Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

15 articles on this Page

IMPEMAlT parliament.

News
Cite
Share

IMPEMAlT parliament. In the HOUSE OF LoRDS, March 3, Earl Granville informed the Marquis of Salisbury that there was no truth whatever in the statement that Oeueral Gra had been ordered to withdraw his forces to SouaKim, -and at once re-embark them. ME. GLADSTONE'S VISITJO Lord Stratheden and of Mr. Gladstone's accounts published lrLfoeP 0f Russia at Copenhagen n I were well founded, Ern"e4S,«^ well founded! Mr Gladstone had received instructions from ^LordGran^^explained that the steamer in which Mr. Gladstone took his cruise arrived at the Orkney Islands sooner than had been expected, and subse- quently visits to Norway and Denmark were agreed upon by those on board, but though the Emperor of Russia and Mr. Gladstone met, not a word of political conversation passed between them. Mr. Gladstone had no instructions from the Foreign Office. THE DYNAMITE DISCOVERIES. Lord Waveney, having referred to the outrages by means of dynamite, asked whether means could not be taken to examine the luggage of passengers on their disembarcation from sea-going steamers, and to exa- mine luggage tendered for deposit- Lord Granville replied that the subject had not escaped the attention of the Home Office, but he thought noble lords would agree with him that there ought to be reticence as to the precautions taken by the Executive for the prevention of these outrages. Their Lordships rose at five minutes to five o clock. In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Marriott took his seat on his re-election for Brighton. He was introduced by Mr. Gibson and Sir W. Barttelot, and was received with loud and prolonged cheering from the Opposition benches. TRE pYNAM1TE PLOTS. In answer to a question from Lord R. Churchill, Sir W. Harcourt said the Government had given stringent instructions and taken measures for the detection of the emissaries engaged in the introduction of dynamite from foreign countries, but he did not think it expe- dient to state the nature of them. They were within the powers already possessed by the Executive, but if those were not sufficient the Government would lose no time in asking for further powers. AFFAIRS IN THE SOUDAN. In reply to Mr. Ashmead-Bartlett, the Marquis of Hartington read the instructions with which General Graham had been furnished, and gave an emphatic -denial to the report that that officer had been directed to withdraw his forces immediately to Souakim. The country, he added, had reason to be satisfied with the arrangements made for the organisation and despatch of the expedition, and with the admirable manner in which the officers and men composing it had carried out their task. Sir S. Northcote, while expressing his concurrence in these sentiments, asked for information as to the policy which the Government were pursuing and their intentions. The Marquis of Hartington replied that it was impossible for him to give fuller explanations at pre- sent, but the main and immediate objects of the Government policy were to secure the safety of the remnant of the Tokar garrison and of Souakim, which was still threatened by a considerable force. Sir W. Lawson, having obtained leave to move the adjournment of the House, insisted that the House had a right to know why the Government were carrying fire and sword among the brave people of the Soudan, the massacre of so many of whom on Friday last— butchered to make a Jingo holiday-he described as a cowardly and dastardly deed. They were entitled to ask what the Government policy was, and whether they had not done sufficient for military glory. Mr. Gladstone denied that there was any ground for regarding the operations in the Soudan as vindictive or carried on for military glory, and pointed out that the engagement at Teb was necessary to secure the relief of the remnant of the garrison at Tokar and the safety of Souakim, the maintenance of which, he contended, was essential to the interests of peace and humanity. Sir S. Northcote feared that the same want of con- sistency, clearness, and firmness on the part of the Government, which had contributed so much to the disasters in Egypt, was to be traced in their proceed- ings now. It was the duty of the Opposition to lose no Opportunity of calling upon the Government to tell the country and the world at large more distinctly than they had yet done how far they acknowledge their responsibilities. Lord R. Churchill said the demand that the Govern- ment should make clear their policy was the demand, not merely of the Opposition, but of the country and of Europe; and for the Government to allow the speech of the Leader of the Opposition to remain unanswered was to plead guilty. They had failed in the rescue part of their programme. Were they now going to retire ? The Marquis of Hartington did not see that anything had happened which