Page images
PDF
EPUB

the Hospital for Incurables at Putney, | wrong. Under these circumstances, it he found that a large number of the in- was the duty of the Government to mates were suffering from muscular either make a complete answer to the rheumatism. Captain Chatterton had a case if they could, or else confess that a severe attack in 1862 which obliged serious wrong had been done to this him to relinquish duty for a time. For gentleman. He (Sir Thomas Chambers) this he was reported; a court-martial was not a soldier himself—and he was was held in his absence; and, on the glad of it-he was only a lawyer; but, evidence, he was found guilty of malin- so far as he could see, the grievance gering or shirking his duty. When the he had brought under the notice of the sentence was read out to him at his House was a substantial one, and one bedside, he emphatically denied that he which, at any rate, justified an inquiry was malingering, and said he was then being made into the circumstances of suffering from excruciating rheumatism. the case in order that the truth might He was carried from Benares to Calcutta be arrived at. in his bed, and examined by the principal medical men there and four Presidency surgeons; they certified to the Indian Government that he was suffering from muscular rheumatism, and was unable to discharge his duty in consequence. Previously to the court-martial neither the surgeon nor the assistant-surgeon of the regiment examined him, though they said he was suffering from nervous irritability caused by indulgence. He came to England, and on his arrival the certificate of Sir William Fergusson and Mr. Canton stated that Captain Chatterton's inability to perform his duties was caused by his suffering from acute muscular rheumatism. Assuming that certificate to be a well-founded statement, it was a slander upon Captain Chatterton to assert that his inability was caused by his having lived too freely; but that had been asserted, and an order was sent from the Home Government to India that he should be put on half-pay; but he could not get even that until he reached England. He had undergone 13 surgical operations, and had incurred great expense in travelling for and obtaining surgical advice. He came to Europe for such advice, and some of the most eminent surgeons in Italy, France, and England were consulted by him. He was advised that if he would return to the warmer climate of India he might obtain some relief for his sufferings, and he accordingly returned to Calcutta, but he was soon turned out of the Calcutta hospital into the street. Now, the question was, which side told the truth? He (Sir Thomas Chambers) maintained that it was proved beyond a doubt that Captain Chatterton was suffering from rheumatism now, and had suffered from it in 1862, and therefore the verdict of the court-martial was

Sir Thomas Chambers

GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR said, he had always stood up in defence of his fellow-officers when he thought they had just cause of complaint on any ground; but, on the present occasion, he was far from thinking that any such ground had been made out. The facts of the case, as far as he knew them--and he had taken some pains to inquire into the matter-led him to think that, instead of being placed on half-pay, Captain Chatterton ought to have been required to leave the service long ago. He deeply regretted that the hon. and learned Member should have been induced to bring before the House this case of an officer who had been accused of malingering, a crime which, in the Army, was even worse than cowardice. It would be far better for a man to be in his grave than have so disgraceful a title. In the whole of his own experience in India he had never met with a single case of malingering. The hon. and learned Member had stated that this officer was wounded in India. The fact, however, seemed to be that he was simply carried to the rear among the wounded. Seven years after his trial he was, in 1869, again accused of malingering, and then removed from the Service; and now certain officers were maligned. The case was, therefore, one which ought not to have been brought before Parliament. He ventured to suggest to the Government that it would be better to allow cases of this kind to be dealt with by courts-martial in India than to follow the slow and cumbrous process now in existence.

LORD GEORGE HAMILTON said, that, of course, hon. Members had a perfect right to bring forward Motions of this kind for inquiry; but he submitted that before doing so, they should

years, and without a particle of evidence to justify such a proceeding, the position of those gentlemen would become intolerable. If the inquiry now asked for were granted, it would afford an opportunity for making charges against a large number of officers in the Indian Service who had rendered good service to the country, which Captain Chatterton had not, when no ground whatever had been offered to the House for adopting such a course.

THE SUGAR CONVENTION, 1864.

