The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1883-04-07 00:00:00

SATURDAY, APRIL 7, UM,

INIPERIAL PARLIAMENT. i

tin the 11
a hpar or Comforts, April 2, on the Motion of Lord
resabSavelior, a new writ was ordered for the election of a
aed for Southampton, in the room of Mr. Butt, created
tosr of the High Court of Justice.
easol's .
E. ritzinaurice stated, in reply to a question by Mr.
fl 1B tßart e t. that the Government Wei not ieceivtd
by th,; ilatuation as to the reported blockade of Madagascar
gakaz.,reeee, or of any acts of hostility against the Medea
• novernment.
k
P
CHEAP TELEGRAMS. r,
at a aSteston asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
Mee et"sloo her Majesty's Government proposed to take in
itlegl.atiune decision of the Rouse on the question of cheaper
s The ca
tar nieancellor of the Exchequer said t If the hon. mem-
" glad taß, l',lae the question later on in the session I shall
Psive a reply to It.
Th COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL BILL.
a e Attorne General n moving the second reading of
as‘lB Coen Y,
aseetaaa, ‘pf Criminal Appeal Bill, dwelt first of all on the
'malt as, of Permitting appeals in civil cases involving
w lea IlStos of money, and denying it to a man in peril
'est. or liberty' He pointed out, also, that 77 per
kid ...",(oe criminal oases tried resulted in convictions
Illales'itsed whether, considering the circumstances
Ilestiesiswhich those trials took place, error was not
a4d '
Probable His own belief, he said, was
b."ere D.,--ere were more wrongful convictions than
h7irled se'F,,,,eral_lY supposed ; and he mentioned that the present
r t --re'arY during his tenure of office had been corn-
,-,Bltleisotelease twelve persons whose innocence had been
nes established to make it impossible to keep them in
igk,ht „Lna Bill' win' tentative only because to extend the
S'ebearsPheal to all criminal trials would throw too great
eBttity a °LI the ;
Adges ; but he hoped that experience would
aleree is"B exteneion. An absolute right of appeal was only
its air teateltal cases and to dispose of the business under
1 would be required to sit for
se ce or three judges
an four times a year.
Nirell* °Ward remarked that the Attorney-General had
hteen I failed to prove the necessity for this startling mice
din not believe that any man of experience
se esC 7_37 'hat mary or even a few innocent people had
re yleted. Great authorities such as Lord Brougham,
sBAseal snroan, and Sir G. C. Lewis were aeainst a criminal
Vise:a and the jurisdiction of the Home Secretary, he
4111 sat. Provided for every practical grievance. The
asserted, would be unworkable, and, among
^l4 Neotions of detail, he pointed out that it
thatnttuateral, and gave no right of appeal to the Crown;
atilsee'seres was no guarantee of the second trial being better
Laird sa° snit, or that a second might not be followed by a
"diseir fourth. He regarded the Bill as an indirect ex-
teeae
,te abolish capital punishment; it would weaken the
hej,SaresPonsibility of the Judge and jury; and it must
"Q.tclitc:ed by a large increase in the number of Judges. Sir
Li conoluded by moving the rejection of the Bill.
askelit. a" addY would not feel poignant grief if capital punish-
• easaere abolished by a side-wind. He oonsidered that
-sa"sr of appea should not be confined to cases of
aole a—sa but Should be incident to every trial for an indict-
sin;;,nee. Once adopted, the principle embodied in this
"a'''d, he was convinced, be rapidly extended.
Besitahwatithsan held that in this bill the Government were
i.kloplaoot only to get rid of capital punishment, but to
nlee"'LLBo_,llers to give evidence, by a side-wind; and he pro-
"stl ess-sesanst a measure which would lead to great expense
itt"e‘e much delay n I the administration of justice.
s_""sse °Dwood maintained that the present appeal to the
a`seoretarY was insufficient, and pointed out that great
Ns 471°,4 and uneasiness existed in the public mind as to
aka n'teins arrived at in many of our criminal trials.
1.4 onnell urged that the right of appeal, advisable as
amatl7,,,,' he for England, was still more advisable for Ire-
stela e present bill, imperfect as it was in some parts,
tlit '4l" his °pinkie, do more towards securing justice and
taeUreland than any measure that had been passed
kt se one exception of Lord O'Hagan's Jury Act.
Se'ee,.a Itolisell thought the existence of a grievance had
shown' and congratulated the Abtorney-General
tes attecapt to remove a very glaring anomaly.
/3
asserasilmot gave his most cordial assent to the bill, and
414 -"uated the Government upon having at last brought
fere e
the House.
'eta, alerleant Simon thought the Attorney-General had
'8441-481Y in bringing the measure forward in the present
tistati ed form. The objections that had been raised to the
d' rik
hiss,' of the Bill dic he contended, touch its principle,
Seal Wa...! to give a prisoner the right of having his case re-
aliv a e e thou-
ght the time had come when they should
terar tore enlightened method of reoonsidering capital
sti eta ,
heret,a,'"an now existed in the Home Secretary's office. He
-*alias; wished the Bill went further than it did. As an
ake he accepted it.
'• h Clarke said there was a t the present time a second eso
teeea re the House under the title of the Criminal Law
to the
Bill, which provided for appeals from any verdict
ela heZthe judge certified it to be a fit case for appeal,
salceaiisaolight this Bill preferable to the present one under
which permitted an appeal as of right in every
• osPital sentence.
treetZajiarcourt, in explaining the exact position of the
181t1 ia'-'utee with regard to the commutation of sentence.,
was guided as far as possible by fixed tradit,ion
ee. and there were certain classes of cases which .
le ablY took into
gentl account. For example, the hon. and
a be_ man had just stated that in 1880-81 no women
aseeop,,eu executed. That was because, so far as his
sWe's so executed.
him, these were cases of intanticde, and it
secie,,ss established practice of the Home Office in such
auir s'aes a,"Bocee to commute the eapital sentence. Another
waa where the jury recommended to mercy; and e.
el4killiaa4 Where circumstances transpired after the trial
aeeeetbald not been brought to the notice of judge and jury.
tkisea "sltnesses were not present who could have cleared
tWer. but who, when public attention had been excited
"Este, g I:rhial and the sentence of death, came forward and
-.Z.!tiLty at.st theY knew., and then it was lets with the Home
tll-'4 "et. But he aced in all such c i‘es under, ,ror-.
en so—esaantages. (Hear, hear,) There was no publicity
th the grounds upon which he proceeded, nobody
,satesse ale Circumstances which led him to take his
but that publicity would be found if there
fetch -naoteetent tribunal which could deal with these fasts,
--
oar this 'lldh •and openly state e grounds
as revel, • s evidence, the
t.,,a4 pr,:aig the decision of the first trial. To his mind this
asiblesaas, eleelve argument in favour of substituting another
ereateZ`ia After some further observations, Sir Wilham tx-
"4l w "ue opinion that the establishment of this appellate
ao?ss,
t e more likely to give harmony and uniformity
s ated s'es be
than were found in the independent
and
I'
bit Of
on particular judges. He saw no rits!vivan-
DDellat 0O the contrary great advantage in having an
eoUrt of this description.
Beer.f4ibEen did not think the Bill would relieve the Home
Nits-PLrY of any of the responsibility which at present
kebas, upon him. He also pointed out that while it gave
eesated power of appeal on the part of a prisoner
tt
t the .BeHe did think mistakes oteec o e
tee ,
ae, tinder the present law had been made out and he
_
tki "14hed to know if the Crown was to bear the costs of all
_
Pleats.
Rrievr:%. Cross thought the Government would make a
mistake if they were going to assimilate the
asausi to the civil law in respect of appeals. It must not
heClPPosed, however, that in voting against the Blithe was
ttezi" favour of a certain amount of appeal. If an experls
NI, Was to btall, it would in his opinion, be far
, er e made a
`lictsa,° give the right of appeal to every one, for all in. offences, but safeguarding it, among other ways,
ficllldrlng the leave of the judge to do so on question
▪ p.
ett.,,...rne1l was glad that the Government had proposed
aloe, sh a Court of Criminal appeal, and expresseda
13111,,""et Pending the final judgment of Parliament on the
tzee,ll jargons who might be convicted hereafter would be
°l3. theve '
-az to 78.-ssohtle dividing the second reading was agreed to by
~The Ice•
''ltt was eB subsequently referred to the Standing Com-
etee,sa° other business was disposed of, and the House was
',ed out at a quarter-past two o'clock.
The It

