Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page



IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. In the House of Lords, on July 5, a discussion was raised by the Bishop of Cork with regard to the hardships alleged to be entailed or, small parishes by making the employment of certificated teachers an indispensable condition of obtain- ing the Government grant. Tho Duke of Marlborough admitted that it was most desirable this class of schools should receive the aid of the state, and promised to do his best for devising some means by Which subsidiary assistance might be extended to the poorest localities, if it were only by way of encouragement to exert e9 themselves, with the view of coming up to the required standard. The Consecration and Ordination Fees Bill was read a third time and passed; as was also the Land Tax Commis- SioneW Names Bill. The War Department Stores Protection Bill, and the Charitable Donations and Bequests (Ireland) Bill, were read tt second time. The Salmon Fishery (Ireland) Bill was opposed on the third reading, and upon a division rejected by 23 to 17, after which their Lordships adjourned. The House of Commons, at the morning sitting, again went Into committee on the lteform Bill, and resumed the con- sideration of Mr. Lowe's proposal to introduce a clause for cumulative voting, by providing that in any contested elec- tion for a county or borougti represented by more than two members, and having more than one seat vacant, every voter should be entitled to a number of votes equal to the number Si vacant seats, and might give all such votes to one can- didate. or distribute them among the candidates as he might think fit Mr. Adderley, speaking on behalf of the Government, opposed the clause, which, he said, introduced a principle that was totally unknown to the constitution. The principle of the constitution was that the whole people should be re- presented by the whole, and when a member was elected he represented the minority as well as the majority. Mr. Fawcett pronounced the proposal a logical one, for With three members in a constituency the majority would be represented by two and the minority by one. But it would not be logical to apply the principle to boroughs with two members only, for in that case the mino- rity and the majority would be placed on an equal footing. Mr. Newdegate would vote for the clause which was ren- dered necessary by the probable and not far distant extinc- tion of the smaller constituencies. Mr. Bright denounced the clause as one of the most violent attacks upon the principles of representation that had ever been witnessed in that House. At no time had he been in favour of new-fangled proposals. On the contrary, he had always asked the House to march along the ancient lines of the constitution, and thus far both the House and the Government had done so. But now came the mernberfor CaIne With this puerile, insignificant, and utterly worthless proposi- tion for arresting the tide of democracy as he called it, and preventing the ruin upon which he declared the House was rushing. In his opinion the House had better do their duty in reference to the matter before them, and leave these great changes to be made by those who came after them, in case they were necessary, and the measure the House was en- gaged in passing turned out to be a failure. Lord Cranborne argued that the clause was requisite as a means of counteracting the overwhelming preponderance which the bill would give to a particular class by the new franchise which it created. He contended that as they were engrafting a new principle of a democratic character upon the constitution they ought to engraft upon it also a pro- tective principle, even though it were new. Mr. Mill spoke at considerable length in favour of the clause as a portion of the scheme of representation known as "Mr. Hare's." Mr. Henley had no faith in the proposal as a counterpoise to what some hon. gentlemen regaroed with apprehension, the influence which the new consiitueiices would exercise in the representation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in announcing his deter- mination to vote against the clause, said that nothing could afford a greater contrast than the largeness of the principle it contained and the smallness of its application. Why, then, run the risk of so great a change with such small re ,sults P If the principle were of the great advantage which its supporters claimed for it, surely it ought to be applied more extensively; and if it were good for constituencies re- turning three members, it would be equally good for those aeturning two. Apply the principle to boroughs with three representatives and the result must be that in the great bulk of the constituencies which returned two members only politicai opinions would be com- pletely neutralised. This being