Committee. He would be perfectly in order in discussing their Report.
      MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid the points were of great importance, and as he suggested at the commencement of his observations only proved that a full opportunity should be given—[cheers]— for discussing this, which, was in one sense a dominant factor in, the situation. ["Hear, hear!"] But if they were to come to the Report of the Committee, it did seem to some of them to be a very inadequate and unsatisfying document. It revealed things Which were very unpleasant. It revealed a method of procedure—for instance this flashing of telegrams all over the world under aliases—things which would have been insignificant and unimportant in themselves, had it not been that they
      484
      were dealing with the lives of men and the fortunes of a large number of people. ["Hear, hear!"] He thought it was a pity that a little more was not said about the undesirability of conduct of that kind, and how unbecoming it was that responsibility should be undertaken so lightly and wielded so clumsily that the consequences should be not the shaping of nations, but the death of certain honest if not very clear-headed men, who were hastened to their fate by this unfortunate mental activity on the part of one or two busybodies. He did think that one more word of censure might have been put on record. He would recall to the memory of the Committee, though it was hardly necessary to refresh their memories—he would recall that telegram which to the everlasting disgrace of the English name was sent to this country and published in this country on the eve of the raid. He did not think enough had been said of this gross abuse of the best sentiments of men's hearts. This ridiculous message, concocted by a party of four round a table, kept stewing for a month in some man's pocket, was sent to London under a forged date and published in a great newspaper—a message appealing to the best passions in every man's breast, to their love for their fellow-creatures, to their love for their womankind. He held that they required no further condemnation of these men and their methods than that which had been stamped with an indelible brand by the facts in connection with that letter as set forth in the Report of the Committee. [Cheers.] He now came to a matter which they might discuss freely, because it was no longer sub judice. He came to the proceedings of the Chartered Company. He protested against those proceedings, and he held that everything that had been said against the Company was lawfully said. They had been deprived of the inquiry which they were promised, and of which he ventured to say weeks ago they would be deprived. He wanted to know why the inquiry was stopped? ["Hear, hear!"] If the Chartered Company had come to an end, he should have been perfectly willing to accept the situation on the principle that in such a case the least said the soonest mended. They might have said —this Chartered Company, after years of failure, getting worse from beginning

      485
      to end, is now dead and done for, and buried; let us forget it. But it was dead and done for, and it was not buried. They knew something of the proceedings of this Company, however, although the inquiry they were promised had not been made. No thanks to the Committee of inquiry, they knew for absolute fact that this Chartered Company—born on the Stock Exchange, flourishing on the Stock Exchange, and drawing its inspiration from the Stock Exchange—had so far degraded the fair name of this country that it had deliberately re-introduced into South Africa under an alias so transparent that no one had the slightest doubt as to its identity—they hail re-introduced the practice of individual slavery. [Cheers.] Had the Committee told them anything about this? Not a bit. Did any Member of the Government tell them? Not a bit. What happened was this. Some months ago the Colonial Secretary in the exercise of his discretion—which seemed to him to have been admirably used—decided to send somebody out to inquire into the proceedings of this colossal failure, of this Chartered Company; and with the judgment that was characteristic of him, he said:—
      "This man shall be a man against whom the finger of criticism cannot put a mark. He shall be, at any rate, a man who is not obnoxious to the charge which has been brought, and justly brought, against the Chartered Company and its officials of haying a pecuniary concern in the affairs of the Company;"
      and he selected a gallant officer in Her Majesty's service, Sir Richard Martin, to make this inquiry. Sir Richard Martin went out, and he reported. They had been asking time after time that the Report of Sir Richard Martin should be produced in this House; but they were told that the matter was sub judice and could not be discussed. He was not responsible, he had nothing to do with it, but he knew that one of the public prints had published large extracts—which he presumed were authentic—front that Report. What did these extracts tell them? He must say that those who, like himself, had studied the proceedings of the Chartered Company were perfectly well aware that they had been carrying on their proceedings ill a way that was absolutely certain to produce the evils which had followed their rule—that they
      486
      had been for months and years driving these wretched Matabele and Mashonas into war—[cheers]—that they had deprived the natives of their cattle, and had compelled them to labour on terms which were the terms of slavery—["hear, hear!"]—and that they had added to the indignity of slavery the compulsory association of those whom they compelled to labour with men whom they regarded as infinitely below them in the social scale. They had done all these things, and the public had been told of them over and over again by competent observers on the spot, who he believed were speaking the truth; and now they were beginning to find that all these things were true, and had been true for months past; and he held that it was a pity that some steps had not been taken at an earlier period to acquaint the House and the country with what was being done. It was no use saying these things were not proved. If they were not proved, why were they not? [" Hear !" and laughter.] Yes, why were they not? He and those who agreed with him had been only too anxious that they should be inquired into and dragged into the light of day. All these evils were the necessary and certain result of allowing money to be the dominating factor in politics. The Report stated that in the opinion of the Committee pecuniary motives and stock-jobbing motives had not had any influence on these events in South Africa. He did not know exactly for whom that passage was intended; but there was not a man in the country, gentle or simple, who saw what was passing under his own eyes who would take that passage quite literally. ["Hear, hear!"] How were they to know there were no stock-jobbing transactions connected even with this one particular item? They were told by certain witnesses that there were no such transactions, but they had been told a great many things outside the Committee by Stock Exchange witnesses, some of which had turned out not to be true. [" Hear, hear !"] Personally, he should have liked an opportunity of testing there statements. If the Chartered Company were a limited company every single transaction, every transfer of shares, would appear on the register at Somerset House, and then they would have some power of ascertaining, not by mere vague

