The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1883-04-21 00:00:00

SATURDAY, APHIL 21, 1883,

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

taX PENSIONS TO LORDS ALCE3TER AND WOLSELEY.
In the HOUSE OF LORDS, April 16, Lord Granville, in
taa,cetal terms, proposed addresses in answer to Her
ilestrrs messages respecting the pensions to Lord Alcester
Zu Lord Wolseley.—His lordship said—l rise to move that
e messages from Her Majesty recommending pensions to
Ze4rd Alcester and Lord Wolseley be now takea taio con-
"ration. Your lordships will remember that six months
;Ile I. had the honour, and 1 considered it a great honour, to
elODOse to your lordships votes of thanks to Admiral Sir
Z",aanchamp Seymour, and General Sir Garnet Wolfe:day, and
Zabae gallant sailors and soldiers who were under their orders
'aril* the operations in Egypt. I made a statement then
Of the grounds on which I thought those thanks ought to be
given- Your lordships received that statement in the most
cordial manner. That statement was followed by the
noble marquis opposite, who expressed himself in very
reng terms, which showed that coMmon ground existed
aetween us in thinking that those distinguished officers
ere tally entitled to your lordships' thanks. (Cheers.)
I remember aright with regard to Sir I3eauchamp
rnnour the noble marquis stated that I had said nothing
aa the way of praise which was tot due to him for the
increase which he had ocaducted in such a manner as to
crease the reputation oi England and to assist our diplo-
saatic agents. Witft regard to Sir Garnet Wolseley, the
11:11,_e Marquis pointed out that he was remarkably active
a "4 marchers through the country, and that while he had
nacnmplete mastery of details, it at the same time in ,
s,‘4, !ay interfered with or narrowed the general scope of ,
.;a7, TAM A unanimous feeling was shown by the vote
x" a`cfl your lordships gave on that occasion. (Hear, hear.)
he already stated, as your lordships are aware, that
I;Z° Queen, acting in concurrence with the feelings that were
ewn by both Houses of Parliament on that occasion,
"as conferred various rewards and honours on the naval
tir military officers under their commend. Among others,
e queen has conferred the honour of two peerages upon
_aord aacester and Lord Wolseley who have already been
Welcomed to your lordships' House. I read to-day, with
terY,a great interest, the speech made by a noble and gallant
narshal, who himself owes his coat in this House
f, distinguish military services, and who, referring to
i!!'e OPhaion of the Duke of Wellington, said that in this, as
former times, men looked forward to a seat in the House
;s4 Lords as the highest honour to which they could attain.
fat the obligation is not entirely on one side. There have
"e_ell discussions as to whether the existence of the House
Lords in the past, in the present, or in the future, was
et good or for evil. But on one thing there is perfect
:naninaity, and that is, that the House does increase its
ffi
arciencY and its popularity in the country by the accession
inaraeu who have rendered great services to their country.
rear, hear.) I beg to move, in the first place, "That an
Jrable address be presented to her Majesty to thank
er, Majesty tor the gracious messages, and to inform Her
—*Nelda' that, taking into consideration the important
eArVices rendered by Frederick Beauchamp Paget, Lord
"4ceaster, Admiral in Her Majesty's Navy, in the course
11 Isle recent expedition to Egypt, and that Her Majesty
• detsirous to confer some signal mark of her favour for
nee distinguished services, this House will cheerfully
„"enetts in enabling Her Majesty to make provision for
I.e"rlng to the said Frederick Beauchamp Paget, Lord
',feeder, and to the next surviving heir male of his body, a
Pension of £2,000 per annum." (Cheers.)
The Marquis of Salisbury: My lords, I rise with very
great pleasure to second the proposal of the noble earl,
"snd the more pleasure I feel in supposting it the more
' I feel that many words are not necessary to commend
aa" to the acceptance of your lordships. It is pleasant to
_wine across a subject on which all are heartily agreed, as
we now are, in the duty of paying due honour, and in
_ng due support to that hononr when paid in the case of
pa:1,28111a, bed services to the Crown; and I think the noble
a7',Was very happy when he called attention, not only to
-"e smarty sympathy with which this House especially re-
nose who have distinguished themselves on the
LeefUt or in the field, but also to the great accession to the
fittenee, power, and dignity of this House, which is con-
'erred by their presence among us when the Sovereign adds
• eas to our ranks. The proposal which the noble earl has
17,p) justified by many precedents. It is in accordance
"I general usage upon these occasions. There never was
Z_Proviaion better deserved by those who earned it at the
tends of the Government and Parliament, and there never
7_llll one which will be more heartily supported by the
"itintrY. (Cheers.)
The motion +and a similar one in regard to Lord Wolseley
'ere then pot by the Lord Chancellor eeriatim, and were
"eelared fry hlm to be agreed to nem. con.
THE FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE.
The Duke of Richmond and Gordon called attention to
