Page images
PDF
EPUB

They

not to be set down for the first day after the recess, but that more time should be given for hon. Members to consider its provisions.

MR. AYRTON moved the adjournment of the debate.

the Debate be now adjourned."
Motion made, and Question put, "That

The House divided :-Ayes 85; Noes 48: Majority 37.

compromise, but were not successful. They
therefore introduced a Bill based upon the
Report of the Committee, intending that
after the second reading it should be re-
ferred to a Select Committee.
thought that if the case of Gas Companies
had not been fully heard before, those
Companies would be delighted to go before
a Committee, in order that it might be
heard. But as soon as the Bill was
introduced, objections of a most extraordi-
nary nature were taken to it. Instead of
courting inquiry, the Gas Companies chal-
lenged the Bill on the second reading, and
petitions were presented containing the
most unfounded allegations. Nothing, for
instance, was more untrue than that the
Bill was drawn with the object of reducing
a guaranteed dividend of 10 per cent to
one of 7 per cent. The Act of 1860
limited the profits of the Gas Companies
to 10 per cent; but it had been suggested
to the Government that an alteration

Debate adjourned till Monday 29th April.

OFFICES AND OATHS BILL-[BILL 7.]
(Sir Colman O'Loghlen, Mr. Cogan,
Sir John Gray.)
CONSIDERATION. ́

Order for Consideration, as amended, read.

MR. NEWDEGATE said, he should not oppose the consideration of the Amendments on that occasion; but he hoped that the hon. Baronet who had charge of the measure (Sir Colman O'Loghlen) would Easter. postpone its further progress until after

Bill, as amended, considered.

Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time To-morrow.

RAILWAYS.

should be made in this respect. The sug gestion, he might remark, was first made to the Government by a Member of a Gas Company, who thought there ought to be a sliding scale. The Bill, accordingly, allowed the Gas Companies to carry their dividends up to any amount they could make, taking away the limit of 10 per cent, provided that after a certain amount was reached there should be a reduction in price at the same time that there was an increase of dividend, so that both the Companies and the public should be the gainers. He had been obliged to state what was the position of the Bill, on account of the objection which had been raised to the proposal for the adjournment of the second reading till after the holydays. The Gas Companies had made certain proposals to the Govern- And, on April 29, Select Committee nomi ment, and the Government hoped to come nated as follows:-Colonel WILSON PATTEN, Mr. to terms with them before the end of the CAVE, Mr. GoSCHEN, Mr. BONHAM-CARTER, Mr. Easter recess, and he therefore now pro-O'LOGILEN, Colonel PACKE, Mr. SCHOLEFIELD DODSON, Mr. WOODD, Mr. WHITBREAD, Sir COLMAN posed that the Bill should be adjourned and Sir EDWARD COLEBROOKE:-Power to send over the holydays. for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.

Select Committee appointed, "to inquire into the provisions made by Parliament for securing the completion of Railways within a prescribed time, and to report whether any and what altera tions should be made in the Standing Orders of 9 Vic. c. 20."-(Mr. Dodson.) this House requiring such provisions, or the Act

MR. ADAIR said, that the Companies did not object to the question at issue being decided by some competent authority; but they did object to the Parliamentary guaLOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPLEMENTAL BILL. rantee being destroyed, and this principle of On Motion of Mr. Secretary WALPOLE, Bill to confiscation introduced. There was, how- Local Government Act, 1858," relating to the confirm certain Provisional Orders under "The ever, an arrangement between the Com-districts of Gainsborough, Farsley, Bideford, panies and the Government that the matter should stand over until after Easter, and therefore he could not vote for the Amend

ment.

MR. POWELL thought the Bill ought

Canterbury, Chipping Wycombe, Worthing, and Wednesfield, and for other purposes relative to certain districts under that Act, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Secretary WALPOLE and Mr. HUNT.

Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 121.]

RAILWAYS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

On Motion of Sir GRAHAM MONTGOMERY, Bill

to define the duties of the Assessor of Railways in Scotland in making up the Valuation Roll of Railways, and to amend in certain respects the Valuation of Lands (Scotland) Acts, ordered to be brought in by Sir GRAHAM MONTGOMERY and Mr. HUNT.

Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 122.] House adjourned at a quarter after One o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Friday, April 12, 1867.

MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-Third Reading Judges' Chambers (Despatch of Business) (58); Vice Admiralty Courts Act Amendment (71), and passed.

Royal Assent-Canada Railway Loan [30 Vict. o. 16]; Alimony Arrears (Ireland) [30 Vict. c. 11]; Criminal Lunatics [30 Vict. c. 12]; Shipping Local Dues [30 Vict. c. 15]; Mutiny [80 Vict. c. 13]; Marine Mutiny [30 Vict. c. 14.]

[blocks in formation]

MR. HUNT, in reply, said, that no Report had yet been received; but that when it should be laid on the table. information reached the Government any

INDIA-FAMINE IN ORISSA.

QUESTION.

MR. SMOLLETT said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether he is willing to put upon the table of the House all the Correspondence that has passed up to the present time with the several Governments in India relative to the Famine in Orissa, and to the alleged enormous loss of human life from starvation in that Province in the year 1866; a subject prominently noticed in Her Majesty's Speech to Parliament at its opening upon the 5th of February last, but upon which no official information whatever has been communicated by Government to the House of Commons?

SIR JAMES FERGUSSON said, in

reply, that the late Secretary of State for India had appointed a Commission for inquiry into the subject, but they had not yet reported. The Report having been so long delayed, the Secretary of State had telegraphed to India to know when it might be expected. The correspondence, so far as it had gone, would be laid on the table immediately after Easter.

ARMY-THE WAR DEPARTMENT.
QUESTION.

GENERAL DUNNE said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, If it be true, as stated in the papers, that General Sir Henry Storks has been appointed head of a new department under the War Department, notice having been given in the House for a Committee on the re-organization of the latter?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he must beg to inform his hon. and gallant Friend that no part of the rumour in question was true. No new department at the War Office had been created, and no appointment of the kind made.

ARMY-REWARD TO MAJOR PALLISER. QUESTION.

MAJOR ANSON said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, What are the recommendations of the Ordnance Select Committee with regard to the reward to be given to Major Palliser; whether the Treasury has approved of those re

1

commendations; and, whether the Secre- | been called to the case of Mr. Grant of tary of State for War will lay upon the Kettleburgh (Suffolk), now in gaol for a table of the House all Correspondence be- disputed Church Rate, and the costs of tween the War Office and Major Palliser contesting the same, which he is unable on the subject? to pay on account of poverty; and whether he will be entitled to be released under any Insolvent Debtors Act now in force?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON, in reply, said, the Secretary of State for War did not act under the advice of the Ordnance Select Committee. He had authorized a reward of £10,000 to be paid to Major Palliser; and a further reward of £5,000 would be charged on next year's Estimates. It was not usual to refer these questions to the War Office. He must decline to lay the correspondence on the table, it being of a confidential character.

IRELAND-ESCAPE OF JOHN KIRWAN.

QUESTION.

MR. PEEL DAWSON said, he rose to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he can give to the House any addi

tional information relative to the

escape

from the Meath Hospital in Dublin of John Kirwan, a reputed Head Centre of the Fenian organization, and whether any of

the Police force who had the care of the

prisoner are in custody under the charge of complicity in the escape?

CAPTAIN ARCHDALL said, he would also beg to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, If he has received a report of the escape from Meath Hospital, while under the charge of a police constable, of a man of the name of Kirwan, supposed to be a Fenian Head Centre, and if he is prepared to state the particulars of his escape; and if he is the same Kirwan who escaped from the police on two previous occasions?

MR. WALPOLE said, in reply, that no information had come to his department respecting this case.

NAVY-GREENWICH HOSPITAL.

QUESTION.

MR. LIDDELL said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether his attention has been directed to a public letter on the subject of the assignment of a portion of Greenwich Hospital to the use of the "Seamen's Hospital; and whether he has any objection to state the reasons which have induced the Admiralty to select a quarter described to be the most unsuitable, upon sanitary grounds and general convenience, for the accommodation of sick and infirm sailors?

