The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-03-13 00:00:00

iidPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

fethe House of Lords, March 8, in answer to Lord Cairns,
Graucille stated that it was proposed to adjourn
from the 19th at March to the sth of April, for the Easter
-

Rect.
on the motion to read the Oriel College, Oxford, Bill
the earl of Derby said there were points in it which were
important to the (lurch sand the College that should be well
sofindered by a select committee, for it involved a cotistittl-
sai principle and affected the patronage of the Crown.
The Bishop of London was very glad the noble earl had
thned attention to the subject, for there were strong objec-
tions to some of the proposed alterations—the suggested en-
dowment for the provost being especially objectionablq.
Lord Rellesdale had had both parties before him, and
te,sah he thought manse of the changes propoeed were neces-
sary, he objected to bills being brought forward to accomplieh
that which might lie done by order is council.
Earl Granville thought the objects of the hill were good.
lard Russell, in pursuance of notice, called attention to
the sums voted by Parliament for public education. He was
et opinion that, in comparison with what hail been
done Perth:RU.lF in Germany and the New England States,
,
education was behind-hand in England and Ireland. The
• ~,Ba of grants in aid had not been without result, but an
linun part of the burden was, as demonstrated by Canon
earsiessone, (brawn on the parochial clergy in consequence
of the unedlingneas of the landowners to promote educe-
lion. The clergy could not do all, and a large part of the
eossetry was without schools. It would be necessary, he
believed, for the Government next year to undertake •
general scheme. The relief of the rates from other burdens
might renaer it possible to procure some support to Weeds
out of them, but he intimated an opinion that public grants
meg be looked to as the main resource; the 4tuestion
of religious education required speedy attention. The
case of Ireland differed as to this from that of England.
Beth to per cent ens raised by local subscriptions,
and the State supplied only 40 per cent. ; but in Ireland
the State had to contriltute 93 per emit At all events,
share srivate emits formed so small a proportion of
the expeuditure as in Ireland, the State was entitled
to use• eider dismetion in the arrangements respect-
ing religious teaching. The Roman Catholic Bishops in
Ireland had, however, chinned to conduct the religious
Backing, even in localities where there was a considerable
Feat...tent population. The reports of the Board of National
Education in 1866 and 11507 pointed out this evil tendency.
Lod Russell himself considered a system of denomitiattonal
education in Ireland would gravely increase the want of
concorid that edema
Lor De Grey defended the Government for having decided
not to bring in a general measure of education at a period
whan it was hopeless to secure proper attention for it.
The Duke of Marlborough dwelt .n the increasing successful
results of the present aystera. The feeling of the usefulness
of voluntary efforts was growing. lie was himself entirely
convinced of the good effects of the existing denominational
system of education in England, and he deprecated any rash
interference with it by the Government.
After remarks from lord Lyveden. Lord Salisbury, Lord .
Grey, and the Bishop of tombs's and after some observations
be Lord Ilarn,why, who feared that education, if not properly
directed, might increase crime, mei by
Lord letter and the Duke of Cleveland, the subject I
droPPed.
After other unimportant business, their lordships ad-
joureed.
In the House of Common., Sir S. Northcote asked the First
Lord of the Treasury a bether he would state the lowliest of
the property of the Irish Church and the amount of charges
that were to be made upon it.
Mr. Gladstone said he was quite ready to give every official
Information in the shape of Parliamentary papers with re•
spec/ to the property of the Irish Church and the amount of
the charges to be made upon it, but he wished that as
regards the calculations that he hail smite the other night
oil all other estimates shoula be taken for what they were
worth as matters of opinion. From the hest information
he could °Maio, he had made the following estimates : -The
estimated aminut of the value of the property of the Irish
Church, exclusive of the value of the fabrics and sites,
were as follows s—The tithe-rent charge was estimated hi
round numbed s at 00,000,000 ; the proceeds of the leased
lauds and perpetual annuities at £4,000,000; the value
of the glebe lands and other lands let for short terms
not on lease at £750,000. These made the total pro-
perty of the Irish church, as estimated £lOOOO,OOO in
rouud numbers. With respect to tlie charges, the life
Interest of all bishops, cathedral dignitaries, and incumbents
was estimated at £4,900,000, the life interest of citratee at
£200,000, the amount of lay compensation, chiefly to clerks,
tertotss,and others holding freehohl appointments,at £OOO,OOO,
the nine of the ativowsons at £300.000. the private