      487
      denials of ibis kind, but by evidence as to which there could be no doubt, whether even in this one particular instance this defence was justified or not. ["Hear, hear!"] He declared that the whole thing, from beginning to end, had been based upon money. If it had not been, then it would have no raison d'être at all. ["Hear, hear!"] He had always sympathised with and admitted the grievances of the Johannesburgers, but the witnesses before the Committee proved that these had been enormously exaggerated, and that there was nothing to justify an outbreak in Johannesburg was proved by the fact that there was no outbreak there. [" Hear, hear !"] There was certainly nothing which could justify the sending of the telegrams from Cape Town to London by which it was attempted to bamboozle that House and the country into the belief that. this extraordinary failure was the result of some deep and splendid patriotic yearning. ["Hear, hear!"] He had given some reasons for believing they ought to have a clear expression from that Parliament as to what had been happening in South Africa. It was not only as regarded the past, but also as to the future, that he desired to say a word. He had heard rumours that some of the officers who had been engaged in what he would call a conspiracy against the welfare of this country were to be rewarded by promotion. He should like to know whether it was the fact that it was intended to promote one, if not two, servants of the Crown who had been engaged in a prominent degree in this conspiracy. [Cries of "Name !"] He alluded to Sir Graham Bower and Mr. Newton. When a Turkish officer committed some offence which Europe had to judge—this country forming part of the European Concert mid acting, on the adjudicating tribunal —his conduct was condemned, representations were made to the Porte, and such a man was removed from the scene of his labours and failures and degraded only to be immediately promoted. ["Hear, hear!"] Were they to follow that example or were they to give this encouragement. to public servants who had so acted—because if they were they should be setting a very dangerous precedent indeed? He thought the whole of the last two years had
      488
      been replete with dangerous precedents. [Cheers.] The fact that so many men had gone scot free bad tended to establish a precedent which they should regret. He could not help turning his thoughts to other branches of Her Majesty's Service, and asking himself what would be the effect in them if this precedent were established in one particular branch. ["Hear, hear!"] Before now men. who had served their Queen and country for the greater part. of their lives, and who had attained pre-eminence in their professions, had been practically ruined as the result of a calamity for which they were not responsible. This had occurred to men in the Navy who were guiltless of any crime, and the career of many a soldier had been similarly blasted for some small dereliction of duty which was really not his own. Were they going to tell these unfortunate men that it they had served in another branch of the public service they might have deceived their superiors, that they might have done so in the course of their regular duties, and that they would have received a nominal censure only? That was all that he desired to say— [loud Ministerial cheers and counter-cheers,]—at that moment because there must be other opportunities of discussing this subject. It was a question that concerned the Empire, and its discussion could not but be advantageous. If the House should resolve to approve the course of action which had been taken he must of course acquiesce; but if it should resolve to censure this action that censure ought to be expressed in a manner which could not be misunderstood—[" hear, hear!"]—so that what had been possible in the past should not be possible in the future for this Chartered Company, which having in its pursuit of gold conquered Mashonaland, Manicaland, and Matabeleland, and failed to conquer the Transvaal, and had inflicted all this shameful history upon the. Empire. [Opposition cheers.]
      [The FIRST LORD of the TREASURY and Mr. WYNDHAM rose together, and there were some cries for the latter, but the hon. Member gave way.]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: If my hon. Friend the Member for Dover desires to address the House I, at all events, shall not stand long between him and the Committee. From the hints, innuendoes, and suggestions of

      489
      accusations—[Opposition cries of "No!" and cheers]—accusations in part sketched out, but not fully developed—to which we have just listened I have been able to extract two or three distinct charges in which the Government may be said to be indirectly involved, and with these two or three charges I propose for a very few moments to occupy the time of the Committee. The first charge of my hon. Friend—who has had the advantage of speaking to us now for nearly an hour— [loud Opposition cheers]—the first charge of my hon. Friend was that this Debate was brought on at a time so inconvenient that no useful, no serious Debate was possible. As a matter of fact, my hon. Friend has had the advantage of speaking at the very moment when many Members of great position in this House desired to address us, but were not able to do so, and I cannot imagine an hour more suited to the Parliamentary ambition of my hon. Friend —[Opposition cries of "Oh !" laughter, and cheers]—than the one which the for-tune of Debate has given him. My hon. Friend has charged the Government distinctly and deliberately with a conspiracy extending throughout the whole Session to suppress all discussion upon what he called "the thing," which afterwards appeared to mean affairs in South Africa. I presume my hon. Friend meant discussion in Committee of Supply, but, as the House knows, discussions in Committee of Supply under the new rule are invariably and without exception given on the most convenient days to the Leader of the Opposition whenever he asks for them. ["Hear, hear!"] He knows that, in addition to that, if any large section of the House desires to have a discussion of these matters, a time for I he discussion during the 20 days allotted to Supply is always found, and if this be, as it undoubtedly is, the first day on which the Colonial Secretary's salary has been in question, it is for this reason, and for no other, that no demand has been made by any large section of Members in this House—[" Oh, oh !" and cheers] —and that the Front Opposition Bench, to whom we only look—[cheers]—for demands for time for the criticism of the Government's policy—that Bench has made no request at all—[cheers]—and, if my memory does not deceive me, I do not think he ever asked for a day; and
      490
      the only Member of the House whom I distinctly recollect as asking for a day to discuss South African affairs is my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield.
      MR. T. R. BUCHANAN: The Committee only reported last week.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: If the Committee only reported last week, what is all this talk about a conspiracy? [Cheers.]
      MR. PHILIP STANHOPE: It surely must be within the recollection of the right hon. Gentleman that, I think, on Thursday of last week I put to him a direct question as to whether he could give a day for the discussion of this particular matter, and he then positively refused to give us any day at all. [Cheers.]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: A conspiracy to burke Debate on this subject, which began on last Thursday—[cheers and laughter]—and which has therefore extended only over One Parliamentary night, which Parliamentary night had for many weeks been mortgaged for another purpose, appears to me a conspiracy of a not very formidable character. [Cheers.]
      MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Does the right hon. Gentleman say he will give us a day? My impression was that the right hon. Gentleman had declined to give us a day. [" Hear, hear!" and cries of "Give it now !"]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: My hon. Friend asks me whether I propose to give a day. A day so far has only been asked for by one single independent Radical sitting below the Gangway. [Cries of "Oh, oh !" and" Hear, hear !"] It will be admitted. that if at this time of the year and of the Session days were to be given on the demand of "a single Member, however able, the task of leading the House, arranging the business of the House, and bringing it to a conclusion would be absolutely impossible. [" Hear, hear !"] I have never refused a day, I have never been asked for a day by the responsible Opposition—[cheers] —if there be a responsible Opposition. [Loud cheers.] If it had, I can assure hon. Members that I should treat it as I always treat demands coming from such a quarter, with the utmost respect, and, in such cases, with invariable compliance. But I am not going to be put off by my