tiAtop
e
t '"er St OF LORDS met on April 8 for the first time after
it!lcia7, holidays. There was no business on the paper,
ietele 1-A2o,,eolidated Fund Bill having been read a first time
"mahiPe adjourned.
'M.Let th
eet OUSR OP COMMONS, Sir Stafford Northcote was the
Le% b enthusiastic demonstration from the Conserve-
It On coining to the Table to put a question rela-
'4olo42:ne Coupse of business he was greeted with loud and
—.4
cheering, which spread to the Ministerial benches.
THE CONGO.
DOs-..ceh Bright called attention to the effect which the
ei treaty with Portugal would have upon the interests
reeeereleation and commerce in South-West Africa, and
e,Wottle .I,t, resolution against any treaty being made that
"N.h oe "lnction the annexation by any Power of territories
Leedo—,Jnent to the Congo, or that would interfere with the
ultherto enjoyed by all civilising and commercial
es at work in those regions.
411411 Wee
eyere, !seconded by Mr. Whitley, who appealed to the
?Veeireeit and the advocates of free trade not to
Lt
eery ,wrs,the face of hostile tariffs, to a foreign country err
rd`m.L.eh bad hitherto been free to all nations.
l'iteinaurice remarked that circumstances had
znce the days of Lord Palmerston and Lord Russell
h,"4ere ineed Her Majesty's Government to consider whether
ree;',,re not adequate reasons for taking a new departure
eZro
,th to this matter, and entering into communica-
'agoeti te the Portu uese Government to see whether
-ferangement could not be made to obviate the
teee rieee to which the present condition of affairs
statZ The noble lord enumerated the demands f
which,
7qest.„. recently by Lord Derby in another place, Her
"iatiQue Government had made in the course of the nego-
adding that either a treaty would be ade fully
:dee, .„.2 ell the rights and liberties, commercial or other
it 141,7hich it was their privilege to defen ;or if they found
taktdoerible to obtain the securities which they had de-
°ectietect the Gwvernment would resume the position they
ter , at the commencement of the negotiations.
r,elstionnrke was of opinion that the proposed treaty would
I.:;nelish trade on the South-Weet African coast, and
`"Aleee."`ere Counselled the Government to adhere to the aid
kre of the Foreign-oefice,
i_tretiet,W,„eidebouse, deprecating any restriction upon the dis-
.M'g Government, submitted an amendment declar-
c
ereeest the conclusion of any treaty that would core-
leent ;me artY engagements into which her Majesty's Govern-
kfloecreght have heretofore entered, or which would net
4e/144°1111de security to all the civilised and commercial
kr. r, at work in the Congo district.
reeet f`eledatone held that it was impossible for the Govern-
'o fetter their action by adopting a limitation so un-
ullt 1,43 f, Well as unsound, as that contained in the resolution;
1;,e011ei1tW4,45 (Mite reedy to engage that if they found it Ix-
eeoei,l juat a treaty should be made, ample opportunity
otior:,?e given to Parliament for expressing its opinion
Itr."t Was retitled.
luctinderson upon this advised Mr. Bright to withdraw
vua dot. °II, but the Speaker pointing out that this could not
cortees;,:cithont the withdrawal of the amendment, Sir S.
'etOre:e remarked that it would be inconvenient if no
thet
.thh,e debate remained on the Totes, and suggested
bkr --endtnent should be agreed to.
i,orte.„,:,erater joined in this suggestion, predicting. that.
'elet7tit would not care for a treaty made with such iimitna
elieu_nd after some further conversation the motion arid
traetenelit were both withdrawn, and Mr. Wode iou
ent was put to and agreed to as a substantive