OBSERVATIONS.

make themselves acquainted with the facts of the case which they undertook to advocate. He regretted that the hon. and learned Member for Marylebone had not done so in this case, for after the statement the hon. and learned Member had made, it would be necessary for him (Lord George Hamilton) to rake up certain facts, which both for the character of the person involved and the honour of the Service, had much better have remained unknown to the public. This officer never was tried for malingering. The facts of the present case were that Lieutenant Chatterton, who joined the Army in 1857, was tried by a general court-martial in 1862 for MR. RITCHIE, in proceeding to call conduct unbecoming the character of an attention to the constant delays interofficer and prejudicial to good order and posed by France in carrying out the military discipline in that, at Benares, Sugar Convention of 1864, and in fulhe rendered himself unfit for duty by filling assurances repeatedly made to excessive indulgence in intoxicating this country on the subject, said, his drinks. The evidence was very clear object was not to complain of the action against the offender, and of the two of Her Majesty's Government, as reprewitnesses called for the defence one said sented by the noble Lord at the head of that Lieutenant Chatterton was not so the Foreign Office, or the hon. Gentledrunk as to be unfit for duty, and the man who so successfully represented other was unable to give much stronger that Office in this House-for they had testimony in his favour. Lord Strath- apparently done all that lay in their nairn, then Commander of the Forces in power for the best-but to strengthen India, approved of the finding, and on their hands in any further representaa subsequent occasion, when Captain tions they might make to induce the Chatterton sent in a memorial, the sen- French Government to carry out their tence, on inquiry made, was confirmed. engagements. The question was one of Lord Sandhurst succeeded Lord Strath- great commercial importance to this nairn in the command of the Forces, country, as the House would see when he and he was inclined to take a more stated that the quantity of sugar refined lenient view of the case. The charge annually amounted to 650,000 tons, and and the evidence were therefore care- was of the value of from £15,000,000 to fully considered by him, and subse- £20,000,000 sterling. Until within a quently sent home for the opinion of few years past the English sugar refining His Royal Highness the Commander-in-trade had been growing and prosperous, Chief, and also confirmed by him. He (Lord George Hamilton) held in his hand a letter written by Lord Sandhurst, dated the 5th of January, 1869, in which he stated that this officer was totally unfit to be in the Service. There was not one item of evidence which the hon. and learned Gentleman had been able to adduce that could afford ground upon which to upset the verdict of the courtmartial, if that was his object; and if it was not, he did not understand what case he had, since Captain Chatterton himself applied more than once to be allowed to retire from Indian Service. If the conduct of Army medical officers was to be made subject to examination and inquiry at a distance of 10 or 15

The duty

but it had now fallen into decline. That
decline was not owing to any want of
skill or of enterprize on the part of the
refiners, but to the unfair competition
which France was enabled to carry on
by the system of bounties.
was levied in France not on the sugar
refined, but on the quantity of raw sugar
that went into the refiners' houses, which
was supposed to make a certain yield of
refined sugar, and that supposed yield
was charged. It was important, there-
fore, that that yield should be exactly
ascertained. He could show from the
admission of the French themselves that
the actual yield was greater by 10 per
cent than the estimated yield. The
French refiner thus paid no duty on

But

this excess yield, but on exportation | bond as a substitute. There was a long he received a drawback equal to the correspondence on the subject between duty he was supposed to have paid, and Lord Derby, Lord Lyons, and the Duc the French sugar refiners were thus en- Decazes; but, notwithstanding all reabled to undersell the English refiners. monstrances, France had systematically The industry and skill of our refiners evaded that which she had promised to had long enabled them to stand even do, and we were now in the position this competition, but the system had that the Convention of 1864, which, as he now come to be intolerable. It was a had said, was our only locus standi, would rule with regard to raw sugar that the expire to-morrow, while France declined deeper the colour the less was the yield, to act upon the law which she herself and the French refiners had turned this to had passed, and now actually proposed their advantage, by artificially deepening to do nothing in the matter until the the colour of the raw sugar and obtaining 1st of March. What reason did she a much greater yield than was officially give for this course ? Within the calculated. In the case of the ordinary last month or two there had been ancane sugar the disadvantage resulting to English refiners from this manipulation of the raw sugar was great, but in the case of beet root sugar, which was largely manufactured in France, it was ten-fold greater. One might say that this was a matter which France would soon open her eyes to. As a matter of fact, she did open her eyes to it as far back as 1864, for it was at her instance that the Convention of 1864 with England, Holland, and Belgium was entered into. Under that Convention a certain scale was drawn up, which it was said would meet the requirements of the case. The English Government had loyally carried out the terms of the Convention; but France, which had originally proposed it as the champion of the abolition of bounties, from that time to the present had systematically evaded her obligations. It was consistently insisted on the part of England that refining in bond was the only way to give effect to the Convention of 1864, and a proposition was made in the French Assembly in 1874 proposing to establish that system on the 1st of May. The proposition was rejected by a small majority, but so strong was the feeling on the subject that it was again brought forward with the consent of the French Government in the same year, and carried by a large majority. It was then decided that refining in bond should commence on the 1st of July, 1875, at the very latest; but it was also declared that every exertion should be used to bring the system into operation at the earliest possible moment after the passing of the law. That engagement was not entered into with us, because our locus standi was the Convention of 1864, for which, however, we were willing to accept refining in Mr. Ritchie