      491
      hon. Friend's interruption. ["Hear, hear!"] His charge is, not that I have refused a day since last Thursday—his charge is that I have done so during the whole of the Session—a charge which is absolutely unfounded. [Cheers.] I repudiate now, and I shall have to that repudiation the assent of every man in the House, on whatever side he sits, who has followed the course of the Debates of the Session. [Cheers.] So much for the first of the specific charges of my hon. Friend. There were two others I extracted from his speech; one was based on an answer I gave him a. few days ago that in considering the question of the future government of the territories of the South Africa Company, among others, the directors of that company were to be consulted. My hon. Friend brings that before the House as if it were the last extreme of political injury; but my hon. Friend forgot to quote the whole of the answer on which he based his charge. I did indeed say that among the persons who would be consulted would be the directors of the company. ["Hear, hear!"] Is that a foolish policy, is that a flagitious, is that a corrupt policy? I think it is an eminently reasonable policy. [Cheers.] I admit it might have deserved the hard epithets he has used had the directors of the company been the only persons to be consulted, but the other persons I said who were to be consulted were Sir Alfred Milner, the Imperial Commissioner in South Africa, and the Government of Cape Colony. ["Hear, hear!"] Who in addition to those does my hon. Friend desire us to consult? [An HON. MEMBER: "Himself!" (Laughter.)] My hon. Friend is a person of great ability, and any observation or suggestion he makes to us we shall, of course, consider. But who among public bodies? My hon. Friend is not yet a public body. [Laughter.] What great official would he have us consult? I am at a loss to see who I have omitted in the answer I gave him—[An HON. MEMBER: "The House of Commons !"]—that we should consult the directors of the company, Sir A. Milner, and the Government of the Cape. So much for the second of my hon. Friend's specific charges; and what is the third? It relates to the Report of Sir Richard Martin with regard to the methods of government and the policy adopted by
      492
      the South Africa Company. The hon. Gentleman asks to whom are we indebted for the Report. Was it to the Committee, was it to the Government? Well, I do not know on whom the credit does devolve, except it be on the hon. Gentleman who has unearthed the Report.
      MR. J. MORLEY: We have asked for the Report repeatedly from this side of the House. [" Hear, hear!"]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: Then am I to understand that the credit of the Report is with those who asked for it, and the merit must be shared between my hon. Friend and the right hon. Gentleman opposite? [Cries of "Oh, oh!"] Let me say that in my judgment the credit for the Report is with those-who appointed the person to make the Report, who caused the Report to be made, and the merit is with my right hon. Friend the Colonial Secretary.
      MR. J. MORLEY: Why do we not have it? [Cries of "Why not produce it?" "It is a public document !"]
      MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he gave every credit to the Colonial Secretary for the Report.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: Eulogiums on my right hon. Friend were dispersed rather arbitrarily in the speech of the hon. Gentleman, but did not notice that he gave any eulogy for this Report. [Cries of "Yes!"] Then I missed that, and I entirely withdraw the criticism on that portion of the hon. Gentleman's remarks, and I understand he is not asking whether he owed this to the Government; what he asked was whether he owed it to the Committee. [Cries of "Where is it?" "Why suppress it?" "We want the Report!"] I think hon. Gentlemen are rather unreasonable in this connection. The Report has been brought to the notice of the Committee, it has been laid before them, and questions have been asked in this House, and no attempt of course has been made to prevent it becoming public by the Government, or would have succeeded; the Report has been laid before a Committee of the House, and is palpably a public document. [Cries of "Where is it?"]
      MR. J. MORLEYrose—
      *THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSsuggested it would be better to

      493
      allow the right hon. Gentleman to continue his speech, and then it could be answered.
      MR. J. MORLEY: It is not an explanation I require, but the right hon. Gentleman has not quite accurately represented to the Committee what has happened. What we wanted to see was the Report, and the Secretary for the Colonies said he was considering this, and that it was not usual to produce it to the House, after submitting it to the Committee until the whole of the evidence laid before the Committee was before us. I rather think he was willing, but his willingness has not come to the point of laying the Report before us.
      THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN, Birmingham, W.): If I may be allowed to say so, I do not think this matter has the importance some hon. Members seem to attach to it. My answer was, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, mid also that the Report was a Report made by an individual, by a Deputy-Commissioner of the Imperial Government, and, therefore, no doubt entitled to consideration; but a Report which, as he himself has said, he had been unable to get sufficient and satisfactory evidence to support. I thought I was bound to semi the Report to the company, who were in a position to obtain evidence, and the moment the Chartered Company had seen the Report they protested against some of the statements, and asked leave to make a reply. In answer to the right hon. Gentleman, I told him all this, and I said in addition it was a question whether the Report ought to be produced after handing it to the Committee, and also a question, whether it was fair to produce the Report without the reply of the Chartered Company. The Chartered Company had to communicate with South Africa on the subject, and consequently I heir reply is not even in my hands. But I promised the reply during the present week. If I receive it
      494
      during the present week I intend immediately to lay on the Table of the House both the Report and the reply. [Cheers.]
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: My right hon. Friend has, with an authority on such a. matter which. I, of course, cannot pretend to, for I can only get my information from him, made the matter perfectly clear, and the Committee will be able to appreciate what amount of substance there is in the notion which my hon. Friend has endeavoured to disseminate that, in this matter of Sir Richard Martin's Report, those responsible for the Report are exorcising the arts of concealment in order that the public may not know what it contains. I think I have now, so far as the Government is concerned, dealt with the only three specific charges which I can, at all events, extract from my hon. Friend's speech. With that part of it which deals with Mr. Rhodes it really is hardly my business to trouble the Committee. Ho has condemned Mr. Rhodes. [An IRISH MEMBER: "So has the Committee!"] He has used very strong language about Mr. Rhodes, but does my hon. Friend suppose that he is wisdom crying in wilderness on tins subject? Is he the only person who has condemned the raid, or whose moral sense has been outraged by the raid? My hon. Friend must know perfectly well that the Committee, in the most explicit terms, has said, with at least as much force as he has employed, that the raid is a thing which is wholly unjustifiable and which Mr. Rhodes himself has never attempted to justify— [Opposition cries of "Oh !]—has never attempted to justify. [Cheers.] Why my hon. Friend, under these circumstances, should, in addition to his attacks on Her Majesty's Government, who are legitimate objects of criticism in this House, and who have no right to complain of such criticism and never do complain of such criticism, have dealt in his long invective against Mr. Rhodes, whose fault neither Mr. Rhodes himself, nor any other man, so far as I know, has endeavoured to extenuate, but who nevertheless has rendered services—[loud cheers]

