The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1876-07-08 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, July 3, tbe Earl of Derby said it
Was true that a -Russian general officer was employed in high
position in the Serviau army, and that other persons who had
held official posts under the• Czar might possibly be with the
Servian troops ; but at present he could not give any definite
information on the subject.
The Earl of Carnarvon indicated the future policy of Her
MsLasty's Government with respect to the MAW, Peninsula,
tuft a motion which had been propdsol by Lord Stanley of
kiderley was withdrawn_
In answer to Earl Granville, the Earl of Derby said there
'would he 120 objtetion to produce the papers on 'be Eastern
Question; but as f,,reign Governments were privately in-
terlined in some of them it would be necessary to consult
them b :fore he could lay all the documents on the table.
The Slave Trade Bill passed through Committee alter some
discussion.
The Wild Fowl Preservation Bill was read a second time,
and, several other Bills having been forwarded a stage, their
Lordships adjourned.
In the ILOUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Disraeli, in answer to
Questions from the Marquis of Hartington, said that the
Government yesterday received information from our Ana-
bassador at Constantinople that the Servians had crossed the
frontier with 30 guns, and about the same time our Consul at
Ragusa had informed us that the Prince of Montenegro had
left Cettinge to place himself at the head of his troops. To-
day they had received no direct information from what must
be called the seat of war. As the negotiations between the
Porte and its subjects had now come to a close, the Govern-
ment admitted that the time had come when the Papers
might be laid before Parliament, but he hoped that the
House would kindly remember that they were voluminous,
and that foreign Powers must be consulted before some of
them could be published.
Mr. E. Jenkins then moved the adjournment of the House
for the purpose of directing attention to certain statements
contained in a letter from Vienna in one of the morning
Papers, as to the character of the negociations which were
alleged tobe going on between her Majesty's Government
and Russia, with reference to action in the affairs of Turkey.
Matters, Mr. Jenkins said, had now reached such a crisis
that the House and the country were entitled to an earlier
explanation Wan the Prime Mtnister had promised; espes
chilly as it appeared that the course pursued by her Majesty's
Government was known at Vienna, and had been authorita-
tively declared in the public press.
Mr. Disraeli repeated what he had said in reply to Lord
Ilartington as to the prompt production of the papers, and
added that he had no doubt the House would come to a wise
conclusion upon them. But, speaking on the part of the
Government, and, indeed, for the general interest of the
country, he must expre,s a hope that the opinion of the
House would be formed upon the authentic documents
Which would be pla,led on the table and submitted to the
consideration of members on the responsibility of the
Government, and not upon anonymous articles in news-
papers, written by "Our Own Correspondents," who were
now sprinkled over all the capitals of Europe. So far as he
could understand in the confusion which prevailed while
Mr. Jenkins was speaking, one of the projects attributed
by him to the Government he heard for the first time, and
the other was ridiculous

Mr. Bright approved the course taken by Mr. Jenkins
and, though be hai no desire now to pronounce an opinion
en the policy of the Government, he regretted that Mr.
'Disraeli bad not given the House further information. Mr.
Disraeli knew all about the =atter, and In a quarter of an
hour he could tell all that the House and the country desired
to know. For instance, he could explain what there was in the
Berlin Note which made it inadmissible after the Andrassy
yott had been acquiesced in, and whether the Government
bad any plan of its own. Looking back to the Crigaean War
and the disdeditable manner in which we had ‘'dritted "
Into it, the country had a right to be taken into confidence)
beforp it was committed to a policy of which it might not ap-
p_roye. The Government, no doubt, would be supported bylpub-
1M opinion in endeavours to preserve peace, or in a poiicy of
neutrality; but it would not support a policy et maintaining
the integrity of Turkey and of repressing the struggles of its
Christian subjects for liberty by the sacrifice of British blood
otild treasure.
Sir H. Wolff pointed out that one of the minor causes of
the Crimean War was that Parliament was content to receive
Ministerial statements wltbout having Papers laid before it,
and he nrgad the Government not to be hurried into a pre
-
tuatara discussion.

After some remarks from Mr. Fawcett, Mr. Wyndham,
Rnd Dr. Kenealy, the Marquis of Hartington admitted that
there was considerable ipconvenieLce In raising such a Ms-
eussiok-without notice, and that it was unreasonable to
exact from the Government any explanations of the pqlicy
theY were now pursuing which they were not prepared to
volunteer. Though he hoped the debate would not be pro-
longed, it would remove all possible misconception as to the
strong feeling which prevailed iss and out ot the House on
tliis subject.