Sir THE °PIM& TRADE.
Orkyin 11-• Pease next moved an address to her Majesty
g that in all negotiations between the Englis and.it th°,,se Governments having reference to the opium duties
ri_oldell,kl be intimated to the latter Government that it
"Aht tokA Met as that of an Independent State, having full
I,his 41.ra0ge its own import duties.
4ted t W,as opposed by Lord E. Fitzmaurice as being calmu.
the te.? "atoPer the action of her Majesty's Government in
laot prriiations, which there was now reason to hope would
bobi, love fruitless on the subject of the transit duties. The
lillestt rd. ou behalf of the Government, moved the previous
bo eg. c'n, Which after further discussion, was carried by 126

tkr en,
CO4 THE CHANNEL TUNNEL.
~ve—amberlain rose to move, "That a Committee of
1,-.lrobers ot this House be appointed to join with a
'lnenV_ttee of the House of Lords, to inquire whether it is
ttoThZtilt that Parliamentary sanction should be given to a
'OM t tie ennanaunication between England and Far
be Iran consider whether any or what oonditions..
catie)Tl",(l by Parliament in the event of such oo mmunl
should
With 'enag sanc•ioned, and that the correspondence
Tt,t referenCe to the proposed construction of a Channel
to tell, PrePented to Parliament in 1882, be referred
that ~ e
_, Corn naittee " 'l'he right hon. gentleman id
tthseo '',, Zell;
toiroulni near?, ~c 1 rmc 141
tmt:
rtanccii sr , lie i slitno u Ipda
pursuance
eine oovieda
" naltBtE? given by the Governroen,, but in view of the neoti.e
B. I,zor:ln given lay the right hon. gentleman opposlt.. lur
Which in'te).,lte thought it right to state the position
t:areaettli
etigtiao-mFia•etnt6crh actooomdpainny,order to put it clearly before.
1/4 Arße• The subjeot of the Tu.nnel watt first Tals44 bY
pillesta result followed, for the e s
breakingta bli sh ed 0
ui in
olf Bs6h7e,
Fbrua but
snot)
ut a stop to the proceedings. In ltll
4 a:
ttho rnattlt,,,W„ ar P
"°Oll L was again brought up, and a correspondence
14/IC'
.... b etween the promoters of the French company
I Imitlish on the one hand, and their respective