      495
      —to South. Africa in particular and to the Empire as a whole, and why he should have attempted to make these pecuniary insinuations against a man of whom I know very little, but of whom the whole world testifies that he is himself in no sense open to that species of corruption —[cheers]—why he should have done that I know not. Of course, it is inevitable that, if British South Africa be, or be thought to be, a great field of enterprise, there will collect around it a great many transactions and persons connected with transactions which are not particularly interesting and in some cases, it may be, not particularly honourable. All we have to desire is that the administration of the country itself shall be a pure administration—[cheers and counter-cheers] —that it shall not be illegitimately moved by base pecuniary considerations —[cheers]—and that the Governors of British South Africa, as the Governors of every other part of Her Majesty's dominions, may have at heart not merely the benefit and the welfare of a few speculators, but the general benefit and the general welfare of every class, native and British, who may be under the British flag, and own the Queen as their Sovereign. That this great end may ho attained is the earnest desire of Her Majesty's Government, and we shall do everything we can to secure it. [Cheers.]
      SIR W. HARCOURT: I do not rise to continue the controversy between the right hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Belfast, though I confess I do not Understand the justification for the warmth of the tone in which the right hon. Gentleman has spoken. With a great part of the observation of the hon. Gentleman I must say I entirely sympathise—[cheers, and Ministerial cries of "Oh!"]—but it is too late to-night to enter into a discussion of a question of such importance as this. [Cheers.] The right hon. Gentleman, has said that he was waiting for an invitation from me to give a day for the discussion of these matters, including the Committee whose
      496
      conduct has been impeached. I think the right hon. Gentleman knows very well what my opinion open that subject is —that when there is a matter in which the House is so deeply interested, as it is in this question, time ought always to be given by the Government. [Cheers.] It is not at this moment that the right hon. Gentleman is aware of my opinion upon that subject, and he need not have waited for my public invitation to give that time. [Ministerial cries of "Oh!"] But, as the right hon. Gentleman, has said that he was waiting for my demand, I make it now. [Cheers, and counter-cheers.] I should think that any Member who has any experience of the House of Commons must know that, whatever their opinions may be upon any particular question or issue, it is wise, proper, and right that the House should be given an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon all sides of the question. [Cheers.]
      THE FIRST LORD OF TEE TREASURYsaid that after what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman he should endeavour to find time for a discussion. That, however, must be raised on a specific resolution. [Cheers.] He could not, however, promise that he should find a whole day.
      MR. G. WYNDHAMsaid the difficulty of the discussion of this Vote had been greatly increased by the action of the Member for Belfast. He should have been content if there had been no discussion on the Colonial Vote at all. Whatever information the hon. Member for Belfast might have, ho did not see that they could usefully intervene in the affairs of South Africa. The hon. Member for West Belfast had made a wholesale attack upon the inhabitants of Johannesburg. Was it fair, or just, or good taste for the hon. Member to read out a string of names of the leaders of society in the town noble men, with wives and children, who conferred a benefit on mankind—[ironical

      497
      laughter]— certainly they conferred a benefit on mankind by applying all the discoveries of science to procure a greater output of gold. There was too much cheap satire against men whose lives hon. Members had not taken the trouble to understand. ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member had also said that there was all attempt to allege some great public service on the part of Mr. Rhodes which, it was held, ought to atone for the political crime of which Mr. Rhodes had been found guilty. He had never heard that said; but he had heard it said that a man who had rendered such signal service to his country must always hold a place in the gratitude of his country. ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member had also asserted that the claim made on behalf of Mr. Rhodes that he it was who brought the country from Rhodesia to the Zambesi under the British Crown was baseless. If the hon. Member talked with statesmen in South Africa he would find that there was not a single man who denied that that had been the policy of Mr. Rhodes throughout, that he had advanced it by his own private purse, and that it was his untiring energy that had brought it about. ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member also spoke of Mr. Rhodes as one who had done nothing to bring Boer and Briton closer together in South Africa. It should be known that now Boers were fighting side by side with men of British blood; that even in the Cape House of Assembly Mr. Rhodes had the support of many Dutch members, and that in South Africa generally leading Dutchmen said that however much they regretted Mr. Rhodes's connection with the Jameson Raid, they were not going to unsay the words of gratitude to Mr. Rhodes which had passed their lips. The hon. Member had said that in the matter of the treatment of the native races Mr. Rhodes had goaded the Mashonas into war; but the hon. Member had forgotten that Mr. Rhodes, with Mr. Colenbrander, had brought peace to the Matabele, showing that it was possible
      498
      for a man who understood the natives to bring peace amongst them and get their affection and love. The hon. Member for West Belfast had done his best to draw an injurious comparison between the work of Mr. Rhodes and that of Sir H. Johnston, and nothing would be more fatal than for the House of Commons as it were to back one great colonial administrator against another. It was derogatory to the dignity of the House and must be of sinister consequence. ["Hear, hear!"] It was hard on the spur of the moment to take up all the charges which had been flung about. The Committee was debarred from discussing the Report of the Committee, but the hon. Centleman had thought it fair to place upon words in that Report the most injurious construction which they were capable of bearing. The hon. Member seemed to think the words condemned not only the political propriety of Mr. Rhodes's conduct, but almost his moral character. He wished to repudiate with all his strength the kind of attack which had been made on Mr. Rhodes as a man. ['' Hear, hear !"] Some of his acts might be politically reprehensible, but as a man Mr. Rhodes still commanded the love, respect, and gratitude of a great number of his fellow-countrymen. [Cheers.]
      MR. J. SCOTT-MONTAGUsaid that he had been six months in South Africa, and though he did not pretend that that enabled him fully to speak on all the problems, yet it gave him a greater knowledge, of the country than hon. Gentlemen who had not been there. He was sure that the hon. Member for West Belfast would modify a great deal of what he had said if he had studied the question on the spot. The hon. Member said that Mr. Rhodes's policy was as bad for the natives as for the British Empire. The hon. Member quite forgot that Mr. Rhodes's legislation on the native question was one of his greatest titles to fame; and whatever might be said of Mr. Rhodes's connection with the Raid, Mr. Rhodes had

      499
      a direct title to the respect and gratitude of Englishmen for the way in which he bore the acquisition of Rhodesia on his own shoulders for a very long time. As to the Colonial Secretary he was bound to say that there was a time when he disagreed with the right hon. Gentleman's policy; but looking back now, and realising the difficulties which had to be contended with, he felt convinced that the way in which the right hon. Gentleman had directed the policy of this country was worthy of admiration, and that the policy was the right one to pursue. As to the Raid, the House of Commons would be doing a great injustice to Mr. Rhodes if they condemned him without regard to his past services. He suggested that it would be well for hon. Members in discussing South Africa to try and moderate their language, because it would be for the advantage of South Africa. He was sure it would be the most difficult task the Government had ever had to try and replace the Chartered Company by any other form of possible administration.
      MR. J. H. DALZIELasked the Leader of the House whether he proposed to take the Vote to-night?
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid the Vote was closely associated with a Motion which, he understood, was to be moved on some subsequent day, but so far from that being a reason for not taking the Colonial Vote, it seemed rather to be a reason in favour of that course. But, of course, he would not press the matter.
      CAPTAIN BETHELLasked the Colonial Secretary whether he could hold out any hope of the early release of the Zulu chiefs who were banished to St. Helena about eight years ago. Their banishment all these years for what, after all, was a mere technical rebellion, was a monstrously heavy punishment. For a good many years he asked the Colonial authorities about these Zulu chiefs and was led to
      500
      believe that in a short time they would be allowed to return to their native country. Nothing however, happened. He believed, indeed, that in 1895 a ship was chartered to convey them back to Zululand, but three days before embarkation, a telegram came from the Colonial Office instructing the governor that they were still to be retained at St. Helena. From that day to this no encouragement or hope has been held out that their punishment would be terminated. The reason of this, he believed, was the opposition of Natal. Natal had since those days got responsible Government. It had constantly asked to have Zululand handed over to it, and he believed the opinion of the Colonial Office was that Zululand ought to be handed over to Natal. He thought the right hon. Gentleman would admit that unless there was some very strong reason for it their punishment had been a monstrous one for a comparatively trifling offence. He knew no reason to fear that their return to Zululand would provoke the inhabitants to a rising, and he earnestly hoped these unfortunate chiefs would be released.
      MR. PHILIP STANHOPEasked if he might give notice of the exact terms of the Motion that would be made?
      THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSsaid the proper time to do so would be on the adjournment.
      MR. STANHOPEappealed to the Leader of the House not to take the Vote at that hour of the night.
      *SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT, in associating himself with the appeal of the hon. Member, said there had been no discussion upon a Colonial Vote since May, 1896. There was a day given towards the close of last session, but that day was entirely consumed by a discussion on the desirability of the appointment of the South Africa Committee,—there was no discussion on South African affairs generally or on Colonial affairs. The Leader of the House adopted a new