. ---
Mr. Disraeli said that in negotiations of this kind there
were always confidential documents which it had never been
the custom to publish without the oonsent of the Govern-
Mont from which they proceeded. After this the motion
liras withdrawn and the subject dropped.

The adjourned debate on Prisons Bill was resumed by the
Lord Mayer, who oppored the Bill on the ground Of its
interference with magisterial authority.
Mr. Whitbread opposed the Bill, which, he said, combined
the wont evils of centralisation without any single advan-
tage ; and Mr. Henley also spoke strongly against it, chiefly
from the point of view ot the treatruem of prisoners, but
also because there was no time to discuss so important a
Constitutional change. Mr. Kennaway, on the contrary,
held this matter of Prisons to be exceptional, and as not
afraid of the centralhation which the Bill involved. Mr.
Pease contended that all the ref )rres could be effected with-
out_the great cost which the Bill would entail.

Mr- RI Yorke and Mr. Leighton supported the Bill, as
also did Sir H. Jackson from the Liberal Benches, who re-
garde it as a first step towards a reform of local 13,11-
go,Oremellt. Nothing was taken from the Visiting Justices
except some small questions of expenditure, and. taking
Into consideration the efficiency and economy secured ty the
Bill, this was a small sacrifice to make.
Mr. Muntz strenuously opposed the Bill on the ground of
Its centralizing tendency, and reproached the c.)untry
gentlemen with selling their birthright for a fsrththg a pound
In the rate. Mr. Harcicastle also spoke against the Bill from
the Conservative Bencher.
Mr. Goschen admitted that in the way of Prison discip'ine
some good results might be expected from this Bill ; but it
was the relief to the local taxation which had promptei the
introduction of the Bill. As to the point of economy, he did
not admit that the fact of the State being able to perform any
duty more efficiently than the local authorities was any rea-
son for transferring it to the State. Nevertheless, he rather
ridiculed as absurd the suggestion that the Bill would strike
a blow at the the principle of local self-government : but he
called on Mr Cross to state at once what was the amount of
his engagements with the Local Taxation Party.
Mr. Cross, in the course of a general reply, touched first
on the question of confiscation, which, he remarked, had not
been repeated, and which he showed was entirely irrelevant.
This was not a matter of local government, because the
local magistrates had no power of filar own, but were
guided strictly by the statute. Of 23,000 prisoners, 10,000
were under the charge of the central Goveznment, and
he could not understand why so much fuss and row was
being Made over the transfer of the remainder. No
Blur was thrown upon the Justices if the improve-
ments contemplated by the Act of 180 had not been all
carried out ; it was not they, but the number of Jurisdictions
and the small number of prisoners which were to blame.
The Bill had passed througn the severe trial of being exa-
f3llne4 by all the Quarter Sessions in this very middle of the
debate. It had been almost unanimously approved, and he
hoped that the House would not only read the Bill a second
tine, but would pats it into law.
Mr. Childers denied altogether that the measure would
lead to economy, and contended that it would delay the re-
form of local admistration. Referring to the speeches of
Bir Massey Lopes, whom he assumed to be the representative
Of the Ministerial policy on this question, he insisted that
the Government should state how far they meant to go in
this line.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer pointed out that the
economy of the measure consisteu not merely in the saving
of 4100,000 or so, but in the Institution of a more econo-
rajcal system of prison administration, On the point of local
self-government, the Chancellor contended that this was not
one rf the subjects which could be left to local ratepayers,
but that it ought to be dealt with by the central Government,
,allA he believed it would facilitate the improvement which,
IS Was to be hoped, would be effected in the loc.al adminie-
lration of the c)untry.
Mr T. Chambers moved the adjournment of the debate,
'which Mr. Disraeli earnes'ly protested against, and the Mar-
quis of HartingtOn, in supporting the motion, remarked
that there were certain portions of the Bill of which he
aDProved, but there certainly was not time this Session to
_give it adequate consideration. After the usual altercation,
sue Motion for adjournm.at was defeated by 293 to 122.
.111% Mitchell Henry immediately moved the adjournment
Or the House but withdrew the motion in deference to an
Lineal fiom Mr. Disraeli and the Marquis of Hartington ;
Liu on a second division the Second Reading was carried by
is Majority of 199-295 to 93.
The other business was disposed of, and the Howse ad-
ottrned at half-past two o'clock.