Governments on the other. On the 24th of June, 1872,
Lord Granvil'e, writing to the t nglish Ambassador in
Paris, said "With reference to your Excellency's despatch
of the 15tn inst , and previous correspondence. I transmit
herewith a copy of a letter received from the Channel
Tunnel Company, urging the Government to inform them it
they have any objection to the tunnel being made. The
Board of Trade have been consulted, and as regards the
eugineering dificulties the Government offer ne opinion;
but they consider it matter for consideration in what way a
concession, if granted, should be modified by fixing the
manner in which the purchase of the undertaking is ta be
effected. The Government do not doubt Wet, assuming the
matter undertaken, it ought not to remain a monopoly, and
I am to request that your Excellency will make known to
the French Government the present application; but the
Government state that, subject to those observations.
they have no objection in principle to the proposed tunnel
between France and England." In 1874, the French Go-
vernment granted a concession to the company, contingent
on making arrangements with the English company for
carrying out the English portion of the undertaking. In the
interval the Government had changed, and the late Govern-
ment was then in office. In November of that year Lad
Derby communicated to the Board of Trade a despatch
received from the French Government, and in doing so
said, "I am to request that you will move their lordships
in order to ascertain their opinion as to the apswer to be
sent to the French Ambassador," and further on, he said,
" Support would be afforded by the Government to secure
such a result as the Board of Trade might desire." In
December, 1874, Lord Derby wrote the French Ambassador
on behalf of the Government, and in this letter he said, "In
reply to your Excellency's communication, I have to say
that there appears to be no reason to doubt that the
Government will offer no opposition to the scheme, provided
they are not asked for a gift or loan, or guarantee, in con-
nexion therewith." In 1875, a Bill was introduced into the
Legislatures of France and England, and both Bills appeared
to have passed without opposition. In March of that year,
a joint Anglo-French Commission was appointed to consider
the conditions on which the undertaking might be carried
out It met in Perin and London. They reported in 1876 on
the question of the management of the traffic and jurisdic-
tion, and suggested that the Government should be
able to suspend the traffic or destroy the communi-
cation in case of war.—After some further observa-
tions the right bon. gentleman proceeded to say
that the first step taken by the present Government was
the appointment of a military and engineering committee
to consider if and how the tunnel could be rendered abso-
lutely useless to an enemy in time of war. That com-
mittee also took a great deal of evidence, and reported in
May, 1882. Upon the receipt of that report the Government
considered what further steps it would be their duty to
take, and came to the conclusion that hitherto the inquiry
had been only partial; that there had been no attempt to
exhaust the evidence as to the Effect, for good or bad, of the
tunnel on commerce; that the advantages of greater facili-
ties of communication had not been brought prominently
before the committee; and that the general military
question had not been fully discussed In lèsi. thereturn,
the Government announced their intention to ask the House
of Lords to join the House of Commons in the appointment
of a ',hit committee to further consider these questions. It
might be asked, perhaps, whether a joint committee was
the best for the purpose, but that was a comparatively
technical point. It appeared from Sir Erskine May's book
that joint committees, which were common up to the year
1695, were not employed from that tipie till 1864, in which
year and in 1872 certain questions connected with railways
were thus considered. Another question might arise
whether the matter was a proper subject for the considera-
tion of a committee at all. he did not know whether that
would be held to be in doubt, but there were so many pre-
cedents in favour of that course that it might be said
that almost every matter of natioual importance had,
sooner or later, been referred to a committee. The amend-
ment of the right hon. gentleman opposite called upon the
Government to express its views on the subject. Now,
two successive Governments had pronounced their opinions
on it very decidedly, and bad indicated their views, not
only to the Rome, but also to a foreign Government, and
It was therefore difficult to see how the present Govern-
ment if any continuity of policy was to be observed
(ironical cheers)—could fly in the face of the opinions given
by two previous administrations. As the case presented
itself to him, the most proper course was for the Govern-
ment to ask the assistance of the whole House as to a
question which so greatly concerned the national security.
It was a question on which the Government had a right to
ask the advice of all parties in the House—(hear, hear)— and
with respect to which it was under a corresponding obliga-
tion to consult the opinion of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) He
moved the motion standing in his name.