      501
      argument which he had never heard before, when he said the vote was not put down because the Leader of the Opposition did not ask for it.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I never said that.
      *SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid he was very sorry if he had misunder stood the right hon. Gentlemen—["hear, hear !"]—but he distinctly said that the Vote was not put down because it was not asked for by the Leader of the Opposition.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: What I said was that if the Leader of the Opposition had asked for it it would have been put down. The logical mind of my right hon. Friend will quite see the distinction. [Laughter.]
      *SIR K ASHMEAD - BARTLETTthought the distinction was rather dialectical that logical. He was surprised to hear the Leader of the House reply to the attack of the Member for Belfast, instead of the Colonial Secretary. He hoped that the House would be given an opportunity by the postponement of the Vote to discuss questions connected with South Africa which could not be discussed on the Report of the Committee. As to the Transvaal, they wanted to know what had been done by the Colonial Secretary to fulfil the pledges given to the Uitlanders eighteen months ago. It would be absurd to attempt to discuss these questions after midnight.
      MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that the Questions as to the Zulus and other points ought tc be raised at a more fitting opportunity than the present, and he supported the appeal which had been made.
      MR LEONARD COURTNEYsaid there were many points in the Colonial Vote which required examination, and which could not be entered into that evening. There was besides the most interesting question connected with the Canadian tariff and its results.
      MR. LABOUCHEREsaid that the Leader of the House intended to consult the directors of the Chartered Company, Sir A. Milner, and the Cape Government as to affairs in Rhodesia; but he did not mention the House of Commons.
      MR. DALZIELurged that the Report of the South African Committee should be fully discussed before the Colonial Secretary's salary was voted.
      MR. BRYN ROBERTShoped that the minutes of evidence and Sir Richard Martin's Report would be circulated before the further discussion of the Vote.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid that if he consented to postpone the Vote, he could not promise any other day for discussion. Still, if the House desired that the Vote should be discussed in the place of some other Vote, he would endeavour to meet that view. He was willing to go on. ["Hear, hear!"]
      MR. J. H. DALZIELconsidered that the remark of the right hon. Gentleman was very ill-timed. Did hon. Gentlemen opposite imagine that any good was to be gained by further discussion to-night of the action of the Committee and the policy of the Colonial Office in view of a day being pledged to be given for that discussion? It seemed to be a waste of time to go on to-night. They were promised a day, and they were going to have a day for the discussion of the whole of the South African question. That day had got to be given, and why was it not going to be given after the day on which they were going to discuss the Report of the Committee? They might have a discussion on the Report of the Committee and on the question of South African policy this week. Why not take to-morrow and the day after?
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid it would cause great inconvenience, as Wednesday and Thursday had been appropriated for some time past for Scotch Bills.
      MR. DALZIELsaid surely that was an argument in favour of the point of view he was pressing on the House. According to the right hon. Gentleman, they could not have the discussion he had promised on South Africa until Monday next; and he supposed he would not give them any hope that Monday would be given.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYthought they might take Monday or Tuesday.
      MR. DALZIELsaid that it was only a matter of the day for the question of the Colonial Secretary's salary. There was absolutely no business promised for Tuesday that could not be postponed wiihout inconvenience. The inevitable result, according to the right hon. Gentleman himself, was that if Monday was given for the discussion of South African affairs, the Colonial Secretary's salary could not be taken; because he would give no pledge that it would be taken after the discussion of the Committee's Report.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid he thought he must be obscure, or the hon. Gentleman had not caught what he said. He had no doubt that the discussion of the Committee in Report must precede the taking of the Colonial Vote.
      MR. DALZIEL: That is what I want to make clear.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid that what he could not promise was that time should be given to this Vote, because lie could not say that the time existed. He could only do his best to consult the wishes of the House, but could not do more?
      MR. DALZIEL: Then it is a mistake on my part?
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: It is not my fault.
      MR. DALZIELsaid he did not understand the right hon. Gentleman to indicate that the Vote would be postponed until after the discussion of the Report. If that was so, it altered the
      504
      matter. They might hope that the amount of time required for the discussion of the Colonial Vote would largely depend on what took place in the previous Debate.
      MR. CHAMBERLAINobserved that what they had to do that night, and would have to do on a future occasion if this Vote was put down again, was to discuss details of colonial policy which arose, and raise questions as to which hon. Members desired information, and which he was always ready to answer. He did not for the life of him see why these questions should not be asked now and the answers given. He understood the hon. Member for Sheffield desired to raise what was called a first-class debate on matters of policy. He learned of that desire for the first time; he doubted whether it was shared by other hon. Members, and, now that matters had fortunately assumed a much more satisfactory aspect in South Africa than they presented some time ago, he should doubt very much whether any good purpose could be served by the discussion of ancient controversies. ["Hear, hear!'] With, regard to the matter raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Holderness, he had to say that when he came into the Colonial Office his attention was directed to the case of the Zulu chiefs. He should not describe them as suffering punishment. He should rather say they were deported because their deportation was considered necessary in the interests of the peace of South Africa. It was not so much to punish them as to protect South Africa that they were sent to St. Helena. He was anxious to carry out the promise which had been made by his predecessors, but which they had been unable to give effect to, and allow the chiefs to be returned to Zululand. He met, however, with the same difficulty which had baffled his predecessor. Although it was considered a right and proper thing that the chiefs should be allowed to return to Zululand; Natal, a colony in the neighbournood, enjoying representative institations, was entirely opposed to it, and as representative government had just