the HOUSE OF LORDS, July 4, the Union of Benefice
;14 lus amended by the Select Committee, so as to extend
:Is operation from cities and boroughs to counties, was con-
clered in a Committee of the whole House, and the various
',wises were agreed to with few alterations.
The Friendly Societies Act (ISM Amendment Bill, bronaht
&rota the Commons, was, on tne motion of the Duke of Rich-
Mond and Gordon, read a second time
The Slave Trade Bill was read a third time and passed.
.„, Lord Belmore, after pointing out some err ‘rs in the
Jleturn of Owners of Land in Ireland, asked whether steps
could be taken to amend the inaccuracies.
Lord Beibourne, referring to the English Return cj Owners
Of Land, said that he could hardly conceive a document of
lees value on account of the errors in it.
Lord Granville and L2rd SsUbury mentioned inaccuracies
oncerning their properties tale English Return
The Duke of Richmond and b4rdon stated, in reply to Lord
Bela:lore, that with regard to Ireland it was intended to
correct the errors by the publication of an appendix to the
Trish Return.
After the disposal of the other business on the paper their
Lprdships adjourned.
In the ROUSE or COMMON'S, at the Morning Sitting, Mr.
FawcAt asked the Premier whether he could name a day for
laying upon the tab:e the papers relating to the Eistern
question.

Mr. D'sraell said that no members of the Rouse could be
more at xtous than those connected with the Government for
the production of the papers in question ; and with that
view he had given orders that the utmost expedition should
be used. It was quite out of his power, however, to 1.3,
*hem they would be ready.
Mr. Bourke, replying to Mr. Ilayter, stated that no tutor-
bastion had reached tile Foreign Office as to the number of
troops that had crossed the tiervlan frontier, or that those
'''coPe Were commanded by a Russian officer.
°a going into Committee on the Public Works Loan
Statement Sclater-Booth made the promised Local Financial
'betetnent, premising that the Bill gave power to the Govern-
rent to sanction loans to the amount of about four nut-
Which would be amply suffi 'lent for all the purposes
D vlding his Local Budget into two parts—Debt
ell, a Current Expenses—he showed that the Local Debt had
rcreated from £80,000,000 in 1873 to £B5 500,00) in 1874 eind
£92,500,000 in lai7s These figures Mr. &later-
. - ill analyzed minutely and front different points of
showing among other things that £12.000,C00
• the Local Debt is owed by the Metropolis, Sii mil-
'lces by the urban sanitary authorities (of which Man-
chester, Liverpool, Bradford, and Leeds accounte,el for 14i
121111,ions) 30 millions for the tolls and dues, and the remain-
der by School Boards, county and municipakAnithorities,
Lt'e• On the question whether local debt had increased
"tore rapidly than ratable value, he mentioned that the
latter has increased' from £100,000,00 In 1867 to
4120,000,000 at the present time, while in twelve months'
e the amount of debt he calculated would be
~„,'"5.600,000. In the last year £8,505,000 had been bor-
.7wed under Local Acts, and 41,975,000 by the autho-
h.,ThtY of the Local Government Board, and the great bnik
been raisec‘ from private sources. Although these
~u6ttres were large he did not regard them as alarming, and
;f ere could be no question that they represented
u'anY valuable improvements and much additional
condort to the people. Passing next to the question of Cur •
ExPenditure, 31r. I:Mater-Booth said that the amounts
iVett by Local Taxatiou had been increased from £24,500,000
1674 to £26,500,000, and the principal items of this addi-
tion were accounted for by the Metropolis Sanitary
"ties and the School Boards. At the same time the Poor
,„„,ltatee had fallen to £7,418,000, being a iiecrete,e of half a
-a.ution inlthree years. In Sect, wade the renotherttive
tzPendithre continued to rise, the unremuoerative expendi-
tu
as
re showed a constant tendency to decree. While the
Public Debt was in the ratio of 10 to 1 to the annual
Revenue of the country, the ratio of Local Debt was as 3 to
1 and besides this in recent Acts excellent provisions had
been inserted for seeing to the proper appltcation of the
oans and their one repayment. As to the averace rate of
taxation, Mr. Sclater- Booth said that whereas in 1857 it was
311 in the pound, at the present time it was anout 3. 8/1
n the Metropolis the average rate was 41. lid., in the towns
at 71d. and in the rural districts it was from 2s. 6d. to
2 a
Alluding to Mr. FAWCOWS amendment, he remarked
that although in the towns there was a difficulty in getting at

the owner Ma the occupier had undoubtedly to pay the
rates, which he regarded more as an increased rent for im-
provements than BR rent in the country there could be no
doubt that the rates woulfa fall on the owner.