meets at ers.lo,ooo, the build ing ch arge on the glebes at £250,000,
mid the annis required to provide for the grants to the
presbyterial) and other colleges and the College of SI aynooth
at el 100,0te, and the expenem of the commission at £OO,OOO
I year tor ten years at .0200,000, making a total of £8,660,000,
being a residue of £7,350,000.
The man, business of the evening was the Navy Estimates,
sad after eequiries and rem.. from several hon. members,
The House went into Committee of Supply, and
Mr. Childers explained the Navy Estimates; and first he
stated that their total was 09.996,000, viz , £8,164,000 effec-
tive services, £1,515,000 non-effective, and £316,000 trans-
port Services, which Is a reduction of £1,027,000 on last year,
and 01,300,e00 fnesu the year IaSTBS. These reductions were
iviried generally over all the votes, and after the accounts
had been corrected there would he a reduction of £199,000 for
wag., £73,050 victualling departments, £127,000 dockyards,
£57,000 stores, 0331.009 contracts, and £21,000 transports.
Be gated, that he had suceemied in concentrating all the
administrative departments of the Admiralty about White-
hall, and the general result of his changes was a eWillg of
£OO,OOO a year, with no injustice to oily single individuaL
Abont VMS) spear would be saved in the suirintentlenee
of the dockyaros, though there was an increase of £24,000
for wag's, and there would be a considerable saving In petty
charges for maintenance, Ac, while the great works
at Chatham, Portsmouth, and Malta would be pushed
on with increased vigour. Inquiries were also going
on into the victualling and hospital departments,
which he anticipated would lead to considerable reductions.
The mode of dealing with the fleet, he stated, had been to
reduce the South American, Pacific, China, I,chuie. and
Africansquatirons from 80 ships and 11,600 men toes' slops and
S.W.° men It hail been arranged that the Indian Government
should pay about £70.000 spear towants the expellees of the
wants kept in the Indian waters; and it sea proposed al-
most immediately to eend a eying squadron of some of our
*Vest vessels to viait the foreign stati, ns. and to despatch
a few of the Coastguard vessels on a cruise. The reduc-
tion of men and boys effected in the Estimates was
from C 0,770 to 6,010, to the credit of which, however,
the late Board of Admiralty was chiefly entitled.
After showing that at the end of the financial year pretty
nearly all the ships DOW in hand would be completed, he
annotuiced that two turret ships, which would he the most
powerful afloat, would be tail down at once, one at Pmts-
.,. and 0110 at Chatham. They would be 4,400 tons,
double .rews, 121 knots epeed, plated with 12.1neh and 14-loch
armour, carrying four 25-100 guns, and coking £286,000 each.
Another turret ram—an improved Hotsper—and Iwo
or three vessels of the Stench class completed the
leiipbullding programme of the year; and when it
was carried out we should have 47 armoured vessels afloat,
with :Os guns ; and these, with 66 efficient unarmoured ships
and a large !umber of vessels of the old type, which he
maiutained svitlemt going into close comparisons would
give Us a navy strssiger than that of any other natl.%
Mr. C'orry vin Heated at some length the policy of the late
Board, which he showed, before it went out, hid prepared
for a reduction of eeesesse on last year's Estimates, leaving
only £305,000 to Mr. Childers' credit. Criticising the pro-
mote]e of the year, he expreseed serious doubts whether the
reimettene se sue Admiralty establishments were 016 e, and
etrrney i.iuj cted to the laying dewn of the two new turret
ships until the Captain and .11,.nareh had been tiled at sea.
A general approbation of the main features of the Esti-
notes was expressed by Mr. Gourley, Colonel Sykes, Sir C.
Wnweeld. Mr. Breeden and Mr. Greses ; and the first three
v"tss-03.300 men and lat,ys, £2,702,353 wages, and 01,112.300
vis .1, and clothing fur the seamen and marines—were
agreed to.
The Home afterwards adjourned.
lathe Meuse cif Lords, March 9, the Duke of Somerset, in
putting • question in reference to the paper, lately presented
to Parliament respecting missionaries in China, referred to
the outrage committed on British subjects at Yang-tchou.
What the noble duke wanted to know was what right have
wet,, send missionaries into the interior of the country to
convert the Chinese? We did not like it events this country.
It was most littlest and unfair to employ our naval forces
against the Chinese in support of the missionaries. He did
not object to the despatches of either Lord Stanley or Earl
Clarendon on the subject, but what he complained of was
that they did not go far enough. Ile contended that our
friendly relatioss with the Chmese Government were pre-
jieliced ivy proceedings like that which happened near
Nanking. The Goverement wanted to reduce our naval
strength in Chinese waters, but to do that they must reduce
the missionaries, for every missionary expedition required a
gunboat. They were actually missions of gunboats. lie
altogether objected to our forcing relig.on down the throats
of the Chinese. Ile wanted to prevent these missionaries
from going to C'hitfa. It was no axe saying let them go at