Sir S. Northcote argued in opposition to the motion, and
moved as an amendment that before entering on this ques-
tion the House should be put in possession of the views of
the Government on the subject. Adverting to the assents
given by former Governments, he pointed out that since
that time thequestion of military defence had assumed much
more important dimensions, and it had now become a ques-
tion on which the Executive Government ought to take the
initiative without attempting to lay the responsibility on
Parliament.

Mr. Gladstone, on the other hand, maintained that the
Executive, by the acts of its predecessors, was committed to
an international proceeding, and had no power now to take
the initiative in withdrawiag from it. But Parliament was
not in any way committed, and it was with Parliament,
therefore, that the initiative in any further action should
properly rest.

- - -
Sir R. Cross, who expressed a strong opinion against the
Tunnel, argued that it was a question of all others on which
the Government ought to communicate with the French
Government.
-

Sir W. Lawson, who took a different view of the value of
the Channel Tunnel, agreed that it was a question of high
policy, which ought to be decided by the House without re-
ference to a Committee.

Mr. E Stanhope also thought that there were ample
materials for the decision of the question, and pointed out
th. 4 whatever report was presented by the Joint Committee,
the Government conld not shirk the responsibility of a
decision, but would have to make up its mind one way or
the other,
Mr. Childers replied that the Governmm.t wit well aware
of this, and had no intention of shrinking from responsi
bility, and after some remarks from Captain Aylmer Sir
Stafford Northcote's amendment was negatdved by 106 to 74.
A second division was taken on the metion, which was
carried by 108 to 72.
Some other business was disposed of, and the House ad-
journed at ten minutes past one o'clock.

A REMARKABLE PHENOMENON-
NATURAL SNOWBALLS.

The following remarkable account of natural snow-
balls has been furnished to the Courant newspaper in
Hartford, Conn., U.S., of February 22. The dis-
tance from Long Island Sound to Massachusetts is
some 70 miles, and the Connecticut Valley Railroad
is about 50 miles long, and runs close to the bank of
the Connecticut River for some 40 miles :
On Tuesday evening a light but damp snow fell upon
the crust that had formed over the snow of Sunday's
storm; and the south wind, which arose at a latter
hour produced an unusual phenomenon. Wednes-
day morning the college campus, the park, and vacant
lots everywhere hereabouts were seen to be strewn
with natural snowballs, some of them resembling
spheres with diameters of from one to nine inches or
more, and others looking very much like rolls of light
cotton batting, having a cylindrical shape, but in
nearly every case with a conical depression at each
end reaching nearly or quite to the middle. It was
easy to see how these balls had been formed, as it is
easy to see how the boys roll up the snow for their
forts. The wind had in each case started a small
pellet of the moist snow, and it had rolled along
until it grew so large that the wind could move it no
further. The ball not only increased in diameter as
it rolled, but grew gradually in length as a little
more of the snow stuck to it on each side, and thus
the snow was formed into the peculiar shape de-
scribed—that of a cylinder with a hollow at each end,
as if a long isosceles triangle were rolled up, begin-
ning at its vertex. The largest of the cylinders
measured on the college campus had a diameter of
twelve inches and a length of eighteen inches
while others in the fields in the neighbourhood seemed
much larger. The path of the balls could in many cases
be readily traced for a distance of twenty-five or thirty
feet. The snow, it should be added, was not at all
closely packed, but lay together very lightly and yielded
to a slight touch, so that it was impossible to move a
ball without breaking it. Observers in other parts of the
city report that some balls were seen of the size of a
barrel, which left tracks behind themf or more than sixty
feet. From East Hartford it is reported that they studded
the fields thickly, especially in places where the wind
had a long range, and were of every size to that of a half-
bushel or larger. Similar balls were seen yesterday
morning in many places from the Sound north to
Massachusetts. All along the line of the Valley
Railroad they appeared on every rod of ground, and
at some places they had left tracks showing that the wind
bad blown them in every direction, even in some
cases up hill. This interesting phenomenon, though
quite unusual, has been noticed before in different
places in this country and elsewhere, the most striking
instance on record being one which was observed in
New Jersey in 1868; this was in the daytime, when
the whole process could be watched. On this occasion
some of the masses of snow which were rolled up by
the wind attained a diameter of three feet. They
appear to have been seen, however, over an area
of only some four hundred acres, whereas the snow-
balls yesterday were spread thickly over many square
miles.