The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1878-05-25 00:00:00

SATURDAY, MAY 25 1878.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Oh the HOUSE OF LORDS, May 20, the Adulteration of
litee
Act (1869) Amendment Bill passed through Corn-
Customs and Inland Revenue Bill was read a second
and passed.
ale Local Government Provisional Orders (Abingdon, Jct.)
kt— and the Public Works Loans Bill were read a second
,jord Selborne directed attention to the movement of In-
-17,a troops to Malta, but stated that it 1r as not his inten-
au_a to call in question the policy of the Government on
Zo Present occasion in ordering that movement. What he
71plained of as unconstitutional was, that no previous
r,?, ice of it had been given to Parliament, and in support of
view he appealed to the authority of Lord Clarendon.
also contested the legality of the proceeding, for
'l7,s Contended that the previous consent of Parliament
sXlid have been obtained in its favour whenever there
d a reasonable opportunity of applying for it. Both
:1.5 written law and the known practice and usage of Parlia-
Zelit were against what had been done by the Governn2ent,
he Maintained that, in reference to the number of
lle7cfs to be kept up, Great Britain and Ireland compre-
th' ed all the dependencies and possessions of the kingdom,
the "Y being the Imperial standing army of the realm for
i}sa defence of all the possessions of the country and for
trpa preservation of the balance of power. He argued th °
the , e words of the Mutiny Act it was against
the taW to exceed the number of men voted for
ebseyear except by those who were actually serving in India,
lise,rying that in the present instance Parliament had not
1,6 allowed an opportunity of exercising its judgment on
th'e lualter, and he quoted various precedents in support of
the ~"veral points he was contending for. It was, he said,
'erY essence of the Constitution that no Ministry should
wilt Merely on its majority, when there were checks provided
kev,9ll would give Parliament an opportunity of forming au
se:,4,assed judgment on the measure proposed to be adopted,
Nl' e terminated his speech by justifying himself for not
citidillg with any motion.
se7lle. Lord Chancellor said that every Government was on
itc:alons of emergency obliged to act on its judgment, hut
the intention of the present Government to lay before
the 'oase of Commons at the earliest moment an account of
ths.ernenditure necessary for the maintenance of the Indian
sin consequence of their movement to Malta. He re-
tepl.to the terms of Lord Hartington's motion, which he
differed from the proposition of Lord Selborne, and he
hell not understand why a simultaneous discussion should
tlitt "I in the two Houses of Parliamen t to discuss two
oreent propositions. He proceeded, after being called to
teiel,r,. to comment on Lord Hartington's motion, which
not be defended, as far as he was aware, by. any
(verity. Ile said that if the Government believed
the by what they had done they had strained or violated
onstitution, they would as soon as possible apply to
heTatnent for an indemnity; but he maintained that they
%It, col:omitted no act requiring them to take that step, and,
hpepiying to the arguments founded on the precedents
the 7d 11 Lord Selborne, contended that the prerogative of
lizei3Own with regard to the movement of troops was not
"e in the cases referred to, adding that there existed
tkpo
atute law to prevent the movement of the Indian
lop to to Malta. He asserted that there was no foundation
rd Selborne's proposition, and he was satisfied with
t5;14,4 to the policy of the measure adopted by the Govern.
that that policy was approved by the country at
te4tlrcl Cardwell, having replied to some of the observations
Lord Chancellor, took occasion to justify the course
in abolishing Purchase in the Army by Royal
I.e;,nut, and then proceeded to express his concurrence in
delborne's general argument.
lhr some remarks from Lord Napier and Ettrick, from
lis-vfllke of Rutland, who said that by the conduct of the
thehraent a great alight had been shown to Parliament,
tott°,ll Lord Denman,
flb„,rd Granville observed that he never knew an instance
ich Parliament had been more cavalierly treated than
tlo4,e,..Dresent case. With regard to the subject of discus-
stated that he could not conceive why the Govern-
kte ',lid not come to Parliament and inform it of their
Dti

