The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1878-05-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

1,..111,0 HOUSE OF COMMONS reassembled on May G., after the
Fper Recess. The first busitiese on the PaDer waeithe
Service Estimates, but the early part of the sitting was
• Pi'ed in an animated conversation on the recent rem-
'mein of troops from India to Malta.
wol2,lhe:"first place Sir W. Harcourt esasse notice that he
Isif,''tztalf on Tuesday under what Mutiny Act these troops
!Je governed, and Mr. S. Holms also gave notice of
act question, Mr. Whitwell intimated that he should
t„ her and when a Supplementary Estimate wee's'.
Posed; and Mr. Laing said he would sig.,. the Go-
Mnsent to arrange for an early day whoa the policy
' toe measure could be discussed,
e Marquis of Harlington (whts di rising was received
tlik,k cheers), said —I beg to stett the right hon. gentleman
to"e Chanceller of the nchequer wnether he is .able
peggve the House e.ny information respecting the new
lia•ssias lons vihtcl lire stated to be in progress between her
astss.'"re Geve.rnment and the Government of Russia.
asBer,7..ther be is able to hold out any hope of the early
to _IQ gof the European Congress. I should wish also
the right hon. gentleman a question, of which I have
private notice,. relating to a subject which ills
, le should be explained as speedily as possible. That
Lion is whether he is able to say why the decision of Her
1t5je511.5 Government to despatch a force of Indian Native
I,,°_olss to Malta was not communicated to Parliament before
traJtecess—(hear, hear)— the public announcement that
ea„'' sten would be taken not having been made until the
J after Parliament separated for the holidays. (Cheers.)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied that active ne-
besiations had been and were now going on, but it would
highly diestdvantaseeous to the public service to have
hgeeneral diseussion upon them at the present moment.
Maltdespatch of a certain number of Indian troops to
th„,sa was decided upon some time ago; but it was not
se""ght necessary, nor was it according to practice,
taticc"zniunicate it to Parliament. A Supplementary
Made /or the cost of the movement would be laid
ttu"All the House, and that would be a favourable oppor-
.(sY for discussing the subject. Adverting to the corn-
made by Mr. Bright during the Recess that he had
'Zeived the House, the Chancellor expressed a hope that
13right, if he had any charge to make of that kind, would
Peat it in the House and in a form which would give him
oPportunity of meeting it.
Or. Fawcett declined to wait for the Estimate, but moved
tilt! adjournment of the House in order to protest against
rj mariner in which he and others had been misled by the
sslcence of the Government as to this particular step,
)7 _ also by the Chancellor's declaration that there
i',"o been no change in the Ministerial policy. To
te."`"oss,oll an indefinite number of Indian soldiers
eiss'iwce part in an European contest, he contended, was a
sZ.oge of enormous importance, and he dwelt on the objec-
iToll to it from a constitutional and financial point of view.
is,;ere was no precedent for it, and, on the whole, he would
iLoe preferred, that millions of English money should have
en wasted.
G. Campbell also complained of the want of notice, and
les„..e4 on the great cost of the movement, which he predicted
rsid amount to millions. He admitted, however, that at a
sive
time, and for a proper purpose, it might be per-
TiLesible to relieve the strain on the population of Great
strittah by the employment of Indian troops; but he denied
taat this was a proper opportunity for trying the experi-
Deent. At the same time, he maintained that, owing to the
cssscultar condition of the Indian Army, it must always be a
Leah and dangerous expedient; and criticizing the corn-
ji°'s ition of the Force, he asserted that not above two belie-
-vne were fit for European service.
tnBfr W. Harcourt, while guarding himself against express-
etgts_anY opinion at the present moment hostile to the policy
cs Lie Government, commented on the statement of the
4ancellor of the Exchequer that it was not necessary to
tenirminfeate it to Parliament, contending that it amounted
a claim on the part of the Crown to the right to move
i.d ? whole of the Indian Army to any place—even to Eng-
-foe any purpose whatever without the sanction of
oitamelit. The House ought not to accept the situation
ces,"strrg told by the Government that a step of this gravity
Z'a be determined on without its knowledge.