made it necessary for the Govern- ment to give any further exposition of their policy than was given at great length in the recent debate. If there were further questions to be discussed an opportunity would be afforded when the supplementary estimates were considered. After a few words from Lord J. Manners the House divided, when the motion for adjournment was negatived by 150 to 103. THE FRANCHISE BILL. The adjourned debate on the Prime Minister's motion for leave to introduce a bill to amend the law relating to the representation of the people was resumed by Mr. Blennerhassett, who approved the ex- tension of household suffrage to Ireland, but urged that, unless it was accompanied by some scheme for proportional representation, the most cultured, enter- prising, and prosperous portion of the population would .be swamped. Mr. Walter heartily approved of the measure, but regretted that it was not accompanied by a scheme of redistribution. Mr. E. Clarke and Mr. W. H. Smith deprecated the increase of political power which the extension of the franchise in Ireland would give those who advocated the disintegration of the Empire. Mr. Goschen admitted that since the first introduc- tion of household suffrage the course of politics had shown the working classes to be desirous of doing right, but the power of resistance to popular demands had been notably diminished both inside and outside the House. This bill, combined with what had gone before, 'entirely took electoral power out of the hands of those who had hitherto enjoyed it, and it became all the more incumbent on the House to see that the rights of mino- rities were respected. This was especially the case in Ireland, and he regretted that not a word had fallen from Mr. Gladstone to show that he intended to take any precaution against the com- plete swamping of the loyal minority there. With regard to redistribution generally, he argued that that question now was of more importance than the mere disfranchisement of a few boroughs-and what he pressed the Government to make some declaration upon was the manner in which members were to be allotted to the great towns, and how the electors were to be allowed to vote. He had no wish to obstruct this bill, or to compel the Government to tie the two subjects together, but the House ought to know the mind of the Cabinet on the vital question how the minority was to be preserved from total disfranchisement. Mr. Parnell remarked that without any extension of the suffrage the strength of the Nationalist party would be 75, and with household suffrage it would be 90-a difference not worth the injustice of denying the Irish people equal treatment with their English brethren. As to the diminution of Irish members, when the time came it would be found that, whether population or the number of electors were taken as the test, Ireland could not be deprived of more than six or seven members. At present the Irish members were elected by very select constituencies, and an introduction of new classes and interests might lead to new divisions; but whether Ireland were included or not, he felt convinced that the lvr I2,embers would be able to carry out their policy. T 1' J evelyan defended the policy of extending to Ireland equal rights and privileges with the rest of the United Kingdom, and thought that the bill would make very little difference in the strength of political parties in that country. After some arguments from Sir J. Lubbock in favour of proportional representation, Sir S. Northeote commented on the main character- istic of the debate—that it had turned more on what was not in the bill than what was in it; and this he attributed to the rhetorical skill with which the Prime Minister lv«d kept all the most interesting parts of the Ministe • 1 1 ],-(• The really interesting portion question m a V'Hbution,foreverybody flit by in- of the subject as 1 k' couj,\ uot be settled by a mere ex- Stmct thattbe'iue. It wasmuch to be regretted that tension of the Tranch discussing this branch of the House was precluded from discu. the country the subject, but the del^1 ,,i.i j)e ample, oppor- how vital it was. bill to tunity, he remarked, 111 the future stage. discuss it. i rpservinc his Mr. Forster made some remarks, rtw- s, opinions on the redistribution views Minister.. T TT„v Mr. Gladstone also spoke briefly, and Sir John J having withdrawn his amendment, the Bill was bro g in and read a first time. The second reading was fixed for the 21st inst. After some other business had been agreed to, the House adjourned at ten minutes to two o'clock.

[No title]

THE FORMATION OF PETROLEUM.

HINTS ON PIG-KEEPING.

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS IN FRANCE.

GARDENING FOR THE WEEK.

WILLS AND BEQUESTS.

THE ANNEXATION OF MERV. -!

ABOUT SEALSKINS.

[No title]

MEMORIAL TO LONGFELLOW IN…

LIGHTNING STROKES IN FRANCE.

THE INHABITED HOUSE DUTY

!SILOS AND ENSILAGE.

[No title]