The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-03-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

RAILWAY RATES.

In the HorrsE OF LORDS, March 9, Lord Henniker
dhected attention to the subject of railway rates, and
urged the Government to undertake legislation on the
subject. He contended that no new powers to charge
terminals should be given to the companies, and sug-
gested the appointment of a Committee to confer with
the Railway Commission as to the basis of a good
measure.

Lord Sudeley reminded the House that the Com-
mittee of the House of Commons on Railway Rates
and Charges had reported in favour of a uniform
classification or rates, the consolidation of the companies
special Acts, and a notification of terminal charges. On
the recommendation of the Board of Trade the railway
companies lad introduced bills dealing with classifica-
tion and terminal charges, but those bills were being
opposed. He trusted some arrangement might be
come to, but the Government could not undertake to
bring in a bill on the subject.
The Marquis of Huntly complained of the pre-
ferential rates made by the railway companies in favour
of foreign produce, and the Marquis of Salisbury
endorsed the complaint, adding that the advantage
given to the foreign producer had excited a strong feel-
ing on the part of the English agriculturist.
Earl Granville contended that no good could result
from legislation which did not recognise that the
interests both of the companies and the traders weze
inseparable.
In reply to Lord Harris, the Earl of Morley stated
that the Yeo.up.nry would be called upon to undergo
two extra drills this year.
Their lordships rose at a quarter to six o'clock.

EARL GRANVILLE AND PRINCE BISMARCK.-IMPORTANT

STATEMENT.

In the Housn or COMMONS, Mr. Labouchere asked
the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
whether it was to be widerstood by the statement in
Lord Granville's Despatch of 7th February to Sir
Edward Malet, that the Despatch of Prince Bismarck
to Count' Miinster of sth May never had been com-
municated to him, that a copy of it was
not left with him, or that it neither had
been read to him nor its contents verbally
stated to him; whether Count Munster did at any
time fulfil the instructions which, as stated in the
"North German Gazette," he had received on sth May,
to give Lord Granville to understand that, if
England refused to come to terms with Germany, the
latter would seek an understadding with France,
and that England declined to meet this German
advance; whether at the interviews which took place
between Count Herbert Bismarck and Lord Granville,
when the former was sent on a mission to London "in
the hope that he might succeed where the Ambassador
had failed," Count Miinster was present; and whether
Count Herbert Bismarck left England without being
apprised by Lord Granville of the fact that Prince Bis-
marck's Despatch :o1 May 5 had never been communi-
cated to him.

Lord E. Fitzmaurice : In reply to my hon. friend, I
will read the following letter which Lord Granville has
addressed to me on the subject:
"Dear Fitzmaurice,—l take the unusual course of
writing to you a letter in answer to the question of Mr.
Labouchere, as they affect me personally rather than
the Foreign Office. I never read nor had I until lately
any knowledge of Prince Bismarck's Despatch of May
5. Count Munster and Count Herbert Bismarck not
long after then told me that the German Govern-
ment could not maintain a friendly attitude on Egyptian
matters if we continued to be unfriendly on Colonial
questions. I denied that we had been unfriendly, and
gave positive assurances on the part of my col-
leagues and myself of friendly action in the future.
Both Count Herbert and Prince Bismarck expressed at
the time their satisfaction with these assurances. The
tension which has since arisen resulted from a serious
difference of opinion between the two Governments as
to whether those assurances had been kept or broken.
(Hear, hear.) I will not renew the discussion, more
especially as I have reason to hope that this friction
would be a thing of the past. (Cheers.) Count
Minster was not present at the conversation with
Count Herbert Bismarck. It is not usual for •
an Ambassador and his First Secretary to come
at the same time. What I have stated above
would show that it was impossible for me to complain
to Count Herbert Bismarck of the non-communication
of a despatch which I did not know to exist, a despatch
which appears to have been secret, and to have dealt
generally with the political situation for the guidance
of Count Munster." _

Mr. Gorst inquired whether her Majesty's Govern-
ment would ask the German Government for a copy
of the despatch of May 5, and would lay it before Par-
liament.

Lord E. Fitzmaurice required notice of the question.

THE ESTIMATES.

In Committee of Supply Lord Hartington moved an
addition of three thousand men of all ranks to the
number voted for the service of the current financial
year; the cost of which, he said, would probably be
met by the sums already granted. The noble Marquis
declared that the measures now proposed were equally
required whether the advance upon Khartoum was
accomplished or not. The chief of these measures was
the construction of the Souakim-Berber Railway, The
total increase to the Army during the next financial
year, in consequence of the events in the Soudan, would
probably be about fifteen thousand men.
A discussion ensued upon the general question of
our policy hi the Soudan, upon which Mr. Gladstone
observed that the present issue was a much narrower
one, and that the time would come when the House
might discuss at length the policy of going to Khar-
toum. After some further debate the Vote was passed
by 98 to 21.
Upon the Vote of £942,000 for additional expendi-
ture for ordinary Army service and military operations
in the Soudan, Sir J. Pease moved to reduce the Vote
by £lOO,OOO, the amount required for the Berber Rail-
way. Ultimately, the Amendment was negatived by
173 to 56, and the Vote was agreed to.
The House resumed, and Mr. Cross submitted a
Resolution charging upon the revenues of India the
ordinary charges of the Indian troops to be employed
on the Expedition to the Soudan. The discussion was
continued to an advanced hour.