      505
      been conferred on Natal it would not have been a wise policy to have disregarded her representations on the subject. The matter had, therefore, to some extent been delayed by negotiations with the Government of Natal, but he was happy to say that these negotiations had proceeded so far that he was justified in indicating to the Zulu chiefs that they would be allowed to return during the present year. ["Hear, hear!"]
      DR. CLARKexpressed satisfaction at the right hon. Gentleman's statement as to the Zulu chiefs. He took it for granted that these men would receive pensions, their lands having been taken from them, and he wished to know whether their pensions would be provided out of Imperial funds or by the Natal Government.
      MR. CHAMBERLAINsaid that he could not enter into details of that kind while the subject, was still under consideration. All these details had been discussed with the Premier of Natal, and it was hoped that a satisfactory settlement, would be arrived at.
      MR. BUXTONexplained that the difficulty of the late Government some years ago arose from the fact that Natal had only recently had self-government. He was glad that the Government had been able to come to an arrangement with Natal on this subject. Understanding that there would be another opportunity of discussing the Vote he begged to move "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
      MR. STANHOPEgave notice that on the consideration of the Report of the British South Africa Committee he would clove the following Resolution:—
      "That this House regrets the inconclusive action and Report of the Select Committee on the affairs of British South Africa, and especially the failure of that Committee to recommend specific steps with regard to Mr. Rhodes, and to report immediately to this House the refusal of Mr. Hawksley to obey the order of the Committee to produce copies of certain telegrams which he admitted were in his possession and which he had already submitted to the Secretary for the Colonies in duty, 1896, and that Mr. Hawksley be ordered to appear at the Bar of this House and then and there to produce the copies of the telegrams."
      MR. R. G. WEBSTERobserved that there were other Colonies besides South Africa, and asked whether
      506
      there would be an opportunity of discussing affairs concerning them, especially the subject of cablegram communication.
      MR. WEIRwas surprised that the hon. Member for Poplar should have moved to report progress at that hour (12.25 a.m.). He thought the discussion ought to go on, and was ready personally to remain up until 6 or 7 o'clock in the morning.
      THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYsaid that it appeared that the hon. Gentleman opposite and himself were anxious to go on and nobody else was. [Laughter.] He was afraid that the general wish of the House was clearly expressed in favour of reporting progress, and, as the Committee was perfectly cognisant of the position in which the business of Supply stood, he should not resist the Motion.
      Resolution to be reported to-morrow; Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon Wednesday.

      WAYS AND MEANS.
      Committee deferred till Wednesday.
      WAYS AND MEANS.

        LAND TRANSFER (MONEY).
        Resolution reported:—
        "That it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, of sums for compensation and other expenses which may become payable under the provisions of any Act of the present Session to establish a Real Representative, and to amend the Land Transfer Act 1875."
        Resolution agreed to.

        LAND TRANSFER (RE-COMMITTED) BILL [H.L.]
        Committee deferred till Thursday.

        SUPPLY (16TH JULY).
        Resolution reported:
        REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1897–98.
        That a sum, not exceeding £6,726,335 including Supplementary sums of £109,875 and £50,000), be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which

        507
        will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1898, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Post Office Services, the expenses of Post Office Savings Banks, and Government Annuities and Insurances, and the Collection of the Post Office Revenue.
        Resolution Read a Second time.
        CAPTAIN PIRIEsaid he would move the reduction of the Vote by £100, in order to call attention to an exceptional state of affairs in his constituency. A new site was required for a Post Office in Aberdeen and this matter had been before the community for some time with great divergence of opinion as to what would be the best site, increased by the fact that the Post Office Department found themselves unable, in spite of the universal opinion in Aberdeen, to provide a sum in any way sufficient to meet the present needs of the town and still less the requirements of the future. The sum proposed by the Post Office was £20,000, and this he represented was quite inadequate. The population of Aberdeen was close upon 150,000 and rapidly augmenting. Last week there appeared in The Times a letter from the hon. Member for the Wells division of Somerset, referring to a town in that constituency, where the circumstances were somewhat similar to those in Aberdeen. A very fair comparison might be drawn between Weston-super-Mare and Aberdeen, showing that the claim for an expenditure of more than £20,000 for the purpose indicated did not err on the side of exaggeration. The population of Weston-super-Mare in 1891 was 15,000, and it was proposed to give £5,000 for the site of a post office there, so that on that proposition an expenditure of £50,000 would not be too much for a population of 150,000. He did not advocate an expenditure so large as that, but he did claim that it should be more than £20,000. He begged the Secretary to the Treasury if he was not able to say at once that the Treasury would give a larger sum, at least, to say that he would postpone a definite settlement as to a site until some further consideration could be given to the matter. The Postmaster General had received deputations on the subject, and the general impression had been that the Department would be prepared to give a larger sum, but last
        508
        week the Post Office sent an important official to Aberdeen to confer with the Town Council, the Harbour Board, and the Chamber of Commerce, and it was naturally hoped that some decision would be come to. The important official, however, opened proceedings by saying that he was sent there with his hands completely tied and bound by two conditions, that whatever site should be chosen must be handed over to the Post Office without any loss of time, and secondly that nothing more than £20,000 was to be given, whatever representations were made by these important public bodies. They were very much incensed at this, and at the present moment there was great agitation and indignation felt throughout the constituency. Under these circumstances he was sure he would not appeal to the Secretary to the Treasury in vain for further consideration. He begged to move the reduction.
        MR. BRYCEsaid his hon. Friend had taken the only method open to him of calling attention to the mistake which he ventured to think was being made by the Post Office and the Treasury in reference to the site for the Post Office in Aberdeen. He believed the matter had been under consideration for some time and that opinions were divided between two sites. The local authorities expressed a strong view that neither of the sites which the Post Office were disposed to adopt would meet all the needs of the city and a special distaste with the site where the Post Office official informed them the Department was likely to adopt. At any rate he could say with some positiveness that the intimations which he gave as to the intentions of the Post Office were received by the bulk of the community with anything but satisfaction. The local authorities gave the Post Office to understand, through this official, that in their view the sum which the Post Office proposed to spend was quite inadequate to secure a building of the requisite size and in the requisite position. In their view £20,000 would not be sufficient to procure a building which would be of a proper size and in a position convenient to the mercantile community. Under these circumstances he appealed to the Post Office and to the Treasury to reconsider the subject and to endeavour to give better consideration to the