ss,s(soe Chancellor of the Exchequer fully admitted that it
e Within the duty and the right of the House to call for
?„71ple explanation and discussion, but the step, though im-
br"„rtant, was neither more nor less than a direction of the
ir,eti that one portion of her army should be moved from
4"(!_part of her dominions to another. It was subject to the
,-"wu'oi,„„ofal control of Parliament, but it was an order strictly
"tun the constitutional prerogative of the Crown. Pre-
Inatuxely to have disclosed this movement when it was decided
h Would have interfered with the arrangements necessary
be mad4k). India, and though the Government was taken
Eo_naewhat 1V surprise when it became public, even if he
tad foreseen that publication, he should not have felt it
~mFcessary to make any communication to the House. Re-
nog to Sir W. Harcourt, he pointed out that the intro-
iloctiou of Indiantroops into this country would be contrary
t.! .i the Bill of Rights, and the Act of 1859 would prevent the
Zfisiall Revenues being made liable for troops employed out
slidia. The entire cost of the movement would be tie-
Out of Imperial Funds, and the necessary Supple-
bientary Estimates had been contemplated in the Budget cal-
rlations. The troops would be under the Indian Mutiny
,c,ts He repeated that there had been no change in the
oY of the Government and that there was no fresh cause
anxiety. They were endeavouring to bring about a
7„aoeful settlement and they still continued to hope for it,
I,mt they had never concealed that it might be necessary to
`we measures of precaution, and this was one of them.
Outr. Laing had no doubt that it was within the power of
. ..,so British Crown to call upon the Indian troops, as had
"'„ en the case in the present instance, but he believed the
D Was fraught with most momentous issues. In the first
,-r
nue, it was a reversal of previous policy, and before it was
Zmopted the view of Parliament upon the subject ought to
maVe been taken.
Ssir S. Hay said a great deal had been said about bringing
,L2sdan troops to Europe, but he supposed, geographically
ir !eking, Malta was really Africa, and it should be borne
si.7..oind that Indian troops were employed in the China
In Abyssinia, and in Persia; and this could therefore
la,ot be termed an experiment. He, therefore, believed that
action of the Government could be generally corn.
'mended. (Hear.)
es?. NeWdegate said it might be quite right to employ
trOops, but thought the Imperial Parliament ought to
previously informed of the step it was intended
oske.
Rylands believed that when the announce-
Was made that Indian troops were to be brought
thto Europe there was a general feeling throughout
country that there had been a suppressio yen i on the
Part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in refer-
fl t 0 to the information he gave before the holidays.
tj},l° chancellor of the Exchequer had assured the House
at any important information that could be communi-
ated he would take care that the House should be in-
arraed of, and yet, in the face of that statement, the
rPortant fact the subject of discussion had been withheld
inkra them. He did not charge the front Bench with intend-
- to Mislead the House, but it had happened more than
e that language was used by members of the Government
ulch was open to misinterpretation. He believed the order-
• of the troops from India involved a great Constitutional
Mr. Bantle Cochrane said he was glad the Government had
:4‘sit en the step referred to, because it showed the noble
inrit animating the Indian Army. Had the House been
I,.."'artned of the measure beforehand it would certainly
~h7ve been opposed by gentlemen opposite, and most
—`BohieVeus discussions would have taken place—dis-
Fissions which would have trammeled and hampered
Lhe Government, and might have led the Russian Govern-
msent to suppose that the country was divided in their sup-
port of the Ministerial policy. (Hoar, hear.) He could not
s
...-°lnprehend why members should come down to the House,
'flud, after attacking the policy of the Government, go away
Without venturing to ask for a division. If gentlemen oppo-
-1:1,!,e really believed that the countiy was with them, why did
they not bring it to an issue by a vote of the House'?
