investigation should not be an altogether | be assumed, was, in his opinion, most distinct one.

THE EARL OF HARDWICKE, in supporting the clause, observed, that the object was not in any way to prevent working men from entering into associations for the purpose of bargaining with the employers of labour. There was a fear that there were in the unions those who oppressed the working men, compelling them by force to join these associations; and he supported this clause because it tended to protect the free and independent working man.

prejudicial. Nothing could be more important to masters and workmen, and not only to them, but to the whole country, than that the truth should be ascertained, and that could be done in no other way than that which was proposed by the Bill.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY said, he could not but consider the Bill unfair. The fact was it was attempted to make use of the Sheffield outrages for the purpose of inquiring into trades unions under unfavourable circumstances, and he regarded it as extremely unfortunate that the most important question affecting the working LORD CRANWORTH moved at the end classes should be approached in a manner of clause to addeminently unfair.

Amendment agreed to.

"Provided also, that this Section shall not extend to indemnify from criminal Proceedings the actual Perpetrator of any Act of Outrage or other Crime; and that no Person shall be compelled to answer any Question the Answer to which might tend to criminate him as the actual Perpetrator of any such Act of Outrage or Crime."

This proviso was inserted in the original. Bill, but had been struck out in the other House; and he would point out that unless it were restored a man who might avow himself to have been the perpetrator of a crime would be indemnified, while others whom he might accuse as instigators of it would be liable to prosecution.

THE EARL OF BELMORE said, the object of the inquiry was not to bring persons to justice, but to ascertain the origin of the outrages which had been committed. The proviso having been struck out in the Commons, he was not disposed to accede to its re-introduction; and there was a precedent for giving an indemnity even in the case of murder, for in the prosecution against Charlotte Winsor, the mother of the murdered child, although there was reason to believe that she was a participator in the crime, was allowed to give

evidence.

LORD ST. LEONARDS expressed surprise at the warmth displayed by noble Lords opposite in discussing a Bill which had no party bearing. There was no ground for imputing that the Bill unfairly prejudged the question. There was no assertion that any class had committed the Sheffield outrage; but public opinion having charged it upon trades unions, those bodies had manfully come forward, and challenged the strictest inquiry. The inquiry was one of the greatest delicacy, and to stigmatize the Bill as unfair, and that it took things for granted which ought not to

flogging of women. He was tried at the | on shore, and also issuing instructions to same time, by the same court, and with guide naval officers in all similar cases the same result. There were four other which might occur again. With regard cases in which depositions were taken for next to the military officers, in answer to the purpose of indictment; but when these a letter from the right hon. Gentleman two bills against Ramsay and Woodrow opposite (Mr. Cardwell), dated May 31, the were ignored, it was not deemed advisable Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of on the part of both the Colonial and Home Hartington), on June 10, informed the CoGovernments to proceed further with those lonial Office that the Commander-in-Chief other cases then. The Earl of Carnarvon, had sent instructions to General O'Connor however, wrote to Sir John Grant that if directing him to institute immediate incircumstances should afterwards arise show-quiry into the two cases of Ensign Cullen ing that feelings in the colony had calmed and Surgeon Morris. On July 24 the Earl down, and there was any chance whatever of Carnarvon asked the War Office to state of getting a fair trial, he was to resume those the result, and suggested that these men proceedings. A correspondence also took should be tried by court martial and that place between the Earl of Carnarvon and officers should be sent out from England to Sir John Grant as to whether those persons constitute those courts martial, in order to might not be brought home to be tried in secure perfect fairness and impartiality. England, and it was decided between them General O'Connor approved that suggesthat it was not wise after the prosecution tion, and officers were sent out by the War had been hanging over these men for more Office, with the Deputy Judge Advocate than a year, to keep up those deferred and to assist them, and the result was that the protracted proceedings. It was thought two men were tried and both of them that it would be against the spirit of acquitted. With regard to the second porBritish criminal jurisprudence to do so; tion of the hon. Gentleman's question and that, moreover-what was of even which related to granting compensation more importance-the keeping alive of agi- for property "wantonly destroyed" during tation in the island would probably be fatal the insurrection, the hon. Gentleman to those important measures which Sir John seemed to have misquoted what he (Mr. Grant was carrying out for the social im- Adderley) said last year. What he said provement and amelioration of the State of was not that the Government would take the colony. Those persons were there- the matter into consideration as to whefore dismissed, and nothing further was ther compensation should be paid, but that done in their cases. So much for the civil the question was one that should be left officers. As to the naval officers, the right to the Government of the colony. It was hon. Member for Oxford (Mr. Cardwell) at first suggested that compensation should referred to the Admiralty as early as the be paid out of the Imperial treasury; but 18th of June the Report of the Royal that Her Majesty's Government at once Commissioners, and the Admiralty replied declined to do, and the matter was left, as on the 5th of July that in their opinion he said it should be, in the hands of the the conduct of the naval officers at Jamaica Government of the colony. As to the was in every way approved as far as their general question of compensation, all he service afloat was concerned, but that their could inform the House was that no apservice ashore on courts martial was deserv-plication from either side had yet been ing of disapprobation; but, at the same made for it. In answer to the last questime, considering that in every case they tion, he had to state that his noble Friend were young and inexperienced officers, and the Earl of Carnarvon had instructed the brought suddenly to the discharge of a Governor, Sir John Grant, to consult the most difficult duty, and that in the majo- Judge who presided at the trials, to rity of cases the proceedings of the courts have the notes of trials referred to, and martial on which they served were con- to ascertain whether there were any firmed by their superior officers, it was grounds on which any remission of the not considered necessary by the Admiralty sentences passed should take place. The to proceed against them. The Admiralty, result was that it appeared there were therefore, sent a despatch to Vice Admiral cases tried by Special Commission. Three Sir James Hope, who was in command of prisoners had been discharged; two of the fleet at Jamaica, approving generally them who had been found guilty had been the conduct of the officers afloat, but re-executed, and the others had been sentenced flecting severely on the conduct of those to penal servitude and imprisonment for