4-'l4B'
4 Pcl Be ~,, aconsfield did not think it would be to the public
IN: 'age that a statement of the movement of the Indian
114,11, should have been prematurely made. Ile believed
line Government had a perfect right to advise the
liirtf,._ to exercise her undoubted prerigative in this
lid tilri for there was no allusion in the Mutiny Act
4ist,,e Native Indian Army. If Lord Selborne be-
that the Government had violated the Con-
' L1141110°4 he ought to come forward and assert his
nee ' hY bringing the matter to a clear and distinct
i • The noble lord thus concluded his speech :
tuitta
nene to-morrow the moral and beneficial effects of this
Iket,,,±oll will be felt not only in this House, but in the
I have expressed my regret that this discussion
lkoeien. at this particular moment. My lips are shut. I
kre ike, of course, and all my colleagues would, lam
144hre, if we could come forward and do that which we
liey be Prepared and glad to do—to vindicate our
give our reasons, which I hope would
44 atuffactory to the country, for all the mea-
that
Noe h_ we have recommended and introduced. We
?lan, een animated by one feeling throughout this business
4 f 4 sustaing and I hope inspires us at present, and that
!ter7tosecure the blessings of peace, and to maintain the
(C °i of Europe and the just position of this country.
tts4,t
..) We are striving at this moment to attain to those
,441 ?sults. But it is impossible at this particular mo-
'14(h:10 Meet discussions and attacks of this kind, and
t4,,eliteiis‘e our conduc: without our having to make state-
Itt,. 1111 enter into arguments and details which might
thei9lidicial to those great objects which not only
iltak In but I am sure equally the noble lords opposite
ke ~, , Eire to accomplish and achieve. I would willingly
tDee,`:(? Part in the discussion to-night, but the noble earl
' title ee Challenged me to rise, and he is a knight to whom
every courtesy. (Laughter.) Therefore it is that
totii•e these few remarks in this discussion' and in answer
Illeit7 uoble duke who spoke behind me, he may urge the
latipe`2ll again and again in this House, but until the time
NDVvhen we can enter into a complete vindication of
all I shall answer is, what we have done we have
kati7,L,Lla the belief that it was done for the public service,
, s a7,'l,gli you may condemn us we will remain silent under
AltiCcusation sooner than vindicate our conduct by in-
g the .
ketili Public we are bound to serve." (Loud cheers.)
e ahic
. ussion on this subject then terminated, and their
•%lii Pe adjourned at twenty-five minutes to eleven o'clock.
'telie the HOUSE OF COMMONS, the Chancellor of the
bla eaultler, replying to Mr. Rylands, stated that the cost
Oliih, g uP the reserves was estimated at about £140,000 a
ik_ltaer, tncluding separation allowances. In reply to Mr.
Ihe sarre right hon. gentleman said the Government
keetece, and would continue to use, their good offices to
eta], I'4 armistice between the Turkish forces and the
Lusurgents.
Aet ;i7,lwer to Sir R. Anstruther, Mr. Cross said that it was
wrce, 'elided to legislate this Session on the subject of
That! Licences.
;Itllartk?rders of the Day having been postponed, the Marquis
b tuitit'ngton moved his resolution declaring that by the
?t8 'Axon of the Realm no Forces may be raised or kept
heetr7rown in time of peace without the consent of Parlia-
Onier, thin any part of the dominions of the Crown, ex-
os 4_Only such Forces as may be actually serving within
ilsig'i"Nerity's Indian Possessions. At the outset the