llt. Peal observed that the discussion which had taken
jultoe might be very useful, but it must be admitted that it
- been very prolix. The movement of native troops from
adf, a was no new thing. They had been in Abyssinia and in
—"na ; and what had been done now was not to bring
Themzs to England as had been suggested, but to Malta, for
""'y Purpose for which they might be required. He could
hot conceive anybody getting up and conscientiously believing
tliat it was unconstitutional to employ these troops in the
service of the State- for ff these troops were to be available
'or the defence of our great empire, it could not be wrong to
; .._eronloy them on this great service. (Hear, hear.) It would
s`v„ileve the strain on England, and he could not see the
..ghtest objection to the policy, (Hear, hear.)

, Mr. E. Jenkins made some observations, and Mr. Fawcett,
12,1 withdrawing the motion for adjournment, gave notice
aat he would move a Resolution, and also that he would
4ew the discussion on the third reading of the Budget

•„In answer to Mr. T. Hankey, the Chancellor of the Ex-
ZfeclUer said he understood that the dog licences would be
;sued for the usual year as heretofore; those taken out be-
the let of June would hold good for the year, and those
fl out after the Ist of June would hold good for the re-
Under of the current financial year.
0 The House subsequently went into Committee of Supply
en the Civil Service Estimates, and the remainder of the
evening was spent in discussing votes in Class 2 (Public
The House adjourned at a quarter past one o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 7, Mr. Chamberlain gave
t
~...°tlte that on an early day he would move the following
'veolution :—" That this House, sharing the earnest desire
rtl Dressed in the oircular despatch of the Marquis of Salts-
rY for the good government, peace, and freedom of a
'gelation to which those blessings have been
Strap—,
ge condemns the policy of warlike demon-
atration which -Her Majesty's Government has pur-
Mied, and is of opinion that the objects in question and
all honourable and peaceful settlement of the existing diftl-
Ntlea will be best promoted by an European Congress, and
a frank definition of the changes in the Treaty of San
otefano which Her Majesty's Government consider to be
te„ce,aaary for the general good of Europe and the interests of
"gland." The hon. member also gave notice that on Thurs.
haY he would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer Whether
'e Would facilitate the discussion of the subject.
45.Cantain Pim gave notice that on going into Committee
'13111)P1y he weuld move,—" That an humble Address be
tfelented to Her Majesty praying her to take such steps as
e_aY be necessary to invite the immediate assembling in
,redon of a Congress of representatives of all the inde-
vendent States of Europe to determine the best means of
es er vin g the general interests of Europe and of Maintain-
g inviolate the sanctity of treaties."
~.11ajor Nolan asked the Secretary of State for War what
"aa the amount pail to or for each of the wives and children
the men of the Army and Militia Reserves lately sum-
Oiled to the colours ; whether any complaints had been
niressed to him regarding the insufficiency of the provision
ade for the maintenance of such wives and children; and
rther, whether he proposed to make any permanent or
"vlenorary addition to those separation allowances.
Colonel Stanley said it would be convenient for him
'Le answer at the same time tbat question and another
r the same subject of which the gallant member for Sun-
had given notice. The amount paid for each of
e•
wives and children of the men of the Army and Militia
47:serves was at the rate of 6d. per day for each woman
e,,d 2d. for each child under fourteen years of age. No
—replaint had reached him, officially or otherwise, Fe.
ti the insufficiency of the provision made for the
vs alntenance of such wives and children, although it was
'zi_et fair to say that letters had been received from indi-
dual members of Boards of Guardians calling attention to
:'se subject, and stating that the question had been brought
ader their consideration. lie had called for returns as to
number of women and children concerned, but those
ter the
had not yet come in. An order had gone out to
ei"e,r„the mode of payment, which, for the future would be
I‘alY"
in advance.