MR. CORRY said, he was very glad his of disabusing the public mind of the most hon. Friend had given him the opportunity unfounded impression which the letter to which he alluded was calculated to convey. The writer of the letter, adverting to an undertaking on the part of the Board before he (Mr. Corry) went to the Admiralty, said, "Since then there was a new Lord; " but he omitted to state that the new Lord of the Admiralty had been the first to urge on the late Government to assign a portion of Greenwich Hospital to the use of the Seamen's Hospital; therethe person to throw any obstructions in the fore, it was not likely that he should be

LORD NAAS said, in reply, that the report which had appeared in the papers was substantially correct. The police constable who had charge of the prisoner way. When he went to the Admiralty had been committed upon a charge of being privy to the escape. There would be an inquiry into the whole transaction, and till that had taken place he could not state what had really occurred. He was not prepared to say whether Kirwan was the same person who had escaped on two previous occasions. The prisoner was in the charge of the Dublin Metropolitan

Police.

MR. GRANT OF KETTLEBURGH

CHURCH RATES.-QUESTION.

MR. THOMAS CAVE said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has

his right hon. Friend the present Secretary of State for War had, according to the usual course, called on the Medical Director General and the Admiralty Director of Works to report on the subject; and, as the matter had created some agitation, he might, perhaps, be allowed to read one or two extracts from their Reports. The letter to The Times stated—

"The Admiralty have now the assurance to offer to the Seamen's Hospital Society a part of Queen Mary's quarter, which for the reasons I am about to describe is wholly unsuited as a hospital for the sick, and which the Admiralty know perfectly well cannot possibly be accepted by the society."" Now, he held in his hand the Report of the Medical Director General, one of the ablest

and most experienced Medical Officers in Her Majesty's service. He said

"I previously visited the Dreadnought in order to ascertain the probable amount of accommodation that would be required. I next, accompanied by the Captain Superintendent and the Medical Inspector General, examined the entire range of buildings in Greenwich Hospital known as Queen Anne's, facing the east, and Queen Mary's, also facing the east and south. In the first-mentioned range of buildings the wards or floors are divided longitudinally by a massive wall, and again subdivided by wooden partitions into small cabins or compartments, each capable of containing two beds. These, though they may have been suitable for old men in good health, are by no means suited to the kind of patients admitted into the Seamen's Hospital, even if all the cabins and bulkheads were removed. Besides, in this quarter there is no kitchen or means of cooking for so many patients. On the opposite side of the public road which passes through the hospital is Queen Mary's quarter, forming an angle facing east and south. The ground-floor in the eastern portion contains an excellent kitchen, in good repair and fit for use, capable of cooking for 800 men, with a good scullery, laundry, and washhouse, ample cellerage, and store rooms. It also contains a large number of baths, besides foot-baths, with an abundant supply of hot and cold water. In the first, second, and third stories above the ground-floor, extending round to the centre of the portion facing the school-ground, there are nine large wards, capable of containing upwards of 300 patients. I would, therefore, for these reasons, beg to propose that the portion of the building called Queen Mary's quarter, with the exception of the western half of the south block, might be offered to the Committee of the Seamen's Hospital."

The Director of Works generally concurred in this Report. He might also state that the letter in The Times had been laid before the Board, and they decided to write to the Lord President of the Council and request him to permit Mr. Simon, the Medical Officer of the Privy Council, to visit Greenwich Hospital and give his advice on the subject. As soon as the Board receive his Report they will pronounce their decision, but that decision will not be at all influenced by the anonymous letter which appeared in The Times.

[blocks in formation]

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE said, he would beg leave to interpose a question upon this subject. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it was not expressly agreed the other day that this Bill should be taken on Monday, the 29th instant, and whether the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Gregory) had not expressed his readiness to be in his place on that day for the purpose of this Bill being proceeded with, and whether all the Irish Members had not concurred in the wish that this Bill should be taken on that day?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I am sorry to learn from the statement of the hon. Baronet, that the arrangement I made for taking this Bill on Monday, the 29th instant, will occasion serious inconvenience to the Irish Members. Her Majesty's Government had no personal interest in fixing that particular day for proceeding with this Bill. They consulted, as they supposed, the convenience of the Irish Members in doing so. Of course, if it should turn out that to proceed with the Bill on that day would be inconvenient to Irish Members generally, I should have no desire to enforce the arrangement. But unless there is a general expression of opinion upon the point, I cannot do otherwise than regard myself as bound by the arrangement I have made. I can only regret that the hon. Baronet did not at the time that arrangement was entered into express the objections his friends had to it. Under existing circumstances, I have no power to change the day for proceeding with the Bill without a general expression of consent to such a proposal by the Irish Members.