other conference between England,
France, Holland, and Belgium, with
the view of inducing Holland and Bel-
gium also to refine in bond. A Conven-
tion to that effect was agreed to, and
the 1st of March was named in it, be-
cause it was necessary that Holland and
Belgium should get a law passed by
their respective Assemblies in order to
carry out the provisions of the Conven-
tion, and that could not very well be
done much earlier than March.
then that excuse did not apply to the
case of France because she had already
passed a law for refining in bond;
and further, the French delegate at the
opening of the Conference, had ex-
pressly stated that whatever dates Hol-
land and Belgium fixed for the com-
mencement of refining in bond, France
was bound to commence that system not
later than 31st July so that the delay
now proposed was a distinct breach of
this understanding.
slightest faith that France would carry
out refining in bond even in March;
but even if she did, it was a most
ruinous thing for our sugar refiners to
have to stand against those bounties
for another six months. If the present
state of things were not remedied, he
did not believe that in another month
there would be a sugar-refiner at work
in the whole Kingdom. It had been
said, why should they object to the
French taxing themselves to give us
cheap sugar? But it really was not a con-
sumer's question, for the consumer did
not derive any benefit from the system.
The drawback received by the French
refiner was £3 or £4 per ton, but he
only reduced his price just below the
price at which sugar could be made
by our refiners; that was to say, he

He had not the

reduced it not more than £1 per ton. | amount of capital lost, it was absolutely or at about the rate of 1-16d. per lb. necessary, whether by remonstrances or This was sufficient to close our re- by other means, to bring France to a finers, but not enough to enable the sense of her obligations. He, therefore, consumer to buy his sugar cheaper. earnestly trusted that the Government Besides the serious injury done to our would adopt some method by which the refiners, there was the great injury in- injury he had described would be remeflicted on our sugar-producing colonies died, and a prosperous branch of manuand also on our carrying trade. The facture in this country saved from utter right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of extinction. the Exchequer had not long ago expressed a hope that England would become the great emporium of the sugar trade; but that was out of the question if refining was to be put an end to in this country. Was all that ruin to be suffered for the sake of £1 a ton upon 120,000 tons of sugar, the quantity of loaf sugar per annum consumed here? After France had obtained the entire monopoly of the sugar trade, she would be able to dictate to us what price we were to pay. What was to be done in that matter ought, he urged, to be done quickly, because the Convention expired to-morrow. What would be the effect if France applied the same principle as she did in the case of sugar to all the other manufactures of this country? It would be of little avail that we could buy her commodities at a little below cost price, if our people had nothing with which to buy them, in consequence of the destruction of the industries by which they had hitherto been supported. He was not so foolish as to think that we should go to war for the sake of that treaty, but the present case was one of so exceptional a character as to require some exceptional treatment. Our sugar refiners were not afraid of fair and open competition. This was not the case of another country being able to produce an article cheaper than we could do, but that of a large manufacturing industry of ours being destroyed by a bounty. He was afraid to speak about our putting on countervailing duties, but the circumstances were so exceptional that we might be justified in doing something of that kind. We might tell France that until she fulfilled her engagements, we would not allow her sugar to come into our market, or we might put on a duty representing the exact amount of the bounty she gave her refiners when they sent their sugar to this country. Unless we were prepared to see hundreds and thousands of our people driven from their employment and an enormous