enif answer to questions from Mr. Whitwell, Mr. Holms,
ph :Nit.. Laing as to the movement of troops from India, the
ancellor of the Exchequer said that the Indian Govern-
the" had temporarily provided the means, but as soon as
p necessary information could be obtained from India a
l3Plenientary Estimate would be laid on the table for
foP,..a,Ying the whole of that outlay and providing for any
Tr",Ler expenditure which may be necessary. The Native
e„°oPa serve under a Mutiny Act and Articles of War
by the Indian Government under the authority of 3
bld4 Will. IV., cap. 85, and 24 and 25 Vic., cap. 67, which are
tait'ing wherever they may be serving, and the oath they
bli,e bin them to go to Enrope or any part of the world;
ds
e Bill of Rights prevents them being brought into this
in dine of peace without the 'leave of Parliament.
aelms staked whether the Native Troops could serve
ei.Z• e Channel Islands, to which the Chancellor of the Ex-
,yedctiter replied that they could; and, in answer to Mr. E.
the.„_at he said that Malta was the destination to which
"aa been ordered.
ailawer to Mr. Hubbard, Lord G. Hamilton stated that
• eaeol Returns for 187 T would be in the hands of hon
erahets in a few days.
Ne,14.1.• Melden called attention to the claims of the Irish
1,..7.,10nal School teachers. In a succinct review et the
1.,.:x1,0115 steps taken since 1874 to improve their condition„
ionontentled that the measures of the Government,
that 'f.ease their salaries had substantially failed, and
earr...tu regard to pensions the Government. had not
thet7 out its promises. What he clamed was
the "e first class teachers should receive £2 a week,
arecond class £,l 103., aria the third Ll ; and, with
d to pensions, the teachers were ready to accept an
made in 1877 that the Government rould double the
tirart of any deferred Post Office annuity they might por-
got themwelves. The time had come, he maiutaiced,

I for further action, and accordingly, he moved a resolution
declaring that the present position of the teachers calls for
the immediate attention of the Government with a view to
the satisfactory adjustment of their claims.
Mr. R. Smyth seconded the motion, which was also sup-
pprted by Mr. C. Lewis and Sir J. Leslie.
Mlaren suggested that the best mode of settling the
question was by levying a school-rate, to which Major Nolan
replied that even if Mr. Meldon's demand were conceded,
Scotland would still enloy a much larger contribution from
the Imperial Exchequer than Ireland.
Mr, Lowther, on behalf of the Government, admitted that
the Act of 1875 had not realized the hopes with which it was
passed, but the Government was anxious that the object
aimed at should be carried out, and was still considering the
subject. He was willing to concur in the resolution i leer-
tain words were omitted which stated that the teKhers
were a discontented body of public servants, which' he
denied, and Mr. Meldon having consented to this the resolu-
tion was agreed to.
Mr. Pease rose to call attention to the manner in which
licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquors were now
issued, and remarked that this question had been brought
before the House on several occasions during the last few
years. His first object in rising was to call the attention
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the present state of
the law under which those licences were granted. Any
system more confused than that which at present existed in
this country in relation to this subject could scarcely be
conceived. Returns showed that while the licensing magis-
trates had hardly granted any fresh licenses in the kingdom,'
the licenses granted by the Excise had increased in an
enormous ratio. The Home Secretary had often asked
whether drunkenness increased in this country. A return
moved for by Mr. Henley, late Member for Oxfordshire, of
the convictions between•lB7l and 1876 showed that drunken-
ness had increased in a very large ratio—in Bradford
43 per cent., in Bristol HO per cent., in Halifax 122 per
cent., and in Nottingham 363 per cent. On considering the
reports of the inspectors of the Northern, Southern, and
Midland divisions one was driven to the conclusion that
drunkenness had increased in the same proportion as the in-
crease of licensed houses. Licences were granted by the
Excise with scarcely any control on the part of the magis-
trates. The reports showed that there had been an enormous
increase in drunkenness among women. [The hon. gentle-
man's observations were interrupted by an unsuccessful at-
tempt to count out the House.] If Her Majesty's Govern-
ment were ready to agree to the course proposed in his
resolution, he would best consult the convenience of the
House by moving the resolution. The hon. gentleman con-
cluded by moving,—
- •

"That, in the opinion of this House it is inexpedient to
issue in England and Wales, between the present time and
the next Session of Parliament, any new licences for the sale
of wine, beer, or spirits to be consumed off the premises'
without the sanction, in the case of each new licence, of Her
Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment."