        509
        representations which had been made. He believed a slight additional expense would be sufficient to procure a site in a really central position which would give general satisfaction. He thought it would be a great pity if, for a very small sum the Post Office and Treasury were to create a sense of hardships and ill-treatment of an important mercantile community when it might with this little additional expense give satisfaction and really provide fur their work in a much more satisfactory way than they would do at the present time. He did not ask the Secretary to the Treasury to express a final opinion at this moment. He would be better satisfied if he would say that he would take the matter into his further consideration.
        MR. HANBURYsaid there would be no objection to the right hon. Gentleman laying before the Post Office any suggestions he had to make, but the matter was by no means finally settled yet. He did not think the difficulty of getting a central site in Aberdeen was as great as the right hon. Gentleman represented.
        MR. BRYCEsaid he did not intend to represent that there was any great difficulty in getting a site, but that neither of the contemplated sites gave satisfaction.
        MR. HANBURYsaid he did not know which two sites the right hon. Gentleman referred to, but as he understood the case the Corporation were anxious for a site in Union Street, which was the principal street of Aberdeen. No site could, he thought, be got there for anything under £40,000, and that was a large sum indeed to pay for the site of a post office.
        MR. WEIRpointed out that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech had promised that, as a result of the meeting of the Postal Union at Washington, the foreign rate of postage would be reduced from 2½d. to 2d The Post al Union Conference was over and the expected reduction had not been agreed to. He could only attribute this failure to the fact that this country was represented at the meeting of the Postal Union by Mr. Walpole, the Secretary of the Post Office, a man who knew nothing about postal affairs, but was pitchforked into his office over the heads of men who had been many years in the service of the Department.
        510
        It was curious to find in the Estimates a sum of £1,500 as salary for the Financial Secretary. No such office existed. The gentleman who had filled the office had retired in October '96 long before the Estimates had been issued. He should like to know who was responsible for this blunder, but he could not help thinking that the Secretary to the Post Office was the man. In the Post Office the retiring age was 61, would that apply to the Secretary who was only three years in office? He must condemn this system of bringing in outsiders over the heads of competent men; it looked like a political job. The hon. Member said that though the late Administration was responsible as to the telegraphic guarantees in the Highlands, the right hon. Gentleman's statement had been misleading. He said that the Highlands had been treated generously. Out of 26 applications for telegraphic extensions, only in two cases were the localities able to provide guarantees. £25,000 was voted for telegraphic extensions all over the country; but last year only £15,000 was spent and the rest was returned to the Treasury. Why was not that sum spent in the Highlands? It was not an uncommon thing for a letter to take four and five days to come from the remote parts of Scotland; and a man who wanted to draw half a sovereign for the savings bank, had to wait eight or ten days before he could get it. He urged the right hon. Gentleman to adopt some plan to remedy this state of things.
        Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
        *MR. FLYNNcomplained of the practice of taking men from Scotland and England and appointing them to postmasterships in Ireland, to the exclusion of local men who had served the post office well and faithfully.
        MR. HANBURYsaid it was also the case that a great number of men were taken from Ireland and appointed to good postmasterships in England and Scotland. With regard to another point which had been raised, the Post Office undoubtedly had a most valuable public servant in

        511
        Mr. Walpole, and no country belonging to the Postal Union had a stronger or better informed representative at Washington than the English Post Office. What happened was that we were outvoted. He pointed out that the Estimates were framed some time before any decision was arrived at as to the question raised in regard to the Financial Secretary of the Post Office. He would look into the matter which had been referred to by the hon. Member for North Mayo.
        Original Question put, and agreed to.

      SUPPLY [9TH JULY].
      Report deferred till Thursday.
      POST OFFICE CONSOLIDATION BILL [H.L.]
      Committee deferred till Monday next.
      PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      Consideration, as amended (by the Standing Committee,) deferred till Tomorrow.
      NAVAL WORKS BILL.
      Committee deferred till To-morrow.
      OUT-DOOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
      Second Reading deferred till Tomorrow.
      CONGESTED DISTRICTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      Consideration, as amended, deferred till To-morrow.
      MILITARY MANœUVRES BILL.
      Second Reading deferred till To morrow.
      DANGEROUS PERFORMANCES BILL.
      Committee deferred till To-morrow.
      STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES' JURISDICTION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      Second Reading deferred till Tomorrow.
      BICYCLES (IRELAND) BILL.
      Second Reading deferred till Monday next.
      BURIAL GROUNDS LOANS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      Adjourned Debate on Second Reading [11th May] further adjourned till To-morrow.
      EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      Committee deferred till To-morrow.
      SCHOOL BOARDS' EXPENSES BILL.
      Committee deferred till To-morrow.
      ISLE OF MAN (CHURCH BUILDING ACTS) BILL— [H.L.]
      Adjourned Debate on Second Reading [5th July] further adjourned till Tomorrow.

      MILITARY MANœUVRES (COMPENSATION).
      Considered in Committee.
      Resolved—
      "That it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, of compensation for any damage caused. by Military Manœuvres, or by any operation incidental thereto, in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to facilitate Military Manœuvres."— [Mr. Brodrick.]
      Resolution to be reported To-morrow.
      Whereupon, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 15th day of this instant July, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.
      House adjourned at Ten minutes after One o'clock.

LORD KENSINGTON.
Petition of William, Lord Kensington, in the Peerage of Ireland, claiming a right to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland; Read, and referred to the Lord Chancellor to consider and report thereupon to the House.

PARISH COUNCILS (SCOTLAND) (CASUAL VACANCIES) BILL.
*THE EARL OF LAUDERDALE, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, remarked that the Bill was a short one, and had passed the House of Commons without opposition. It applied to Parish Councils in Scotland consisting of burghal and landward members, and the object of the Bill was to alter the law as regarded the filling up of casual vacancies as they occurred in Councils so constituted. When a casual vacancy occurred, the burghal and landward members both voted to fill it up. The Bill would only permit the members of each section to vote in filling up a vacancy occurring in that section. The other day a vacancy occurred in a landward parish, but the burghal members outnumbering the others filled up the vacancy against the wishes of the landward members. It was to remedy a practical inconvenience of this sort that the Bill had been introduced.
*THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR)said he did not rise to offer any opposition to the Bill. It was no doubt true that it passed through all its stages in another place without Amendment, but he understood it was passed through rapidly at a time when it was unexpected to be reached, or notice of opposition to it would have been given. As far as the Government were concerned, lie could not consent to the first sub-section of the first clause of the Bill, and it would be his duty at a- subsequent stage to move that that sub-section be struck out of the Bill. In the instance of
386
inconvenience alluded to, the burgher members no doubt stretched their powers. The Landward Committee had distinct functions and interests separate from those represented by the burgher members, and, while it was reasonable that the Landward Committee should be filled up by landward members only, it was not reasonable that a vacancy among the burgher members should be filled up only by the burgher representatives. For this reason the burg-her representatives had no separate action apart from the Landward Committee as the Landward Committee had from the burgher representatives. As no practical inconvenience had occurred the other way, there was no cause for the change proposed in the first sub-section of the Bill. On the other hand, the Bill, if passed in the form in which it stood, would possibly cause grave inconvenience in 20 or 25 parishes in a way which, if the Amendment which he would be obliged to propose at a subsequent stage was resisted, he would explain more fully.
LORD TWEEDMOUTHagreed that exceptional powers should not be given to the burgher members. If it was impossible to give reciprocal powers to the landward and burgher members, it was not desirable that any change should be made in the law at all. He did not oppose the Second Reading, but should the change proposed be brought forward in Committee he should oppose the future stages of the Bill.
Read 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

