The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-06-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the House of Lord., June 17, a timer, ntlather of railw
M ay
bills were read a second time. The etropolitan Railway
bill was read a third time, and passed.
Lord Cairns inquired whether it WAS true that our Melt
at Geneva had put in a summary of arguments on the Eng-
lish Case?
Lord Granville said that theatthltrators had resolved that
their proceedings should be for the present private, but the
corresp.mdence must have prepared their lordships for the
course which the Government would take It the proposals
submitted to the Goveinuient of the talted States should
and that course had been taken.
Lord Cairns said there were two courses angirested in the
papers—one, that the points for argument should he given in
tinder protest, and the other, that they should not be given

at all.
Lord Granville said that Iler Majesty'a Government had
ot put in the summery of arguments, and this statement
appeared to be rec-ived with !satisfaction.
On the Oder of the Day fur ,eoing into Committee on the
Parliamentary and liunfcipal Elections Bill,
Lord Cairns pointed out that the clauses had been reduced
yf medialf as compared with the hill of last year, in order
that provisions should be taken out of the bill and put Into
the schedule. Ile protested against a agsrem which was
liable to great abuse.
The 110000 having gone Into Committee, Lord Colehester
moved to omit clause 1, abolishing the present system of
election nomiration. Lord Ripon defended the clause as con-
ducive to the quiet and orderly character of elections, and
the clause was retained.
On Clause 2. enacting that the votes shall be taken by
Ballot,
The Duke of Richmond said that the clause opened up the
whole question of personathm.an offence so serious that it
was absolutely necessary to prDee some machinery by which
the vote could be traced. In the hill of 1670, which hadsupon
its back the more of air. Bright. Lord llartington proposed
a clause to this effect, which he had taken out, end now pro-
posed for adoption.
Lord Ripon pointed out various points of difference be-
tween the present bill and that of Lord Ilartirgton. The
amendment was really vital to the bill, because it would
render secret votieg almost impossible.
- - - •

Lord Cairns contended that tbe dense would be produc-
tive of mischief, vice, perjury, and fraud, and that unless per-
sonation must be triumphont it must be followed cud
punished by means of is scrutiny.
• • • • • . . ,

The Lord Chancellor said that the amendmentsof the Duke
of Richmond would, if adopted, snake this an entirely new
bill. It was not worth s hbe, for the sake of punishing the
small modicum of personation, to lose the larger benefit of
an absolutely secret vote.
Lord Grey was afraid that personation was already to in-
finitesimal evil, anal that under the Ballot It might be carried
on to a much greater extent.
Lord Romilly held that the only effectual method of
putting down personation was by a greater multiplication of
the number of polling places.
The Duke of Somerset Ball that the objeet of the Ballot
was to obtain an honest vote, and asked whether the
Government intended to adopt the words they regarded as
so desirable In 1670.

Lord Granville said it was carrying the argumention ad
Imminent too far to hold the Government responsible for not
adopting a clause which, Milted, had not been bully argiled
two years ago.
• —•

Their lordships divided, when the Duke of Richmond's
amendment was canted by a majority of ;1, the Contents
henna 16 and the Not-Contents 91.
• - -

The Duke of Richmond next proposed an amendment
raising the question of secrecy and making the Ballot
optional.
Lord Ripon said it would have been better to throw out
the bill on the second reartlug than to adept amendments
which would render it a dellfsion and a sham.
Lord Salisbury denied that the sense either of the country
or the House of Commons could be pleaded in favour of a
compulsory Ballot.
Lord Cowper opposed the amendment.

Lord Grey wad- not support an amendment which was
Inconsistent with the prix.ciple of the bill, and virtually
destructive of the measure.

Lord Lytlelton had ,ited against the bill on the second
reading, but would be no party to an amendment that would
make the bill an utter unreality.

Lord Airlie, who had voted with the Duke of Richmond in
the last division, thought that their lordships would place
themselves in a false position by agreeing to this amend-
ment.

Lord Cairns denied that the Opposition were now attempt-
ing to &f-at the bill by a site wind. The Duke of Richmond
had given full notice of the emir nihnents ho intended to pro-
pose in Committee, and the Legislature had no right to Im-
pose secrecy upon an electe against his will.
Lord Kimberley contended that if the bill passed with
these amendments it would be so much waste paper.
Lord Romillv, having gone through live or six severely
contested elections, testilled to the strong desire for the
Ballot among the constituencies as a protection against
intimidation. .