ink ;,..remarked that, though he could not pretend to
CkstaM,eope of the Debate on a measure so novel and
t 7, voteci"'2 he had purposely narrowed the issue to
th proror, partly because he did not wish at present
es 4 0,, 46 a discussion on the general policy of
,-‘et it uvernment after the Ministerial declaration
Lth. Ro,W_Lould be injurious while delicate negotiations
`,l!,g on, and partly because he
thought the ques-
ott sufficpntly important to be discussed on its own
ON 4,11 e claim set up by the Government was that troops
ne thdia and not voted by Parliament could be trans-
atia, a the prerogative of the Crown from India and used
ieleh Zrer dominions if the Crown. That was the claim
Zit it :vie OPposition denied, asserting, on the other hand,
I,Zetain", in India only that Forces could be raised and
I,:dieti„eu without the authority of annual votes by
I;zee t`oot, and that when the Indian Forces were trans-
li teree any other part of Her Majesty's dominions they
.r,e,eil
(elibject to the conditions regulating the other
the Crown. Adverting first to the principles which
4 que relations between the Crown, Parliament, and
I,?trwerY, he maintained that Parliament had always claimed
Over the Standing Army distinct from its general
h...L e
.. outrol, and that any increase after the Estimates
Zreji,`" Voted must be sanctioned by Parliament not
iienerally, but by a vote of the actual numbers.
'' aee uext with the position of the Indian Army .
i
ed lierib
t as a non Parliamentary Army, and it
e„,rillacy therefore to describe this measure as
-eop,7 Movement of a portion of Her Majesty's
kl Of i I.,?ra one portion of her dominions to another. The
Olia,:.°oB declared that these troops should not be used in
ii,‘,4l ey „9,Derations at the cost of India without the sanc-
12114teearliament ; but in this case that Act had been
itlise i,. When used outside India in time of peace these
leeis ),“:10Pe must be voted by Parliament; and in proof
b,`!1.14-e quoted the speech of General Peel in 1864 when
`,; 01egtMe0ts were retained in China after the
lt-qte„," the financial aspects cf the question Lord
I,ttpre;‘,4ul contended that the conduct of the Go-
it,..loe 1 ,had broken the rules devised for the pro-
ta7,%lll:, uth of the British and Indian Exchequers; and,
beezthlng the various excuses which had been Offered for
I„te r„.. g the step from Parliament, he showed that they
et te,(lte insufficient, and could have had no other object
i'lleo:!sert a Prerogative, lie had no desire to restrict
!iv Ili`ae!nent, but the House had a right robe informed of
Were,amendment was a vote of confidence moved by the
CZtit
Ili„
eZent in itself, and this expedient might be used by
N-gruentalon with a majority to cover any breach of the
t.
t,
esi
4. lur• .
4S e„cks-Beach moved an Amendment declaring that
I,Nnitrol of Parliament over the Military Forces of the
*Zig tUfliciently secured by law and the power of re-
-Itimeeh;PPlies, it is inexpedient to pass a Resolution
di,l ? the hands of the Government in the present
140,. e°l.eign Affairs. The Conservative Party, he said,
14,, '-oseq,7 object to any jealousy being shown on behalf of
4 t "tion, and he regarded it as a good auspice for
,11l
kev'eth:tree that this jealousy was shown by one who was
,tiill4l wt. of the Government which advised this
se, ed varvant on Purchase. The Government main-
sh_t
tltiT i„,e uat in this matter they had acted for the
st
till rtes of the country without violating in
hie Oppeo t.ile Law or the Constitution; and it leaders of
th4ht ha salon had really been of opinion that the Govern-