so, the government would thenceforward be in the hands of the constituencies who were represented by only one member; in fact, the United Kingdom would be governed by the gentlemen who came from Scotland. With regard to the dangers which were anticipated from the democratic tendency of the bill he frankly avowed that he had no fear on the subject, and he entreated the committee not to allow such a bugbear to be made the foundation of a new legislation that would have the effect of changing the whole character of the oon- stitution. Sir G. Grey would vote for the second reading of the clause, for the purpose of afterwards amending it in accordance With the views expressed by Mr. Morrison. Mr. Lowe having replied upon the whole debate, the oom- mittee divided, when there appeared for the clause, 173; and against it, 314. The clause was, therefore, rejected by the overwhelming majority of 141. On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Chairman then reported progress. The Lunacy (Scotland) Bill was passed through committee, and some other business of a routine nature-gone thruugh, and then the sitting was suspended. At the evening sitting there was the usual Friday night76 miscellaneous discussion on going into Supply. Sir C. O'Loghlen dilated at considerable length on the grievances and anomalies of the Irish Peerage, concluding with a motion for an address to the Queen, praying her not to exercise her prerogative to create Irish Peers, which he withdrew, after some observations from Mr. Pullard- Urquhart, Mr. Pim, Colonel French, and Lord >"a is. Sir F. Goldsmid made a statement in reference to the recent persecution of the Jews in Roumania,—to which Lord Stanley replied that the inilueuce of England and ;i France was being exercised to put an end to these perse- cutiona, and that Prince Charles. personally strongly disap- proved them. Mr. Syrian called attention to the Keport of the Committee Of 1866 on the Army Medical Service, and moved a resolu- tion condemning the alterations in the Royal warrant of the 1st of October, 1858, and expressing the opinion that the efficiency of the Medical Service would be promoted by car- rying out the recommendations of the Committee in their integrity. Sir J. Pakington discussed the recommendations of the Committee, contending* that they had been substantially carried out and after some observations from Sir IL An- Struther the resolution was withdrawn. Ift. Peter Taylor brought under the notice of the House What he described a gross miscarriage of justice, in the re- cent conviction of two men by the Salisbury bench of magis- trates on a poaching charge, the circumstanccs of which have been fully detailed in the newspapers. Mr. Marsh and Sir M. T. Beach bore testimony to the high character of the committing magistrates and 1IJr. Hardy, after severely rebuking Nl r. Taylor for the un- fairness of some of his statements, and the spirit in which be had handled the matter, explained the course taken by the Home-office, and vindicated the impartiality and bona Mee of the magistrates. Mr. Mill protested against the warmth of Mr. Hardy's language. A long and acrimonious conversation on the various fea- tures of the case followed, and ultimately a division took place on a motion to produce the correspondence between the Home-office and the magistrates, which Mr. Hardy op- posed, and it was rejected by 70 to 31. was brought abruptly to an end, at a quarter to twoocJock, by a motion to adjourn, which was at once agreed to without demur. In the House of Lords, on July 8, the Consecration of Churchyards (No. 2) Bill passed through committee. The Barl of Shaftesbury called attention to a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury, which had appeared in the Guardian newspaper, stating that convocation will be con- suited on the matters submitted to the ritual commission before they were submitted to parliament. He asked the grchfctehop on what authority he made that statement; and juso, if convocation disapproved of the report of the com- mission, which decision was to prevail. If convocation were to have such power it would be necessary to inquire what' convocation was, and whether it was to consist only of the province of Canterbury, or was to have representa- tives from the provinces of York, Dublin, and Armagh. Lord Taunton asked what progress the ritual commis- eioners had made on the question of clericaJ vestment The Archbishop of Canterbury replied that the inquiry of the.COmmi.88ioners had hitherto been confined to the matter of Vestments, and with regard to the question of the Earl of Shaftesbury, he said it was a historical fact that tle B >ok of Common Prayer became law by the joint act on oi parlia- ment and of convocatlOll, and he apprehended that no altera- tion would be made in it without consulting both bodies. The Bishop of London