Their lordships divided, when there appeared a majority of
16 for the Duke of Richmond's amenduieut—Coutente, 63;
Not-Contents, 67.
"

The Duke of Richmond next propos.' to strike out
certain words In clause 4 prohibiting; Returning (Hikers,
from communicating how any person Votes. Now that the
Ballot was optional no purpose could be served by this pro-
viso. The aa.endment was rasisted I;y Lord Ripon, but was
carried on a division by a majority of 16.
The Duke of Richmond next moved an amendment to
clause 6, giving every elector so far as is reasonably prac-
ticable a polling-place within two miles from his residence,
Instead of four as propo ed by the bilL The amendment
was opposed by the Government, but was carried on a
division by a majority co 19.
- - - • - . .

On the motion of the Archbithop of Canterbury, Clause
was amended by striking out the word s permitting Returning
Officers to take any P.aliamentary.aided school for the pur-
poses of the poll.
Lord Shaftesbury proposed two amendments, which he said
bad found greet favour with the Olite of the working men,
and which together would be eminently favourabl., to the
peace and good order of elections The that. enabling the
poll at borough elections to be prolonged until El o'clock p on,
was carried on a division by b 7 votes against 72. Before the
second (cloaing ail publichouses on the polling-day) could he
put,
Lord Cairns moved that the Chairman report progress. in
order to call attention to conduct on the part of the Govern-
ment which was entirely unprecedented within his ex-
perience. Having by their organ, Lord Ripon, refused to
accede to the amendment, they suddenly turned round and
all of them went into the lobby with Lord Shaftestury. This
was speaking one way and voting another.
Lord Ripon said he had regretted that the other Rouse had
struck out the clause Imictliening the hours of the polling,
but thought the hour of eight In the evening too late
throughout the year. lie had voted for the clause with the
view of modifying it on the Report.
• •

Ultimately the motion for reporting progress was with-
drawn, and Lord Kimberley having antionnceil that the
Government would certainly go into the lobby against Lord
Shaft.shury's second amendment, it was rejected by 133
votes against 90. The r. side of the two divi.ions is that the
poll will be kept open until 8 o'clock p.m., while the public-
houses will be allowed to remain open (luring the day of
election as usuaL
Lord Beauchamp moved to arid words to clause 33, limiting
the operation of the Act to December 31, 168.), unless Parlia-
ment should otherwise determine. The amendment was
strongly opposed by the Government, but it was carried on a
division by 106 votes against 60.
The Duke of Richmond's form of Ballot paper was also '
carried against that in the bill by 91 votes against PS.
The bill was then ordered to be reported with amendments,
and their lordships adjourned.
In the House of Commons, Mr. Gladstone was questioned
by Mr. Bouvet+, and Lord E. Cecil as to the proceedings
before the Tribunal at Geneva, and contradicted, as for as
the British Government is concerned, the telegram that the
two Summaries of Arguments have been lodged. The British
Summary has not been lodged and the British agent bas
applied for an adjournment, in conformity with a previous
statement. Further than this Mr. Gladstone refused to
make any further disclosures, in deference to the Arbitrators,
who were keeping their proceedings secret, except to say
that it was expected they would adjourn again that day for
24 hours.
In reply to a question from Mr. B. Cochrane, Mr. K n itch-
bull-Hugessen stated that last year Canada refused to the
United States' fishermen the provisional rise of the privileges
gran t..,1 them by the Treaty, while Prince Edward Island and
Newfoundland had ailowed them. By "provisional use"
Mr. Knatchbull-liugessen understood that it the legislation
by the British or Dominion Legislatures necessary to c irry
out the Treaty was never sanctioned, these privileges would
fall to the ground. . .

The Hone wee for the rest of the evening in Committee of
Supply on the Civil Service Estimates.
Several hills were also forwarded a stage, and the Rouse
adjourned at sminutes to 2 o'clock.

In the House of Lords. June 18, a very large number of
private bills were read a second time.
On the motion to read the Mid-London (Western Section)
Bill a second time,
The Duke of Marlborough asked their lordships to reject
the hill, on the ground that this was only a portion of a much
more extended scheme that had been brought before tar.
Moment this session. If the bill were passed, it would
be used as a means of carrying the larger measure in a
future session oi Parlianient. The scheme should be con-
sidered as a whole, and the judgment of Parliament ought
not to be fettered as it would be by the c distruction of a
portion of the line, lie asked their lordships to put a atop
to this speculative and haphazard scheme.
The Earl of Nlalmeshury, as an inhabitant of Marylthone
pariah, opposed the bill.
The amendment was carried without a division.
The second reading of the Appointment of Commissioners
for Taking Affidavits Bill was moved by the Marquis of
Clamicarde, and agreed to.
The Pier and harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Hit
sass read a second time.
- - • -