ts,„4,,acted unconstitutionally, was it not likely that
have proposed a resolution in the House of
that Lord Hartinelon would not have moved a
44 4 C0-‘e of censure, instead of a mere motion in the form
to 4
ik ttetito • , , the tinnal truism? Lord Hartington's arguments
iiie,ql te, „Position of the Indian Army, he maintained,
'0 prevent the Crown making any use of it outside
lasa t3';'.ue. the contrary, he assertei that the Indian Army
kill' th,rgell the Queen's army as any part of the Forces, and
,hlo,Pothin was nothing in any of the Acts of Parliament
le tee i g 'II Constitutional usage to prevent the Crown
R the t 4 Ind'
, 4 ti,„_ is..n troops to any part of the Empire, except
Atititiger 4 Kingdom. The Indian Army, he contended,
t,est„,eoe6„,,tvith the sanction of Parliament, and the Act of '
,ks geee-„`"Plated its employment outside India in cases of
hvraetiwithout the special sanction of Parliament.
ief ii`u instances of this he mentioned the garrison-
tqli tr°hgkong and Singapore from 1867 to 1871 by
4,e4mititie,„"Ps- Lord Hartington's contention that the
74.ei0e,," ,of the Bill of Rights applied to the whole
ih,ehti°' the Crown and not merely to this Kingdom
Y. unwarranted by law; and as one proof
N'l4ltii°t elicited the case -of the German Legion, which
owed to serve n this Kingdom, but served in
1-0 fora,. at the Cape. There were also Colonial Forces
~!,tit 4r11,1„:41e service of the Crown which were never voted
0 he _eut. In order to insure the successful carrying
h`ea, peel, "teasure, it was necessary that the sanction which
L'ev,!,,t Ti, g_tven to it by the Government should be kept
tsovernment had taken this step because they be-
gat,: thal" ia sufficient emergency existed, and because they
4at's'lla a; In spite of the persistent efforts to mislead foreign
tt ottseil-4LO the feeling of the country, to minimize
stt4ellt, IP,,g,.'h and to depreciate the valour and loyalty
it would receive the approbation of the
tit) esi, i said h
, 4, 4144 appealed to the House to support this
,lleiii ited against petty cavils' ceaseless misrepresenta-
JUlgar personalities. At this there were loud
,kkeletikry e order k
' and "withdraw," until the Colonial
ali bl.l,xtPlained that he referred not to members of the
61 o.certain persons outside; and he concluded his
uwesvi ;game
•-; appealing to the House to make it clear to
if danger arose the whole of the Empire would
or our defence.
L isid like d
eprecated the extension of the debate over
aange of the Eastern Question, and denied that
' thenj wish on that side of the House to limit the
etethi.Twn to employ these Indian troops. All that
that Parliament should sanction it.
' 0.142;,,eY, Mr. Inver, and Mr. Ritchie defended the
est I,le Government, while Mr. Dillwyn and Mr.
01f
L., Lgan supported the Resolution.
'4lag Ur
4a„_ ged that the principle laid down by Ministers
C43astnre Emhart troops were an integral portion of the
th!tth, -I: was fraught with dangerous consequences to the
t, eh"entre,
, 44 "Plin
admitted the duty of the Opposition to raise
LY jafri out objected to the resolution because it
uged the just prerogative of th-, Crown. If
' 11e1 prevent th- Crown making use of the
~,ti :Crin,,,•7 however great the emergency.
lite Mae '.'lli Harcourt did not charge the Government
la Aly s Muse_
oksitet, With, ser design of violating the Constitution, but
Pl
4-541tre, at'orance of Constitutional and Parliamentary
qlio sect.t_ this he illustrated from the speech of the
tabbiefetarY. who, he said, had not answered, but
W
gat Lord Ilartington's arguments. hat,