remarked that the machinery pos- sessed by convocation for legislation was of the humblest character. A proposition to alter the 29th canon had now been before the convocations of Canterbury and York for six years with less chance of an agreement being come to than when the question was first introduced. The Archbishop of Canterbury observed that he wrote the letter referred to without any authority from the Govern- ment for the statements contained in it. T. Lord Cranworth said it was perfectly true that the Prayer- book, before receiving the sanction of Parliament, was by convocation but no efficacy could be given to any alterations in it except by the Queen, Lords, and Commons. The Bishop of Carlisle thought the answer given by the Archbishop of Canterbury would be regar ded by the country with dismay. If it were really true that, convocation was to beconaulted npon the matters submitted to the rojal com- mission before Parliament made any enactment concerning them, be apprehended they would be simply playing into the hands of their enemies, who only asked for two years to enable them to revolutionise the church. He urged the necessity of prompt legislation upon the subject. The Earl of Derby declined to express an opinion as to the propriety of submitting the questions which had been placed in the hands of the c<mmjMtot)era to con vocation, but he was certainly of opinion that it was in the power of parlia-1 ment to legislate upon them without consulting convoca- tion.. The subject then dropped. The lferl of JOxaftejAwrj-gave notice that he should post- pone the second reading of the Clerical Vestments Bill for a I week. Several bills were advanced a stage, and their Lordships adjourned. In the House of Commons, Mr. Carington asked the Secre- tary of State for War whether it was true that the cavalry regiments who marched from Aldershot to Hounslow to take part in the intended review were left in the oamp entirely without rations until the following morning. Sir J. Pakington said the facts were not so bad as would appear in the question. The troops which reached Hounslow between eight and nine o'clock in the morning did not re- ceive their rations till four o'clock in the afternoon. No doubt there had been great want of care in some quarter, and he had been endeavouring to find out in what quarter. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, in reply to Mr. Hadfield, that after the 1st of January next the rate of post between this country tsiid the United States would be reduced from one shilling to sixpence. (This announcement was re- ceived with loud cheers,) The right hon. gentleman added that of the many propositions that had been made for cheap postal communication the vast majority had originated with the English Government, and that negociations were now in progress on the subject with Peru, Chili, and other South American states. During the last twelve months, too, he re- minded the House, the postal rate had been sensibly reduced with Sweden, Denmark, and Holland and the Government were in hopes to be able to carry the reduction still further in a short time. The House having gone into committee on the Reform Bill, Mr. Crawford moved a new clause, permitting voters for the City of London to reside within 25 miles of the nearest City boundary, and, after some discussion, the clause was added to the bill. On the motion of Mr. Russell Gurney, a new clause was ordered to form part of the bill disenfranchising persons reported guilty of bribery at Totnes from voting for the county of Devon; a, similar clause relating to Great Yar- mouth and the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk; a similar clause with regard to Lancaster and the county of Lancaster; and a similar clause respecting Reigate and the county o Surrey. Lord E. Cecil moved a clause disqualifying persons from voting who had been convicted of felony, larceny, perjury, or subornation of perjury. The committee allowed it to be read a second time, though the Chancellor of the Exchequer hinted his dislike for it; but, on the question that it be added to the bill, the Oppo- sition assumed a more decided tone, and Mr. Gladstone observed that the committee were perpetrating a grave error in introducing a new principle of criminal law into the Re- form Bill, a sentiment which was received with an approving cheer. The Solicitor General having expressed his concurrence in this view of the question, the clause was eventually with- drawn, its mover intimating that he should re-open the sub- ject on the report Faint and equally abortive attempts were made by Mr. H. Beaumont to carry a clause giving a second member to Hud- dersfleld; Mr. J. B. Smith, a clause restricting the opening of any inn or public-house on a polling-day; Mr. Dillwyn clause granting a second member to Swansea; and Mr. Monk, a, clause creating