their peril, for in case of a riot or disturbance there would
be an appeal to Pekin, leading perhaps to very great d-
culties betweeu the two Governments.
Lord Clarendon admitted that the state of things was
extremely unsatisfactory. He did justice to the unsel-
fish earnestnesa of the miesionaries u but they really
needed to le protected against themselves. They had
certain Treaty rights, hut the feeling of the whole popu-
laden in Chins wan opposed to their settlement in the
interior. They could not, how seer, perceive the consequence
of their own acts. It was not the fault of the Government,
which had issueil very clear Instructions and recom-
mendations to the London Missionary Society, extracts
from which Lord Clarendon read. It was intended
rigidly to adhere to the principle of the.. The
principle was that missions could not be protected
where no Consul resided, or in any case by mea-
sures of coercion by Her Majesty's naval force.
The Bishop 01 1,1. David's agreed antis the need of the use
of caution by missions in China, but he doubted the alleged
universality of aversion in the Chinese people from Chris-
tianity. He earnestly hoped the British Government would
never endeavour to put down niissionary effort, hut mis-
sionaries whea they diti not abide by the advice ot the Go.
vernment acted at their own risk.
The Bishop ef Peternorough thought the propagation of
Christianity at least es Importlnt as British trade—the opium
hale for instance in defence ef which we had once under-
taken a costly wsr. Ile believed the missionaries would not
withdraw from their work out of respect to the intereets of
commerm. Ile did not mean that missionariea ought to be
followed by an army.
Lord Grey agreed that there should be one same rule in
respect of the trader and of the missionary. It was to be
lammited that we had at different times enforced immoral
branches of trade on China. Bat if a British subject would
force Ida way MD) the interior, whether a trader or • InlB-
- it might to be unuerstood that he waa not entitled to
mot. ction by arms.
lord Shafteeleiry sympathised with the spirit of the Bishop
of Peterborough's defence of the miesionaries ; but he thought
fright to state that they were not sent ont by any of *le
great missionary societies, which always showed as mush
jinigment as zeal.
Lord Clanricertle, in moving for certain returns, made
ohservatiom on the proper rule to be adopted in Ireland as
to granting the aid of the pollee for private purposes, with
reference to the attack on Mr. Scully at Ballycohey. He
preceded to remark Oil other ontrases which hail occurred
in Ireland. Whatever the solution 1)t the land question, the
promulgation of various theorim on which had a certain
he feared, with those outrages, the law ought at
all events to be carried out.
Lord Dufferin said the papers were not in a fit state to he
produced at present. Ile etated what had been done by the I
Government, hut the outrage at liallycohey had happened
while the late Government was in office, and he referred
Lord liatiricarde to the Duke of Abercorn for further in-
formation on the points in question.
The Duke of Abercom explained the facts of the case.
Mr. Scully was himself chiefly to blame, and no blame, he
thought, attached to the police. Still less was the late
Government in fault for what had occurred.
Lord Granville observed that the dmire of the Government
reno dy Isiah grievances was quite compatible with a
decided resolution to carry oust the law.
Their Lordships afterwards adjourned.
In the House of Commons, Sir Thomas liateson asked the
Chief Secretary for Ireland-1. Whether Captain alackey,
the Fenian convict, who ta reported to have received an
unconditional pardon from her Majesty's present advisers,
was the same individual who last year killed a police con-
stable at Cork, who attacked and set tire to a police
barrack at Ballyknocklane and seined the arms of the
constabulary belonging to that station, who alan
attacked and rifled the Martell° Tower at Pots in
December, her, and who was Implicated In other
owl:meg at Castle Martyr, Knockadone, Kilmallock,
Kficooley Wood, and elsewhere. 2. Whether the said
Captain Markey hail. in 106, been arrested by order
of toed Kimberley, under a Lord.Lieutenanta warrant, and
had been discharged in the mouth of April following, on hie
&dewily pledging himself in writing not to return to the
Veiled Kingdom, 3. And, finally, whether this man was
the criniisal, who, for these repeated outrages, was, on the
20th of March last, sentenced by the present Lord Chancellor
to twelve years' penal servitude?
Mr. chichester Forteseue said the statements were sub-
stantially correct, with but one exception, and that was
that the prisoner Alackey hail been discharged losiui
&tighter). There was not the slightest intention (0 remit
soy prtion of the sentence (cheers and renewed laughter).
Mr. Beckett Denison asked the Under Secretary of State
for India whether it was true that the Indian Government
haul suleddisel the Ammer of Aleghanietan with money
mei arms and, if so, whether the subsidy was to be OD an-
nual one, and what conditions are attaehed thereto?
Mr. Grant Dan said the late Viceroy ware the Aralar six