- - '
' `r.

he asked, was the claim of the Government? Either
it must go so far as to assert the right of the Crown
to maintain any army it pleased outside the United.
Kingdom without the consent of Parliament, or the Reso-
lution could not be controverted. He deni, d that the
power of refusing supplies was a sufficient control, and
contended that the Indian Army had been deliberately
placed on a different footim; from the British Army,
and before it could be employed outside India certain
steps must be taken to place it in the same re-
lations to Parliament as the Standing Army. The
law protecting the finances of India had been violated,
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had delibe-
rately repeated the offence for which he apologized so
humbly at the time of the Abyssinian Expedition. Person-
ally he was ready to place the whole forces of the Empire at
the service of the Government to assert the right of Great
Britain and Europe to have a voice in settlement of the
Eastern Question. But they would find the cordial co-
operation of the House of Commons as valuable an assistance
as an Indian contingent.

The debate was for the night closed with a speech from
Mr. E. Stanhope, who remarked that the Government fully
admitted the financial control of Parliament, and desired at
all times to submit an estimate at the earliest possible
moment. That was their intention now; and within a short
time, perhaps ere the debate was concluded, they would be
prepared to produce a good general estimate of the contem-
plated expenditure. It would then be for the Hulse to deal
with the matter as it might think fit.
The-debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr. Fawcett.
On the report of Supply, Mr. Parnell renewed his opposi-
tion to the Stationery Vote, on the ground that it included
part of the expenses of the Queen's Colleges, but the Speaker
ruled that it was not competent for him to go into this
question, and on a division the Vote was carried by 115 to
13.

--Some other business wai disposed of, and the House
adjourned at 10 minutes past 1 o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, May 21, in reply to Lord De La
Warr, Lord Elphinstone gave some information of the steps
adopted to raise the Eurydice, and added that up to the
present time twenty bodies had been recovered.

The Contagious Diseases (Animals) Bill was committed
pro forma, and ordered to be reprinted with amendments.
The Adulteration of Seeds Act, 1869, Amendment Bill was
read a third time and passed.
The Public Works Loan Bill passed through Committee.
Viscount Hardinge wished to ask whether the Secretary
of State for War had considered the propriety of allotting
a certain number of marks for proficiency in riding and
athletics in the examinations for entrance into Woolwich
and Sandhurst Colleges. He thought that the giving
of such marks was so desirable that it ought to be the
rule in examinations for the army. With candidates for
the Militia he would leave riding and athletics entirely
optional. It was hardly necessary to say that proficiency in
riding was of great importance to young men who
proposed to enter the Cavalry. The Duke of Wellington
said that he found the best Cavalry officers to be men who
had been accustomed to follow the hounds. Now, every
officer who sought admission to the Staff College must
produce a certificate of proficiency in riding. It might be
said that a young officer would be taught at Sandhurst all
the riding he required. He had nothing to say against the
system of instruction in riding at Sandhurst. A large
number of young men entered the riding school there who
never had been on a horse before. They were made to go
over a number of fences and they got a number of falls which
did them all the good in the world; but you could not in a
term or two at sandhurst make a good rider of a young fel-
low who had never been on a horse till he was 19 or 20 years
of age. Athletics were now practised at all our public schools
but a certain number of the candidates for commissions in
the army were not educated in our public schools; and it
was to be borne in mind that while the medical examination
of the men was very critical, that of the officers was not very
strict. If the heart and lungs of the latter were found to
be sound and they had not varicose veins, they were passed;
but very weedy young men might pass the medical exami-
nation, and the gymnastic course which the cadets went
through in the Military Colleges would not convert a weedy
man into a strong one. It was an old saying that no person
should go into the water until he knew how to swim. He
thought it might fairly be said that no one should go into
the Army till he knew how to ride. He would have exa-
minations in four physical exercises—swimming, leaping,
walking, and riding; but it might be left to the candidate
to choose from among them. He need not go in for all.
He might even go in for only one. He submitted that the
examinations should not be as they were at present, purely
intellectual.

Earl Fortescue said he had taken great interest in the
question for some years past, and last session he expressed
a hope that the attention of the Government would be called
to the subject, and that commissions would be given to those
who showed themselves proficient in martial and athletic
exercises. The late distinguished veteran, Sir John Bur-
goyne, had expressed to him almost on the last occasion
on which he had an opportunity of conversing with him, his
fears lest the army examinations should be confined to intel-
lectual acquirements, and various other authorities had ex-
pressed their opinion that it was of the greatest importance
that the officers should be recruited from those who had
attained a proficiency in [athletics, and that the granting
of commissions should not be confined to those who had
obtained marks in mere book learning. 'lndeed this prin-
ciple was already widely recognised, and he mentioned that
a right rev, prelate, who had obtained a great reputation as
a schoolmaster, on having a commission sent to him to be
given to the most suitable of his pupils, selected the captain
of the eleven. lie hoped that they would hear from the
Secretary of State that the non-scientific as well as scientific
branches of the army would not be chosen in future ex-
clusively from the class of persons who exhibited intellectual
efficiency alone; but that the physical condition of the can-
didates and their proficiency in athletics would also be
regarded.
Lord Hampton expressed his opinion that it might be de
sirable that physical tests should be applied to candidates
for commissions, without superseding competitive examina-
tions in literary subjects.
Lord Bury thought that it was almost universally
conceded to be advisable that physical tests should be
adopted with respect to candidates for commissions in the
Army. The first thing to be attended to was to see that
young officers had good education; but the subject of
physical tests was engaging the attention of the Govern-
ment.