various periods. The sentence upon one [ remittance to London of the 25 per cent of those prisoners, who was convicted of now in the hands of the Mexican Finana minor offence, had been remitted to the cial Commission due to the Bondholders? extent of one-half his term, and that upon Bogle, who had been sentenced to penal servitude for life, had been remitted to ten years' penal servitude. In the other cases there were no grounds for interference.

AGRICULTURAL GANGS CHILDREN'S

EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION.

QUESTION.

LORD STANLEY said, in reply, that no information of the nature mentioned in the Question of the hon. Gentleman had been received by the Government. The only allusion which he could find to the subject was contained in a letter from an unofficial person, which he had received six weeks ago, in which the writer stated that from what he had heard the French authorities were not inclined to retain possession of the administration of the Custom House at Vera Cruz. As soon as he had received any positive information on the matter he should be ready to communicate it to the hon. Gentleman.

POLLUTION OF RIVERS-REPORT OF
THE COMMISSIONERS.-QUESTION.
MR. HARVEY LEWIS said, he would

MR. POWELL said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether instructions have been given or will be given to the Children's Employment Commissioners with a view to the extension of the inquiry beyond "organized agricultural gangs commonly called public gangs" to "private gangs and other branches of agricultural employment," which the Commissioners describe in their Sixth Report (p. xxiv.) as beg to ask the Secretary of State for the "beyond the scope of their instructions," Home Department, When the Second and whereon they consequently received Report of the Commissioners to inquire evidence admitted to be "very limited into the best means of preventing the and only incidental to the main object of Pollution of Rivers, which has been retheir inquiry;" and, whether the Govern- ceived from the Commissioners, will be ment intend to introduce during this Ses- presented to Parliament? sion a measure dealing with the evils disclosed in the recent Report? MR. WALPOLE said, in reply, that he could not give to the first Question of the hon. Member a decided answer at the present moment, as the matter to which it referred was under consideration. In reply to the second Question, he would observe that he thought it would be better to allow the Report to lie on the table for a little time before he announced what

grave

course the Government might be prepared to take with respect to any legislation founded upon it.

MEXICAN BONDHOLDERS.-QUESTION.