:ate Prevalence of foot-and-mouth disease and to its con-
sinued importation from abroad, and moved for any cone-
-spendent:4s with foreign Governments on the subject. While
admitting that the Government had done much to check
the
14. importation of diseased animals, he contended that
- ought to stop the trade with the United States, from
Zafich one ship alone had brought more diseased animals
than had come from France in a year.
The motion was seconded by Lord Vernon and supported
"1 the Marquis of Hertford.
_ Lord Carlingford in reply, pointed out that the only remedy
riggested was total prohibition of the import of live stock
:loin abroad, the effect of which would be a large increase in
ze,_Priee of meat without giving absolute immunity from the
risk of Infection. He did not think the circumstances would
.arY so drastic a measure, but he promised that no reason-
_ e effort should be wanting to check the spread of the
susease.
haThe motion Was agreed to; and the Army (Annual) Bill
s "ngs heel: read a third time and passed, their Lordships
010 as Pen minutes to eight o'clock.
THE PARCELS POST.
lain the HOUSE OF Comm, Mr. Stuart-Wortley asked the
osta:taster-General whether a circular had been issued to
:tail carriers, forbidding them to carry after the and of July
anY parcels not exceeding 71bs. in weight otherwise
—" ea Part of Her Majesty's mails' and whether he was
rare that the effect of this prohibition would be seriously
„cripple the early delivery of newspapers in rural diStricts
;;;Fts If so, whether he would kindly consider the possibility
"Ithdrawing or modifying this circular.
*alit- Pickering Phipps asked the Postmaster-General
Gettter the drivers of snail carts, although prohibited from
%ring Passengers, had been allowed by the Post Office su-
esoi to carry parcels, and had done so to a large extent
IC
e newspaper Press; whether, as the new rate for
"cels post delivery of newspapers would be much greater
* the sums hitherto paid to the drivers of mail carts, it
at°llld be possible to charge the newspaper Press as regular
wholesale customers a lower rate; whether it was the
saa! that railway companies carried newspaper parcels at
ai their ordinary parcel rates; and whether the GovernZelft Telegraph Department charged the Press a much less
:tun for telegrams than was charged for private telegrams,
Without injury to the Telegraph Department and with great
advantage to the public.
Mr. Fawcett in reply said—l think it will be convenient if
answer the question of the hon. member and that of the hon.
naember for South Northamptonshire (Mr. P. Phipps) at the
lame time. I believe it will be admitted that it
would not be expedient to allow mail contractors to
parcels which would compete with the parcels
an be carried by parcels post, and in my opinion
st would be very undesirable for the Post Office to de-
Dalin. as suggested, from the principle of uniformity of
barge, fl allow parcels of newspapers to be carried at a
sower rate of postage than other parcels. I should, how-
-10 much regret that the introduction of the parcel post
a
;Tp.nid in any way interfere with the cheap and early arm-
;tltor,: of newspapers in the rural districts that I will con-
_ e •shether any arrangements can be made for allowing
r.ntraetnrs to continue to carry parcels of newspapers so
the carrying of these parcels in no way interferes
"•
"ti the delivery of the parcel and letter mails.
POST OFFICES.
Mr. Macfarlane asked the Postmaster-General whether,
en an application was made in a town or village for a
t Office, it WAS the practice to require the inhabitants to
'▪ `"e a guarantee that the number of letters would cover the
coat of the establishment, &a. ; and, if it was not usual to
enforce such a condition with regard to a Post Office, why
.:tvfas required in the case of a telegraph office, seeing that
""e Postal and telegraph departments yield a large surplus
te/enue.
bllttraaarawcett said the practice of the department is similar
aa_veln the cases to which the hon. member refers. When
,-4,7 estimated revenue is insufficient a guarantee is, as a
—l4O reettired.
RAILWAY PASSENGER DUTY.
lai
111 reply to Mr. Buxton, the Chancellor of the 'Exchequer
to !d : I stated in opening the Budget that we did not pro-
exempt from duty receipts from season-ticketa S.;(_l 011 single fares exceeding id. a mile. In urban dis-
a_aas the duty on the receipts from such tickets will be 2 per
. instead of 5 per cent. The Bill will be introduced
-asta• rtlY, but some details are not yet settled with the Board
ss arade. (Hear.)
GUN LICENCES.
a.lll answer to Mr. Monk, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
,74„ d he proposed that the new gun licence should come into
''''tee in July.

sjie Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply to Sir J. Pease
,741 that as he found his proposals relating to silver plate were
)34,,agreeable to the Trade they were dropped out of the
iat,:get, and in answer to Dr. Lyons, he announced that the
ft,"IKIIMent had determined not to ask the House to con-
„mu) contract for the conveyance of the Irish mails with
ndon and North-Western Railway Company. This
• received with much cheering, and the right hon. gentle-
54ded that new tenders would be invited in which
Dai•
5`464 provision would be made for the accommodation of
Iftgertraffic.