Lord Lansdowne thought that under a system of physical
tests a person might be excluded from the Army who would
otherwise have made an excellent officer.

Their Lordships then adjourned.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Gourley asked the
Attorney-General if his attention had been called to the
alleged purchase and equipment by the Russian Govern-
ment and Russian subjects of United States' steamships for
the purpose of being employed and commissioned as public
privateers; and if he could state how far the allegations
were correct, and the nature of the responsibilities attaching
to the United States Government under the Treaty of
Washington, and to the Russian Government and Russian
subjects under the Declaration of Paris, should the vessels
In question, or ships of other neutral countries, be commis-
sioned for the capture of British shipping in the event of
war.

The Attorney-General: Steamships have been recently
purchased in the United States by persons who are said to
be acting on behalf of the Russian Government; but Her
Majesty's Government have no information which would
lead them to believe that these vessels are intended in
the event of war to be commissioned and employed as
privateers, in contravention of the Declaration of Paris, to
which Great Britain and Russia were parties, and whereby
it was agreed that privateering should be and remain
abolished. By Article 6 of the Treaty of Washington,
Great Britain and the United States agreed to observe as
between themselves the three rules therein laid down in
future as binding on a neutral Government in time of war;
and Her Majesty's Government-have no reason to apprehend
that the Government of the United States have any intention
of departing from the observance of those rules if circum-
stances should call for their application. It is hardly neces-
sary, therefore, to consider what responsibilities would
attach to the United States' Government or to the Russian
Government in the event of any violation on their part of
the obligations by which they are bound under the Treaty
of Washington and the Declaration of Paris respectively.
Mr. Lowther informed Mr Downing that the protracted
discussions on other measures before Easter had prevented
the Grand Jury Law Amendment (Ireland) Bill coming on
second reading. He hopeu. members interested in it would
facilitate the other business of the Government, especially
Supply, so that its second reading might not be long deferred
(Hear, hear.)

The preceding Motions and Orders of the Day having been
postponed, the Adjourned Debate on Lord Rartington's
Resolution was resumed by

Mr. Fawcett, who, declining to confine himself to the
strictly technical and legal grounds on which the question
had hitherto been argued, proceeded to contend that no
emergency had occurred to justify the secrecy which the
Government had practised, and that even if any such emer-
gency had occurred a course had been pursued which was
utterly unconstitutional. The claim set up by the Govern-
ment was that the Indian Army might be drawn on inde-
finitely to assist this country in a European conflict, but
this was so serious an innovation that the people of this
country ought to be consulted before it was adopted. It
was a mean and ungenerous thing to call upon India to shed
her blood in defence of British interests, and if these forces
could be spared it followed that India was called on to bear
a larger military expenditure than was necessary for her
own defence.