lees ot rupees, and also promised another six laes, and pre-
sented him with some arms. 'the word
.isuhsidy was not as

appropriate o;;;:a71.a-tiTei;:w;re-nO.diciOn;Or-P7o1;;ise of

„ -
any annual payment.
In reply to Nlr. Hadfield,
Nlr. iilad,tone stated that, on the night of the 23rd, he
sliould move that the Howse do adjourn until the 31st inst.
Mr. Locke King Biked leave to bring in a bill for the
better settling the real estates of intestates. Ile said, in the
vase of a man dying without a will, the bill would assimi-
late the laws relating to land to the laws relating to personal
property. lie denied that his onject was to introduce the
law of primogeniture as it prevailed in Francs.
The bill having been seconded,
Mr. Stapleton and Mr. Holdney objected to the measure.
Mr. lieresford-Hope referred to the two divisions which
took place on the same subject In 1(.59 and 1866, when the
bill was rejected by very large majorities, and said the prin-
cipal opposition then came from coma members of the Liberal
. . . .

Government. Ile believed the bill did not work satisfactorhy
in countries where it was the law, and he should oppose the
bill at its 5001001 reading.
Mr Walter thought a measure of such importance should
be dealt with by the Government.
Mr. Hatfield supported the hill.
Sir L. Palk strongly objected to the measure.
Mr. Gladstone said he understood there was no intention
to divide the House. He believed the subject could he dealt
with better by the Government, but he could not pledge the
. , •

(mvernment to deal with the cinestion jllat at present, its
they have so many measures on their hands lie hoped,
however, that the House would allow the bill to he brought
in.

Mr. Henley hoped the title of the bill would be altered to
that of a bill for the colltiscation of the 40s. freeholds.