Clifton (Bristol) a new borough with one member. Mr. Gladstone moved a clause to the effect that South Lancashire should be separated into two divisions, each to have three members, instead of two each as proposed by the bill The clause was opposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and was negatived without a division. The next two clauses were negatived after a very short dis- cussion on each. One, which was moved by Mr. D. Griffith, was to enable a freeholder, copyholder, or leaseholder within a borough to be registered for the borough instead of for the county: and the other, by Lord Henley, to keep open the poll in counties till five o'clock instead of four. Colonel Gilpin moved that the four boroughs next above 10,000 inhabitants now returning two members each shall return only one member, and that Luton, Keighley, Barns- ley, and St. Helen's—four of the towns originally proposed to have representation conferred on them—shall each return one member. A lengthened discussion ensued, in the course of which the claims of Tiverton, Warwick, and Tamworth, three of the four boroughs which would be affected by the proposi- tion, were defended by their respective representatives, Mr. Denman, Mr. Walrond, Mr. J. Peel, and Mr. A. Peel (who proposed to find the four members by disfranchising the four smallest boroughs). Lord F. Cavendish and Mr. H. Beau- mont supported the claims of Barnsley, Mr. Whitbread and Colonel Stuart those of Luton, and Mr. A. Egerton thol1 of St. Helen's. Sir G. Grey supported the proposition of Mr. A. Peel. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said government had ado;pted the course which they thought most expedient, and in which they had been guides by the decisions the com- mittee had already arrived at and he appealed to tt- com- mittee not at the end of the session to unsettle what had been done, a course which he intimated might endanger the bill in the other house. Mr. Gladstone thought the committee would have great difficulty in tracing the connection between the modest pro. posal of Colonel Gilpin, and the flaming description given of it by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the momentous consequences to ensue from it, He contended that the com- mittee was not precluded by previous decisions frorm adopt- ing this clause On a division the clause was rejected by 224 to 195. Further progress with the bill was then postponed. Some other business was disposed of, and the House ad- journed. In the House of Lords on July 9, the Earl of Derby stated, in reply to Lord Stratford de Radcliffe, that he had received a telegram which showed that there could no longer be any doubt as to the fate of the Emperor Maximilian. He was shot on the 19th of June, in spite of every attempt to save him. The tone of the victorious party was defiant to all foreign powers, the United States included They refused to give up the Emperor's body. The French ministei was preparing to depart with his legation, but though hitherto unmolested he was apprehensive that he might be detained as a hostage for the giving up of Almonte. His lordship added that it was scarcely necessnry to say that he shared in the feelings of all their lordships with regard to this most unnecessary, cruel and barbarous murder, which must have excited horror in every civilised country. He de- clined to give any opinion as to whether their lordships should express their feelings with regard to this event by any public act. Lord Stratford de Redcliffe said his.mntiments on the matter were so strong, thot although he believed the govern- ment was prepared to do all that was right in the matter, he should feel himself bound to propose some resolution on the subject. The Railway Guards and Passengers Communication Bill was read a second time and referred to a select committee. Several other bills were forwarded a atage, and their Lordships adjourned. At the morning sitting of the House of Commons the houae, soon after it met, resolved itself into committee on the Representation of the People Bill. Mr. Locke moved a new clause, requiring the overseer, ¡in case a rate made on or before the 6th of January shall re- main unpaid on the 1st of June, to send notice thereof to the occupier. After some discussion it was arranged that the clause should be read a second time, and some amendments moved by Mr. Hardy were inserted, it being understood that the clause thus amended should be further considered on the report .