Mr. Fti wcett. au amendment, moved a Resolution,
seLionded by Mr. Rathbone, declaring that an unduly large
proportion of the charge involved In the payment of the in-
terest and capital of the loans raised by local auti.orities
falls on the occupiers as distinguished from the owners of
land, houses, and other ratable property.
Mr. Hubbard complained of the delay in laying down a
reliable measure of vsluation ; and Mr. Goschen, after some
remarks in favour of the principle cf Mr leawcs re,oln-
Von, est ed for a declaration that the Goverinne .t held itself
to have fulfilled all its pledges on the subject of subventions
to local rates.

Mr. Hankey made some prat:Heal suggestions as a repre-
seut.tive of the Public Works Loan Cominissioners.

Toe Chancellor of the Exchequer remarked that the
Government, in various measures which it has introduced,
Bid already sanctioned the principle of dividing rates be-
tween cwners and occupiers, and with regard to the decrease
of the non-remunerative rates, he pointed out that one reason,
for it was the subvention from Imperial Wilds. As
to further subventions, without giving any pledges
as to the future, he admitted that the Govern-
ment deemed itself free as to the past, after
the passing of the Prisons Bill, and each new case must be
decided on its own merits. Moreover, he promised that the
Government would continue to fla its attention on improve-
ments of administration.

After some observations from Sir G. Campbell, Mr. Faw-
cett's amendment was withdrawn and the Bill was passed
through Committee pro formet.
On the order for committing the Appellate Jurisdiction
Bill, Sir H. James offered several suggestions with tbe object
of getting rid of what he described as the present "block "in
the judicial business; tut at the instance of Mr. Forsyth the
debate was adjourned to a day sitting on Friday.

The Bishopric of Truro Bill, which stood for second reading,
was opposed by Mr. Dillwyn, who continued to address the
House until the time arrived for the suspension of disputed
business.

Some other Bills were advanced a stage.
At the Evening Sitting, Mr, Tenncmt was calling attention
to the Report of the Factory and Workshops Acts Commis-
sion, when the Rouse was counted out at five minutes past
nine o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 5, the Orphan and
Deserted Children (Ireland) Bill was read a second time.
The Second Reading of the Medical Act Amendment
(Foreign Universities) Bill was moved by Mr. Cowper
Temple. A. debate ensued, b which Mr. Wheelhouse, Dr.
Playfair, Mr. Stansfeld, Lord Sandon, Mr. Bright, and several
other hon. members took part, after which Mr. Cowper-
Temple withdrew the BILL

On the motion for resuming the adjourned debate on tie
Increase of the Episcopate Bill,

Mr. Beresford-llope said it was desirable that more
bishops should be ordained. Six more bishops had been
suggested, but he was confident that two or three more
would be a great relief to the Courch. During recent
years the commerce and wealth of the country had
greatly increased, while the number of bishops had re-
mained nearly stationary. He felt that he should be unable
to carry the Bill this session, and after the satisfactory
assurances which he had received on the subject from the
Government of their sympathy with the object of his Bill, Le
proposed to withdraw it.
Colonel Matins hoped the Government would eee their
way clear to some comprehensive way of dealing with this
question.

Mr. Cross thought that the time had come when there
should be a moderate increase in the episcopate. A y
measure on the eubJect ought to be brought forward by the
Goverm.nt, and ought not to be submi.ted without careful
consideration, and ought to be a settlement of the questic n
for some time to come The criention had been for sore
time under conddera•lon of the Government; investlgatiors
were already taking place, and until they were completed he
did net consider that any further statement should be made
by the Government in regard to them.
The Bill was then withdrawn.
The other business was di-posed of, and the House ad-
journed.