MR. SAMUDA said, he would not go over the same ground as his hon. Colleague had; but this he must say, that the amount of injury which had been done to this country by France in the sugar refinery question was very great. He did not want the House or the Government to pursue any course that would be against the consumers' interest; but this was a long-pending question between the people of France and this country. France had been much favoured by this country, but she had broken all her engagements with England. Lord Derby had put the matter to her in the simplest and broadest way when he said this was not a consumers' question; it was more than that; it was a question in which the action pursued by the Government of France had almost entirely destroyed the sugar-refining interest of this country and the whole of the capital that had been invested in it; and unless something was done speedily to remedy the evil, the sugar manufacturers in this country would be obliged to shut up their houses. He believed his hon. Colleague had under-stated rather than over-stated the magnitude of the mischief done by France to one of the largest sugar-refining districts of this country. It was melancholy to witness the way in which the sugar manufactories in the Tower Hamlets had one by one succumbed, owing to the causes so well described in the admirable exposition to which the House had just listened. The course that France was adopting was the simple one of bearing down, by unfair competition, the sugar-refining trade of this country, in which so much capital was invested, with the hope of recouping herself subsequently, when she had got the whole trade in her hands, by charging a large additional price for her sugar all over the Continent. It so happened that the soil of France was peculiarly suitable for the growth of beet, and that after the sugar had been extracted from

that root, the residue was nearly as | respect to the duties on wine to the prevaluable for feeding cattle as thejudice of the distillers of this country, root in its original state. There- and it ought to go forth to the Ministry fore, the French Government, by being of France that every part of the United enabled to throw into beet cultivation an Kingdom was agreed upon this pointenormous quantity of their land and to that the system of allowing a drawback employ a large number of labourers in to the manufacturers in France, in the sugar-refining trade, were able to order that they might compete with us recoup themselves for the large sum on unfair terms, was a system which which they most unfairly paid out of could not be tolerated by any country public money to their sugar refiners. which respected itself. The growth of In these circumstances we ought not to beet and the manufacture of sugar in stand upon formalities, and it would Ireland might be profitably carried on be advisable that the French Govern- were it not for the undue advantage that ment should be informed that the France gave to her sugar refiners. course of action they had adopted was contrary to all good faith and to their express agreement, and that until they put themselves in the right, we should no longer consider that we were under any obligation to regard them as entitled to be dealt with under the most-favoured nation clause of the Treaty.

MR. M'LAREN said, the question was one that was possessed of much interest for the Northern part of the Kingdom, where things were coming to a crisis with regard to it. There was only one sugar refinery in Edinburgh, and it had been working at a loss for a considerable time, and within the last day or two the proprietors had given notice to their workmen of their intention to stop the works altogether. His hon. Friend the Member for Greenock (Mr. Grieve), who was a partner in the largest sugar-refining business in the Kingdom, told him that things were in the same state in his part of the country, and that many houses thought of giving up their business altogether, which would cause thousands of men earning good wages to go idle. The mode adopted by France partook too much of the nature of the Old Bailey practice, of making a promise to-morrow in order to break it the next day, and the time had come when our Government ought to meet the matter in a very decided manner, and should teach the French Government to act like honest men. Within the last few years we had largely reduced the duty on the importation of French wines, as compared with those of Spain and Portugal, and we should take care that it was known that it was not too late for us to retrace our steps in that matter.

SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA said, that France had been greatly favoured with Mr. Samuda

MR. BOURKE said, he was sure that no one could be surprised that the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ritchie) had brought this subject before the House, because, if other hon. Members had seen and heard as much of the condition of the sugar refiners of this country as he had done within the last three or four months, they would be glad that the question had fallen into such able hands as those of the hon. Member. Nothing could be more conclusive than the hon. Member's statement, and he thanked him for the kind way in which he had spoken of the action which Her Majesty's Government had already taken in this matter, and for the terms in which he had referred to him personally. All he could say was, that it had given the greatest pain at the Foreign Office to hear of the great distress in the sugarrefining trade that existed in all parts of the United Kingdom, and he could assure the House that the Foreign Office had from time to time in the last few months repeatedly remonstrated with the French Government upon this question as it affected England, Ireland, and Scotland. At that hour of the night, he would not weary the House by going into the bygone story of the classification of sugar, but the debate must have reminded many of the older hon. Members of the time when the whole subject of the classification of sugar was gone into very fully, first by Sir Robert Peel, and subsequently by a Select Committee of the House in 1862. It was owing to the Report of that Committee, which the then French Minister of Finance had had translated into French, that the pernicious system that was then in force there was put an end to, and that sounder views on this question were entertained all over Europe. From 1864 to 1871

« PreviousContinue »