OUR RELATIONS WITH SPAIN.

QUESTION.

COLONEL SYKES said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether in the case of a rupture be given to British shipping to enable with Spain, sufficient previous notice will them to leave Spanish ports?

LORD STANLEY: All I can say, Sir, in answer to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member, is that I most sincerely hope that the contingency his Question contemplates may never arise. Should it, however, unfortunately arise, every means will be taken by Her Majesty's Government to give warning and protection to British vessels in Spanish ports.

ADJOURNMENT FOR THE EASTER
HOLYDAYS.

MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I rise to make the customary Motion that this House will at its rising adjourn till Monday, the 29th instant, and in doing so I cannot of course omit noticing the remark of the right hon. Gentleman opposite that this Motion might interfere with the continuation of the debate upon his Amendment. Sir, the debate did not originate on this side of the House, and therefore it would be presumption on my part to guarantee that the debate should terminate to-night. All I can say is that as far as Her Majesty's Government are concerned they are most desirous that the debate upon the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment should be concluded and the division upon it taken to-night. I shall use all the influence I may possess to secure that object; and I hope, under these circumstances, there will be no opposition to the Motion for the Adjournment.

hon. Member for Oldham made a speech in which, although he expressed himself in favour of the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire, he yet held out hopes to the other side of the House, and to the Treasury Bench in particular, that circumstances might arise in which he would vote against the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment and would give his support to the Government measure. Now, Sir, a document has been put into my hands for which I am not responsible; and I hope, for the honour of Parliament, that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be able to deny its authenticity. We have all heard in past times of a thimblerig Administration, and if this document be authentic-and I have no reason to believe that it is not authentic-and possibly the hon. Member for the Anglesea boroughs will corroborate my statement-there is indeed the commencement of a thimblerig Government. Now here, Sir, are the minutes of a conference-a conference or conversation-which has taken place between the hon. and gallant Member for the county of Dublin and the hon. Member for Swansea, who sits below the gangway, together with one or two other hon. Members of the Liberal party. And it is this:

MR. OSBORNE: Sir, before the House assents to that Motion, I wish to bring a little matter under its consideration. I think that little matter will have some effect upon the debate, and probably also upon the division about to take place "At the request of certain Members Mr. upon the Amendment of the right hon. Dillwyn has committed the terms to writGentleman the Member for South Lanca-ing, and, at their request, he has shown it shire. Sir, I will put it in the form of a question, because you ruled last night that an hon. Member moving the adjournment of the House as a precise Motion early in the evening has the opportunity to reply, and as the reply in this case may be very important, I am very glad to make use of this opportunity. I accept the right hon. Gentleman's words with reference to me, and as "a sincere Reformer," speaking to a recent convert, I trust that I shall be listened to. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has commissioned the Secretary for the Treasury and the hon. and gallant Member for the county of Dublin to enter into any arrangement with one or two Members on this side of the House professing peculiar opinions. ["Oh, oh!"] If the House will not be impatient I will lead them gradually up to the little matter. I will give my evidence and I will shrink from nothing. It will be in the recollection of the House that in the course of the debate last night the

to Colonel Taylor to know whether it is correct. After reading it over, Colonel Taylor has admitted it to be correct-the purport being that Colonel Taylor undertook, as a gentleman and a man of honour, to press upon the Cabinet the desirability of adopting Mr. Hibbert's Amendment; and further, he gave an intimation that Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli were personally in favour of accepting it." Now, what I want to know is, was that hon. and gallant Gentleman commissioned by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House to enter into such an agreement? I wish to know whether he was commissioned to make this arrangement; and, if so, whether the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer has consulted his Cabinet upon the propriety of such a proceeding? I put to the right hon. Gentleman that question. The document I have read to the House has been placed in my hands, and the statement I have made will be authenticated by the hon. Member for the Anglesea burghs.

« PreviousContinue »