Leave was then given to bring In the bill.
Mr. V. Harcourt moved for a ielect Committee to inquire
into the law affecting the registration of borough voters. In
support of his motion Mr. Harcourt descanted at length on
the errors awl liard•hips arming f,om the present system of
making the Rate-book the register, and suggested the ap-
pointment of a rewstrar of voters In every borough.
entirely Independent of the overseers. Ile suggested, too,
varbeis improvements in the mode of making claims and ob.
ections, which woukl simplify the process of revision, and
would remove many of the t•bstaeles encountered by working
men in getting on the register.
The motion gave rise io a short conversation, turning
idowst entirely on the technicalities of registration, awl on
the practical disfranchisements arising from the defects of
he law. Mr. Mathlione spoke of the else of Liverpool, and
Mr. Millie of Chelsea. Lord Sanibel suggested that the in.
qulry should be referred to the committee appointed the
other evening:. while Mr. Collins alone was of opinion that

the, law was satisfactory.
Mr. Bruce admitted that grave objections had been made
out against the present system of registration, all of which
arose from the mistake of using the Rate-book for po-
litical purposes. Ile assented cordially to the proposed
" -----

Inquiry.
Mr. Stapleton obtained leave to bring in a Bill to alter the
mode of electing Representative Peers for Scotland and Eng-
land, though Mr. Gladstone, in assenting to it, inclined to
the opinion that the initiative ought to be left to the House
of Lords in such a matter
. . . .

Ihe remainder of the sitting was occupied by a short de-
bate on the Sale of Liquors on Sunday (Ireland) Bill.
ajor O'Reilly, Who moved its SOCUIId reading, explained
tIIV it propo,,ed to close public-houses at nine en Sundays in
towns :tint seven in the country, and that it olso gave p.,wer
to the local authority to adopt seven o'clock for the hour of
closing in towns. 111 r. Peel Dawson sod Mr. Brewer sup-
ported it, and It was opposed by Mr. Murphy, who objected
chiefly to the 7 o'clock restriction, and deprecated legislation
until the whole licensing system had been dealt with On an
appeal from Mr. C. Forttscue, Mr. Murphy suspended his
opposition until the next stage, and the bill was read a second
time, and the Mouse adjourned.