The Attorney-General replied to Mr. Fawcett that the
Government was ready to enter into a general discussion,
and it was not their fault if it was confined to a strictly legal
and constitutional issue. Criticizing the language of the
Resolution, which he characterized as astute and forensic,
attributing it to Lord Hartington's legal advisers, he con-
tended that though founded on the Bill of Rights and the
Mutiny Act, it recited them incorrectly, and the proposi-
tion it laid down was, therefore, unsound. The Bill
of Rights, he contended, enly applied to the kingdom
and the Mutiny Act to the United Kingdom, and in
dealing with the Bill of Rights the Attorney. General ex-
pressed an opinion—from which there was not much dissent
—that it was not declaratory in this respect of the Common
Law, and that before it the Crown had power to raise and
enrol troops within the kingdom. Nevertheless, the check
which Parliament possessed in " the power of the purse"
was substantial amireal, and though the Crown, as he con-
tended, had a right to move these troops to Malta, when
they got there they came under the authority of Parlia-
ment, which could refuse the supplies. The precedents
of 1775 and 1794 he showed had nothing to do with this
question, and, if this proposition were admitted, the
Bill of Rights had been infringed by many of the Colonies
where forces were raised and maintained for the service of
the Crown without the authority of Parliament. The Cana-
dian Legislature under the authority of an Imperial Act of
Parliament had power to raise troops, just as the native
troops were raised by the Indian Government under the
Act of 1853; but if this Resolution were passed one set
of forces could be moved anywhere while the other could not,
and it would also prevent the British troops in India being
moved to the defence of the Australian Colonies without the
sanction cf Parliament being obtained The Indian Govern-
ment Act of 1858 did not prevent the Crown moving troops,
but merely protected the Indian revenue. As to the qualifica-
tion "in the time of peace," it made no difference whether
it was in time of peace or war. The occasion was one which
justified the Government in using every precaution, and the
Country would look rather to the success of its policy, and
would not interest itself in a constitutional quibble.
Mr. Gladstone, after some remarks on the general policy
of the Government and on the Purchase Warrant, proceeded
to reply to the Attorney-General, charging the Government
with having acted both unconstitutionally and illegally.
In the first place, they had acted unconstitutionally, in-
asmuch as, though knowing of this charge, they had framed
and cal rit d through the Budget without making any
provision for it; and in the next place, , they had placed
Parliament under a virtual compulsion to vote money
for purposes on which they had never been consulted.
Although at times a Government could not escape the
necessity of anticipating expenditure, it must be on matters
which did not fetter the discretion of Parliament. They
had acted illegally because they had violated the Bill of
Rights, and here he asserted, in contradiction to the
Attorney-General, that the Bill of Rights declared the
ancient Common Law, and that it applied not merely to the
kingdom but to the whole dominions of the Crown, quoting
the debates of 1775 and the preamble of the Bill itself. The
Government had also violated the Indian Government Act,
which, he maintained, did not merely protect the Indian
revenue, hut limited the poviter of the Crown to move the Indian
troops outside the frontiers. After touching on the question of
secrecy, which he asserted was entirely needless, Mr. Glad-
stone proceeded to protest against the contention of the Go-
vernment, which he understood to be that outside the
United Kingdom the Crown could keep up any force it
pleased, and move its army to any part of the Empire with-
out consulting Parliament, as long as it was not placed
under the necessity of asking for supplies. This he denounced
as a sacrifice of the liberties which have come down to us,
and though he should regard it as nothing less than a
national calamity tithe Resolution were voted down by the
majority, it was, nevertheless, the duty of the minority to
face that risk and to take a division.
The debate was continued by Mr. Balfour, Sir G. Camp-
bell, Mr. Forsyth, Mr. Newdegate, Sir H. Havelock, and
Mr. Grantham.
Mr. Childers commented on the inconsistency of the
Government in impai bug to Parliament the calling out of
the Reserves, while this much smaller measure was kept
back from it. Considering that Lord Salisbury at the
time of the Abyssinian war had spoken strongly against the
employment of native troops, and that all the military wit-
nesses examined before the Select Committee had testified
against it, such.;ii measure, he contended. ought not to have


..-i,...,..t;.,5_.f'4';;:_..:,..--",.7.7---.:

t,4et
t.qr.
4,4 the

4tio.
tkr.l4l
k(118.4',(1);
nth