VERMINOUS PERSONS BILL.
On the Motion to go into Committee on this Bill,
*LORD BALFOURremarked that if the Bill was meant to apply to Scotland the machinery of the Bill as it stood was unsuited for the purpose. It was not for him to- suggest that there were any persons in Scotland to whom the Bill would be applicable. But if the Bill was meant to apply to Scotland it would have to be amended. He would be willing to suggest to the noble Lord the form of the Amendments.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)asked whether the noble Earl (Lord Stamford) in charge of the Bill hail taken any steps to identify the fund out of which the expenses of working the Act wore to come? He had himself received a great many representations from various parts of the country complaining that there was no such identification, and fearing that the expense under the Act would fall upon them. There was a clause about the local authority, but that did not solve the question.
THE EARL OF STAMFORDreplied that he had made inquiries of the Local Government Board, and no difficulty was apprehended there. In the case of rural authorities the cost would be met out of the general purposes rate, and in the case of other authorities it would come out of the general fund.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid the Local Government Board appeared to be satisfied, but it seemed to him that there should be a provision to charge the cast of administering the Act on the common fund.
Considered in Commiteee (according to Order); reported without Amendment; and re-committed to the Standing Committee.

COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) BILL [H.L.]
On the Motion to go into Committee on this Bill,
*LORD MONKSWELLasked to be allowed to say a few words as to the proceedings of the Select Committee to. which the Bill was referred. The Benches opposite were represented by Lord Knutsford, Lord Pirbright, Lord Hatherton, and Lord Tennyson; Lord Hobhouse, Lord Farmer, Lord Turing, and Lord Welby represented that side. The Committee sat several clays, examined several witnesses and went into the subject carefully. The first point which they devoted a great deal of attention to was that of translation. It was absolutely necessary to amend the law with regard to translation. It was now in a sad state of confusion. Translations into foreign tongues were dealt with under the Berne Convention and under
388
the International Copyright Act. But as to translations into Hindustani, Welsh, Gaelic, and other tongues current within the British dominions the law was in a doubtful state indeed. With regard to this, he could not do better than quote from the evidence of Mr. Daldy, one of the Commissioners of 1878, and who was now, and had been for many years, honorary secretary of the Copyright Association,—
"Lord Thring—In answer to the chairman you said, as I understand, that there was a difficulty about the law of translation in England as compared with a book translated in France?—The difficulty arises from the confusion of the law. The Chairman.—A doubt as to the law?—Yes. Lord Thring.—Would you explain that a little?—With pleasure. Under the A ct of 1842 there is no protection whatever for translations in England. Under the Berne Convention we are to have protection for translations of English works if they are published in other countries, but we have nothing giving protection for translations published within the British dominions, and such a case has occurred."
Lord Thring then asked, "Will you put a concrete case?" The answer was:—
"A concrete case occurred some years ago in India. Your Lordships probably are acquainted with the name of 'Todhunter's Arithmetic.' That was translated into an Indian language, and published there and went through some 20 editions. The publishers, on behalf of the proprietors, tried to stop it. but they found by the decision of the Judge, which was a righteous decision according to the law, that they could not stop it. They could have stopped it if it had been published in Italy or France or Germany, but not when it was published within our own dominions."
It was perfectly certain, therefore, that the matter of translation ought to be dealt with as soon as possible, and the promoters of the Bill proposed to deal with it by as was proposed in the original Bill, the absolute right during the whole period of the copyright to prevent unauthorised translations. An endeavour had been made to lighten the Bill so that it might be got through their Lordships' House this Session, and it dealt only with those subjects which were most pressing and least contentious. All reference to newspaper copyright had been struck out. With regard to magazine copyright, it was proposed to make it retrospective, but as there was a difference of opinion as to that, the

389
clause in the Bill making the copyright retrospective had been omitted. With regard to lectures the Bill had also been considerably lightened. The great point on which. The Committee wished to insist was that copyright should be given not only in lectures when published in a Look, but when delivered, and that they hail tried to effect by the Bill. It was further suggested in the original Bill that the law should be altered so as to give copyright, which did not now exist, to lectures delivered in endowed buildings. The Select Committee were on the whole favourable to that proposition, but at the same time they recognised that any alteration of the law to effect that must seriously affect very considerable interests, and they thought it was not desirable, without taking a great deal of evidence mid going into the matter very thoroughly, to recommend such an alteration in the law, consequently they had inserted in the amended Bill a proviso setting up again the provision that now existed, not allowing copyright to lectures in endowed buildings. For the present it had been decided not to propose any change in the law with regard to the difficult and thorny question of registration. Another alteration had been made which he thought would commend itself to their Lordships. The principal Act of 1842 now applied to all British possessions unless by Order in Council they should be exempted either from the whole Act or part of it. It was proposed in the amended Bill to give the British possessions much greater freedom of action by declaring that the Act, if it passed, should not run in any of the British possessions unless they themselves asked either for the whole or part of it. The net result, therefore, of the labours of the Select Committee had been to greatly lighten the Bill and to clear it of almost every subject of controversy, whilst at the same time it introduced a great many alterations of the law which were of considerable value. He might perhaps be allowed to say that the best thanks of the Committee were due to Lord Thring for the great care and attention he had bestowed on the drafting of this Measure. ["Hear!"] He found that two or three Amendments would have to be made, which, however, did not touch the substance of the Bill. In order that noble
390
Lords might. have an opportunity of considering the Amendments he had put down, he proposed to take the Report stage to-morrow, and the Amendments on Thursday or Friday, when he hoped the House would give a Third Reading to, the Bill. ["Hear, hear!"] He begged to move that the House now resolve itself into Committee on the Bill.
Considered in Committee (according to Order). The Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; Standing Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow.
House Adjourned at Five Minutes before Five o'Clock, till To-morrow, a Quarter past Ten o'Clock