}1r. W. Cowper moved that the borough of Hertford should comprise the towns of Ware and Hoddesden, and Mr. I)imidale supported the motion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said the discussion only showed that the power of the boundary commissioners was not understood. This was a matter for their consideration. Captain Hayter, who had a notice on the paper to add the towns of Shepton Mallet and Glastonbui-y to the city of Wells, said he was quite satisfied with that explanation, and should thei efore not bring forward his motion. Sir G. Grey asked if it was meant that the boundary com- missioners had the power of enlarging boroughs. The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied in the negative, but observed that the case of Ware, which was only half a mile from Hertford, would come within their powers. The motion was withdrawn. Several other clauses on the paper were then withdrawn, amongst them being one by Mr. Schreiber, that a second member be given to the borough of Cheltenham; one by Mr. Woodd, that the borough of Knaresborough do consist of the parishes of Knaresborough and Pannal; and one by Mr. H. Lewis, that two additional members be given to the H. Lewis, that two additional members be given to the borough of Marylebone. A new clause moved by Sir E Dering, that the county of Kent be divided into three divisions, each division to return two members, and which he brought forward, as he stated, not for the purpose of getting more representation, but that the county might be more equally divided, was negatived, as was also a similar clause by Mr. Henniker-Major with regard to the county of Suffolk. This was the last of the new clauses of which notice had been given, and the committee then, amid some cheering, proceeded to the consideration of the schedules. The new schedule A, which comprises the boroughs to re- turn one member only in future parliaments, was agreed to after a short discussion, in the course of which Colonel Dyott complained that injustice had been done to Lichfield as com- pared with Tamworth. Mr. Wyld made a protest against Bodmin being included, and Mr. D. Griffith moved that Bridgewater be included, which motion was negatived. Schedule B, which comprises the new boroughs to return one member each, was also agreed to without alteration, after a motion by Mr. Corrance to omit Stockton and insert Lowestoft, a motion by Mr. H. Beaumont to add Rotherhum and Doncaster, and another by Mr. Holden to add Keighley, were negatived. The remaining schedules were likewise agreed to without alteration, and the preamble of the bill passed through com- mittee, and it was arranged that the report should be taken at a morning sitting on Friday (July 12.) The sitting was then, at a quarter to seven o'clock, sus- pended. At the evening sitting, Mr. M'Kenna called attention to the enormous and dis- proportionate increase of Irish taxation since 1841, as compared with the increase in Great Britain, and canvassing critically the chief Budgets in that interval, he showed that while in Great Britain the taxation had increased between 1861 and 1861 at the rate of Be. 3d. per head, in Ireland the increase amounted to 10s. 2d. per head, and maintained that the imposition of new taxes unaccompanied by any countervailing advantage lay at the root of much of the political discontent of Ireland. Tracing next the causes which impeded the national prosperity of that country, he argued that the almost .simultaneous establishment of Free Trade and the construction of the system of Oontia«ntal raflwayvon wiefcprfaoipieB Ibftt cultural produce could be carried on them at a much lower rate than on the Irish railways, placed Ireland at a disad- vantage in supplying the English markets. He concluded by moving a resolution (after urging that the Governmentshould give some kind of guarantee to the Irish railways which would enable them to reduce their traffic rates) expressing an opinion that this disproportionate increase of taxation re- quires the immediate attention of Parliament. The motion was seconded and supported by Mr. Pollard- Urquhart and General Dunne, but, Mr. Monsell opposed it, advocating equality of taxation as the foundation for perfect religious equality—the want of which, and not taxation, was the cause of Irish discontent. Mr. Hunt remarked that the increase of taxation per head was generally accepted as a proof of increased prosperity or power to bear taxes, and pointed out that the great increase had taken place in the article of spirits. At the same time considerable relief had been afforded under such heads as coffee, tea, sugar, and wine the grants in aid of local taxa- tion, as well as the loans for public works, had been much larger in Ireland than in England. After a short discussion, in which Mr. Wlialley, Mr. Mon- sell. Lord Dunkellin, and other hon. members took part, the resolution was withdrawn. Mr. Bazley obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the Carriers Act. Bills were brought in by Lord Naas to amend the laws re- u lating to the custody of dangerous lunatics in Ireland, and to the superannuation allowances of the Dublin p dice. The Bans of Matrimony Bill passed through Committee, and the House adjourned.