MR. HARVEY LEWIS said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether information has reached him from the British Representative at Mexico that the French authorities,

who have assumed the administration of the Custom House at Vera Cruz, have refused to allow the agent to receive the 25 per cent hypothecated to the Mexican Bondholders, and have remitted the funds set apart for them to the Mexican Financial Commission; and, whether he will apply to the French Government for the

MR. WALPOLE, in reply, said, the Report relative to the river Calder, in Yorkshire, and the Lea, a tributary of the Thames, was printed and under the consideration of the Commissioners. He understood it would be presented to Parliament in the course of a few weeks.

CASE OF MR. CHURCHWARD.

QUESTION.

MR. SERJEANT GASELEE said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the Lord Chancellor has revoked the appointment of Mr. Churchward as a Magistrate at Dover?

MR. WALPOLE: I think, Sir, the hon. and learned Gentleman will see the propriety of my forbearing to give a specific answer to his Question, until Her Majesty's pleasure has been made known in reply to the Address which was agreed to a few evenings ago.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTSNEW APPOINTMENTS.-QUESTION. MR. O'REILLY said, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, with reference to the Statement of

LORD STANLEY replied, that he had not received the papers named by the hon. and learned Gentleman. He had, however, telegraphed for them, and when he got them he would lay them on the table.

ARMY-SANITARY COMMITTEE.

the Under Secretary of State for India, | sworn before the British Consul at Cadiz that the earliest period at which the India on the 23rd February last; and, if so, Office could ascertain the course which the whether he will lay them upon the table Colonial Secretary was likely to pursue of the House? with reference to the new appointment in the Straits Settlement was the 18th January, he is aware that those appointments were authoritatively announced in the public papers long antecedent to that date; and, if so, whether he can explain to the House how this occurred? He must beg to explain that it was announced in November last in the newspapers that the new Governor of the Straits Settlements and other officers had been appointed; but in consequence of a Question which he put on the 11th March to the Secretary of State for India, he found that the first time the India Office ascertained the course which the Colonial Secretary would pursue in making the appointments was the 18th January, and he wished to know how it was that the newspapers were enabled to publish the appointments so long before?

MR. ADDERLEY replied, that it as suredly was on the 18th of January that the Colonial Office made the communication in question to the Indian Department. Whether previous information on the subject reached Colonel Ord through the newspapers he was not aware. All he could say was that he could have got no authoritative statement before that date.

ARMY-MEDICAL OFFICERS.

QUESTION.

MR. SYNAN said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, From what date it is proposed to give the increase of pay to Army Medical Officers; and if, in the new Army Medical Warrant, it is contemplated to change the denomination of, or to give any "brevet rank" to, Assistant Surgeons on completing their tenth year of service?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON, in reply, said, the increase of pay of medical officers in the army would commence from the 1st of next month-the beginning of the financial year. As to the second part of the Question, there was no intention to make any change.

CASE OF THE "TORNADO."--QUESTION. SIR ROBERT COLLIER said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he has received Copies of the Depositions of the Crew of the Tornado,

QUESTION.

SIR GEORGE STUCLEY said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, What is the name and date of the appointment of the Civilian Member of the Army Sanitary Committee referred to in Vote 17, Army Estimates; why, with his travelling expenses he is to receive £1,200 per annum; and, why a Medical Officer of the Army cannot perform the duties required from such Civilian Practitioner?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON replied, that the name of the civilian member of the Army Sanitary Committee was Dr. Sutherland-a name well-known as that of a very eminent man. He was first appointed to serve under the War Department in 1855 by Lord Panmure, who sent him out to make inquiry into the sanitary condition of our soldiers in the Crimea. In 1857 he was again appointed by the same noble Lord a member of the Commission to inquire into the sanitary state of the army, and his appointment to the discharge of the particular duties which he now performed was made by Sir George Cornewall Lewis in 1862. In answer to the second Question, he must observe that his hon. Friend seemed to labour under a mistake at which he could not wonder, because of the somewhat careless mode in which such entries were made in the Estimates. The salary which Dr. Sutherland received for the duties which he now performed was £1,000 a year, but he was a member of a Committee of which the other members were unpaid, but to whom an allowance of £200 a year was given for travelling expenses. The charge, therefore, was one which was not peculiar to Dr. Sutherland. In reply to the last Question, he would simply observe that there might, no doubt, be many medical officers in the army who were quite competent to discharge the duties in question; but Dr. Sutherland was a man of the highest possible reputation, and he doubted whether there was in Eng