THE PENSIONS OF LORDS ALCESTER AND
WOLSELLY.
klll,Cornmittee of the whole House Mr. Gladstone moved
authorising the granting out of the Consolidated
Ar 4 (4 Pensions of £2,000 a year each for two lives to Lord
eester and Lord Wolseley. Mr. Gladstone deprecated any
1:?„atall. _Big of the discussion to be taken on the second read-
"the Bill which would be introduced, and after some
~ervationa from Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Lewis, and Mr.
"Ylands, the resolutions were agteed to.
THE CRIMINAL CODE BILL
wile Criminal Code (Indictable Offences Procedure) Bill
ultreferred, after some discussion, to the Standing Corn-
r.."°o on Law, an amendment by Mr. T. P. O'Connor to
Ij:et it to a Committee of the whole House being negatived
'„9B to 27.
e Attorney-General moved an instruction to the coin- '
‘tee that they have power to consolidate this and the
c,..1_1r.t of Criminal Appeal Bill into one measure, which was
by 67 to 17.
•
PATENTS FOR INVENTIONS BILL
?Yr. • Chamberlain, in moving the second reading of the
tents for Inventions Bill, explained that, while it pro-
rlP6 no alteration in the duration of a patent, it contained
•,,,prection to the Privy Council which it was considered
reuhld remove the complaints made by patentees with
th orgkrd to e conditions on which applications for extensions
bapatents were now dealt with. No alteration would be
bati2,lll the second and third payments for patents ;
to me term of provisional protection would be extended
reZivelve months, and the fees on first payment would be
obin_ed from £25 to £4, for which sum an inventor might
to a Patent for four years.- The total sum payable for a
Drov„Tha Years' patent would be £154. The whole of the
111411-o`°Pri of the Bill, which the right hon. gentleman OX-
-1 .11 detail, were based upon the belief that the in-
and tir, Waa a person to be encouraged and not repressed,
pro Y were the most liberal that the Government could
oturie without entailing an actual demand upon the Ex-
, ner,
the course of the discussion which followed, while
004 Z et the details invited criticism, there was a general
aolv"'ithhatia of opinion that the Bill, as a whole, was an
kiateri.l,—ce all previous proposals, and likely to contribute
--wY to a final settlement of the question.
INTlventually the second reading was agreed to, and the
I'SW:trod to be referred to the Standing Committee of
Elora
10,,_00 other Bills were disposed of, and the House ad-
dat half-past one o'clock.

111 tla yr
no 0 —OUSE On Loans, April 17, in reply to Lord Harris,
%liked for information in regard to the relations between
th4alt2„°o and Annam, Earl Granville said that he understood
ofo action of France was directed to the maintenance
the-Fmt'a Claimed under a treaty entered into in 1874, but
oreign Office had no official information on the subject.
The
brio. aohle Earl added, in answer to the Marquis of Sails-
her Majesty's Government had no official repro-
"yea in the country.
The b
avrinlla of Sale (Ireland) Act (1879) Amendment Bill
at a ab„...nell Passed through committee, their lordships rose
Past six o'clock.
THE EIRSZCLASS RESERVE.
th
or e tiOnsE OP COMMONS Sir A. Hayter, in reply to
Tu°r Cecil, stated that on the Ist of April last the total
stu.
_et First-class Army Reserve men, exclusive of those
Itesei.eVng with the colours, was 27,073. There were 978
oh'"°llBhhien with the colours, but they were practically all

BRADLAUGH AND THE HOUSE.
xewd:rwer to questions from Sir W. Hart,Dyke, pett-ittatetaieLoßrrudixbiugh case,
Churo_ ll , and Sir H. Wolff on various
' Ciladitone said the Lord Chancellor had no recollec.

tion and could find no trace that he had stated to the House
while the Oaths Act was being passed that henceforward
actions could only be instituted by, the Attorney-General.
As to Mr. Bradlaugh's proceedings on February 22,
1882, when he administered the oath to himself and
sat and voted, the Government did not institute pro-
ceedings against him because the House took the
matter into its own hands and visited him with the
extreme penalty of expulsion. With regard to the affirma-
tion, when the Government proposed the Standing Order
under which Mr. Bradlaugh took his seat, they did not con-
sider the contingency of what might arise if legal proceed-
ings were instituted; but the moment Mr. Bradlaugh had
voted an action was instituted by a private person, so that
if the Government had intended to instruct the Attorney.
General it would have been too late. Now that the law had
been nettled, the Government. as he had already announced,
would feel it their duty to institute proceedings against any
gentleman who came to the table and made a declaration
which it had been established he had no legal right to make.
THE RELIEF OF LOCAL TAXATION.