Sir 11. Selwin-Ibbetson, on behalf of the Government, ob-
jected to pronouncing any opinion until the Lord's Com-
mittee on Intemperance has reported. Two years ago a
committee of the House of Lords was appointed to investi-
gate the whole of that question. An immense mass of
evidence had been submitted to that committee, but it
had not yet presented its report, and it would there-
fore be unwise now to altempt to legislate on that sub-
ject. Another consideration which could not be over-
looked was that at this period of the Session they could
hardly hope to deal with much advantage with any
further measures than those already before the House. In
those circumstances, and not from any hostility to the
general object which the hon. member opposite had in
view, but because the present was not an opportune
moment for dealing with the subject, he begged to move
the previous question.
Mr. Pease having briefly replied, the previous question
was agreed to, and the original motion was therefore not
put.
Mr. Monk moved the second reading of his Bill for
abolishing the Conge d'Elire, and the rejection of it was
moved by Mr. Hubbard, who objected to removing a popu-
lar check against improper appointments. Mr. Assheton
had just risen to speak on the question. when the House
was counted out at 25 minutes to nine o'clock.

In the HoUSE or COMMONS, May 8, Mr. Cowen moved the
second reading of the County Courts al, the object of
which is to amend and extend the County Court system.
After tracing the great reforms which had taken place
during the last 25 years, which had resulted in the establish-
ment of the High Courts of Justice, Mr. Cowen explained
the provisions and details of the Bill with con-
siderable minuteness, and asserted that the Bill, if
adopted, would entail no additional tax upon the rate-
payers, would afford great facilities and economies to
suitors, would work no injury to the legal profession, and
would be a step towards the establishment of that system of
local judicature which all eminent jurists admitted would
some day have to come into operation.
Mr. Osborne Morgan, in moving the rejection of the Bill,
complimented its author on his valuable and earnest con-
tribution to the cause of the law reform, and regretted that
there were not more hon. members present to take part in
so important a discussion. However, the Bill as it stood
was entirely unworkable, and would practically plunge the
whole county court system into utter confusion. It was
wrong in principle and unworkable in uetail, and therefore
he saw no good which could result from its being read a
second time.
Mr. Gregory seconded the motion for the rejection of the
Bill.
After a discussion, in which Mr. Hopwood, Mr. S. Lloyd,
Mr. Wheelhouse, Mr. Serjeant Simon, and other hon. mem-
bers took part,
- •

The Attorney-General said he expressed his own personal
opinion, and was not speaking for the Government, when he,
stated that it would be advantageous to increase the jurfs-
diction of the county courts The hon. and learned gentle-
man then proceeded to criticise in detail the provisions of
the Bill, and ultimately suggested that the hon. gentleman
(Mr Cowen) should not press his motion to a division, but
viithdraw the Bill and await the report of the select com-
mittee, after which he might consider whether he would
bring forward amended proposals.
Mr. ,Cowen accepted the suggestion of the Attorney
General, and both the motion and amendment were then,
by. leave, withdrawn.
Lord Hill Trevor briefly moved the second reading of
Tenant Right (Ireland) Bill, the object of which is to extend
the benefits of the Land Act to leaseholders as well as yearly
tenants. After some observations from several members,
the bill was ordered to be read a second time.
Some other business was disposed of, and the House
adjourned.