In the House of Commons, March 10, Lord R. Montagu
moved the second reading of the Contagious Diseases
Animals) Bill Ile stated that since the bill had heen
Introduced, the Government had brought in a lull of their
own. He hail no wish to put his 1411 in opposition to that
of the Government, and he did not think they would come
Into antagonism, because they were totally distinct and
separate measures, and dot not trench upon the same
ground. lie had suggested to the Government that the
two bills should be read a second time, and referred to the
same committee, but the Government were anxious before
assenting to such a proposition that the subject should
undergo full discussion in the House. Ile contended that
any bill which dealt merely with the movement of cattle in
England, without giving security and making regis-
latiom to prevent the access of a new disease would
be one-sided, and ought not to be adopted. The
only way to guard against contagion was to prevent
contact between foreign and Etigliah cattle. The bill pro-
posed that at all ports where foreign cattle were landed
markets should be established, that the cattle should be
slaughtered as soon as landed, and should only be allowed
tic go inland as dead meat. All the objections which had
bees raised against this scheme might be summed up under
one head, namely, that if separate markete were estab-
lished the price of meat would be artificially nailed.
If that were really so he adulated that it would he
a fatal objection, but he disputed the accuracy of the asser-
tion. During the cattle plague separate markets were
established, on the 11th October, 1867, at Liverpool,
Manchester. Birmingham, Southampton, and in the Metro.
polls. In 1863 the highest price of meat in Liverpool was
7id per lb., aud the lowest Pd. Meat then rose throughout
tine country, and was at its highest in the beginning if 1860,
when it began to Lill again In 1860, the highest price in
Liverpool was 9c1.. and the lowest ad ; but alter the eaten-
, lishment of separate markets the price fell, and in 1868 the
highest price was id , and the lowest 4d. ; and in the inland
towns it was actually less than in ports where foreign cattle
were landed. lie altogether denied that it was the producer who
raised the prim, of meat to the consumer, and argued that
it was the middleman, or butcher. Prices did not depend
on importation, but importation depended on prices. When
the oGees tell in England, the foreign breeder sent his cattle
to France, Valentin. or the Rhenish ono/dices, but when the
wholesale prices were high here, the foreign importer was in-
duced to semi over his cattle. The present bill would, he
believed, have the effect of getting rid of the middleman
and his profits, by making the wholesale prices higher and
the retail prices lower.
Mr. Headline moved as an amendment that the bill be read
a second time up Ii that day six months. Ile objected to
the bill, that ft perpetuated all the existiog Acts of Portia-
merit, which were nine in number, and dated from the
midole of the reign of George lii.; and also because in
principle it was antagonistic to the Government measure.
The hill sought to make the separate market system per-
manent, and part of the normal institutions of the country,
and at all Hines applicable tin the iinportation of foreign
cattle. He strongly objected to the system of separate
markets, on the ground that it was to all intents and pur-
poses a return to the old exploded system of protection.
Mr. Norwood seconded the amendment.
Mr. Reed simported the principle of the bill, which was
the .tablishn,ut of separate markets for foreign cattle. He
denied that high prices were attributable to the legulatMna
requirin4 foreign cattle to be slaughtered at the out-ports.
The real cause was the drought of last year, which had been
most dims rous to the aunimer Itrsde..
Mr. W. E. roister, on the part of the Government, said
he felt himself called ulion to oppose the second readiiig of
the bill. Ile objected to it because it perpetitated the exist-
big Acts, whereas it was desirable that for the future there
should only be one Act, and because it laid down as a •
rMe that all cattle imported from al iroml should be
compulsmily slaughtered. If such a regulation were
enforced it would virtu:di". destroy the foreign cattle trade.
The plan of the Government was, that discretionary
power should be given to the Privy Council, to be used upon
the responsibility of the Government. As tel prices, he
contended that it was impossible to interfere with the trade
without affecting the price ti the cm.sumer. In the next
place, he tail not think that the Government, out of the con-
solidated fund, ought to be called upon to make provision
for the niarkets that would be necessary at the outport..
His three main objections to the bill of the noble lord were,
that it made consolidation difficult, that it did not lay down
to what extent discretion was permitted, and, lastly, because
it would Lunt Parliament in a difficulty as to making provi-
, dons for markets. Be asked the noble lord not to go to a
division bitt to withdraw the hill with the view of having a
full discussion upon the Government measure.
• Mr. Selwin Ibbetstin thought the Government bill was more
likely to deal comprehensively with the subject than the bill
of the noble lord, but at the same time it might facilitate
discussion if both schemes wers referred to the same coin-
mittee.
Mr. Dent objected to read the bill a second time, ors the
ground that by reading it they would give au assent to its
principle
-After some further discussion, amid calls for a division,
Mr. Bruce said it would be impossible to consider the two
bills together.
The House then divided, and the nunibers were—
For the second reading .. 197
Agidust
• •
The 1411 was accordingly rejected.
The Solicitor-General moved the second reading of the
University Tests Bill, tie explained that the 1411 was identi-
cal in Its provisions with the measure of last year. With
regard to the Universities, it compelled religious freedom,
and with regard to the colleges it only removed all restric-
tions from their freedom of action in this respect which
had been Imposed from time to time by Parliament itself.
The battle of belief and unhelief was going on now as it
always had been ; but looking to bygone times, Christianity
had no reason to be afraid of the ultimate result of the
great struggle. With the immense advantages which the
Church of England possessed, it was her own fault if she
were not perfectly safe. She was perfectly safe if she did
her duty ; and if she did not do her duty she had no right to
appeal to Parliament for protection. The abolitim of these
, tests was inevitable sooner or later, and he advised his.
members opposite to take counsel in time, and to accept the
inevitable rather than continue to fly the flag of no aurren-
der " with the certainty of its being torn down very shortly.
Mr. Mowbray moved, " that the bill be read a second time
upon that day six months." Ile said he should not have
taken this course if there were any prospect of a comproinise
being a2cepted, but aa every concession on the part of the
Universities had been uniformly rejected, the opponents hail
no alternative but to say "is," to the second reading of
the bill.
Sir It. Palmer moved the adjournment of the debate,
which was agreed to, and the House adjourned.