Mr. Peel called attention to the severe and inequitable
pressure of local taxes, and moved that no further delay
should be allowed in granting adequate relief to ratepayers
in counties and boroughs in respect of national services
required of local authorities. The annual sum affected
by his motion was some 55 millions, of which half
was raised from the rates, besides a local debt amount-
ing to £144,000,000 : and after tracing the Parlia-
mentary history of the question during the last thirty
years, he showed by various examples how oppressively
local taxes bear on the smaller ratepayers in the boroughs
and rural occupiers. Then he indicated the objects which
he regarded as national, such as the charge for pauper
lunatics, police, &c, and showed that under the present
system nearly 300 millions of personal income escapes taxa-
tion. With regard to the subventions from the Imperial
Exchequer, while he did not object to them, he did not con-
sider that they were the best form of relief. The equities
of the case wuuld not be met by further delay, and he
entreated the House no longer to shirk the matter, as would
be done if the Amendment were agreed to, of which notice
had been given by Mr. A. Grey.
Lord Emlyn, in seconding the motion, advocated a large
reduction in outdoor relief and a large subvention from Ina-
perial funds in aid of indoor relief.

Mr. Grey moved an amendment recognizing the necessity
of relief, but declaring that it should be given by transferring
the proceeds of taxes to local authorities, and in connexion
with a reform of local government. He denied emphatically
that his motion was intended to shelve the question, but he
desired, by joining the two questions together, to secure a
motive power which he feared would be wanting if the tax-
ation question were settled first. Of the three modes of
giving relief—subvention, further centralization, and
the appropriation of imperial taxes—he preferred the
latter, and he indicated various taxes, such as the house
tax, the game and gun licenses, the dog license, carriage
licenses, armorial bearings and drink licenses, amounting to
nearly five millions, which might very properly be devoted
to the relief of local burdens. The income•tax also might
be so used, but it was impossible at present to adopt this
mode of relief, because there were no local authorities to
whom the taxes could be handed over. An Improved local
administration would lead to increased efficiency and a
saving of expenditure, and he hoped that the Government
would at the earliest moment available bring in the measure
to which they were pledged.

Mr. A. J. Balfour argued that the result of adopting this
amendment would be to defer the granting of relief at least
for a session, and possibly for an indefinite period. The
matter was one which could be dealt with by the Govern-
ment in their financial capacity, entirely apart from the
question of lbcal government.
- • •

Mr. H. Fowler also held that a distinct injustice was
created by the levying upon one class of property alone of
charges which conduced to the benefit of all classes of society
and that the House had a right to appeal to the Government
to remedy it.
Sir B. Leighton suggested that an adequate remedy might
be provided by the Imperial Exchequer bearing one•halt of
the cost of the indoor poor, the larger portion of the cost of
lunatics, the entire charge for the police, and half of that for
the main reads, which would not amount to more than three
and a half millions sterling.

After some observations from Mr. Heneage in favour of a
thorough revision of local rates and taxes Sir M. Lopes
strongly supported the resolution, and insisted that a reform
of local government was not a necessary preliminary to the
granting of relief to ratepayers. Whatever relief was given
should be real and substantial, and he called upon the
Government no longer to shirk the question, but to declare
their intention, to do something.
Sir C. Dilke intimated that the Government intended to
support the amendment, because it distinctly put before
the House the principle which they, held upon this ques-
tion. The present system of local government was not only
complicated, but was unsuited to the present needs of the
country. The reform of county government would not
suffice; there must be a reform of local government through-
out all its branches in order to secure realieconomy as well
as efficiency of administration.
The debate was continued by Mr. Sclater•Booth, Mr.
Gosehen, and Sir S. Northcote.
Mr. Gladstone observed that the Motion meant a call for
the immediate imposition of fresh taxes upon the country,
for there was no surplus in the Exchequerd
In the result the Motion was rejected by 230 to 216.
After some observations from Sir J. MlCenna, Mr. Pell's
motion was negatived by 229 to 217, and Mr. Grey's amend-
ment was agreed to.
The announcement of the numbers was received with loud
cheers from the Opposition benches.