The flaptistual Fees Bill passed through committee.
The Bishop of Carlisle moved the second reading of the
Triads of Benefices and Churches Bill, and mentioned the
ffircuittsiances which led him to bring it forward, he having
found thdt aecheine which he was willing to sanction could
not be carried out, owing to a technical difficulty which was
interposed by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners.
The bill was read a mend time_
The Board of Trade Inquiries Bill was read a second time.
Lord Abinger again complained of the injustice done to
the Captains of ,he late Purchase Corps by their proposed
supersession by the First-Captains of the .icientitlc Corps,
and moved for a Royal Commission of Inquiry.
A imm discussion followed, and in adivision, Lord Abinger's
motion for a Royal Commission was curios! by 42 Contents.
against 39 Not-Cobtents.
Their lordships then adjourned.
- - -

In she /louse of Commons, Mr. Manta moved the third
reading of the Birmingham Sewage Bill.
Sir Itcliatt Neel moved as an amendment that the bill he
read a third tisne that cay six months. Ile said his opposi-
tion was not hawid upon any personal et selfish motives.
Ile repeated his former objections to the hill, and said that
If this bill pass., it would be to him a most grievous wrong,
for it would render Ids horns uninhabitable, and would
spread impurity and pestilence over the thickly populated
property which he owned.
lurd Henley, VA chairman of the committee on the bill,
acid that thin bill wax not introduced to serve the purposes
of a speculation, but to relieve a corporliti-in of one of the
greatest towns in England, sslio were Erred to take the
eourse now proposed. It was nisolutely necessary that the
seirage of Birmingham should be tagen in the direction
provided by this bill. The corporation were restrained by
Injunctions in Chancery from placing se wagein the neigh-
bourhood of the town, and they were ,mpelled of necessity
toga into the neighbourhood which they bow proposed. Of
the LeGO acres, which scald ba taken, only DO be-
longed Pi the right hon. baronet. The rocess of defer
-
eating the sewage was such that he was perfectly satisfied
there would be nothing in the nature of a nuiaance, and
there would not he tain slightest filmy dime either tai the
residence of the right Icon, baronet or his tenants. In the
casea of the Leamington and Warwick sewage works there
Weanco complaint of nuisance, and Lord Warwick had par-
(glued the sewage for a term of thirty years to place on his
land. It struck the committee as a mid:, of absolute
necessity for the Corporation of Birmingham to plopt some
such plan aa this, and that this was the only feasible • ne.
After remarks from gir C. B. Add. rley and Mr Dixon,
. .

Mr B. ;;re *aid the old theory used to be that a Men's
house was his castle, but it seemed now that they could vom-
pel a man to sell his owlt land, end to have a nuisance erected
before his door. At Warwick PO acres were taken for
2,000 000 gallons of sewage, but at hirrninzhain th., pro.
posed to take I aily 900 acres for 22,000,000 valor, It would
be but a poor compliment to the illustrous size of the right
hon, baronet the member for Tamworth to desecrate his
home 1011 i the home of his children by putting before the
House a crude and undigested plan d! sewage nitration.
Allen the discussion had been continued for some littl
time, the House divided—For the third reading, it against,
148 ; majority, 8. The hill was therefore rejected.
The liousc then went into Committeee on the Scotch P..ln-
ration hill, and the remainder of the sitting was occupied
Wall the Couseleuce Clause (65';. The points raised, how.

ever, had no special application to Scotland, but were
ronewals of controversies discussed at lep,gth and set-
tled In 167 d, aver the English Act. Mr. Anderson
lire moved that no religious cafe:his= or forminary
distinctive of ary particular denomination shall be taught
la a public t. 014;01, and was beaten by t'to to 130. Mr.
M'Laren next proposed a proviso, that when relLdous In-
.-dm:than is given the reading and teaching of the Bible
shall form part of auch instruction. but the Committee
declined to agree with fun by 1811 to 130. At the end ot the
clause Mr. Crum-Es-leg proposed to add that all payments
Cr Instruction In religions subjects shall be defrayed out of
funds voluntarily provided, but this wan negatived by the
largest majority of the day-230 to 85. _

- -
The C!au,e h:iving been a,Treed to, the Committee ad-
journed until Friday.
_ .

•
The Court of Chancery Funds, the Cnstoms and Inland
Revenue, and the Chain Cables and Anchors At Stispinsion
Bills were read a third time and passed.
At the Es ening Sitting the lloose was counted out as soon
as the Speaker t..ok the chair.

in the House of Commits, June 19, Mr. Rusaell Gurney
moved that the House should go iuto committee im the
Public Prosecutors Bill. - - •

Mr. Sclater-ltooth said it was quite impossible to -get a
correct view of the bill in its present state after the extensive
amenftents Id which the flume Secretary had given notzce.
Ile suggested thst the hill should he c.hireitted we .fornia
in order thst it mtglit be reprinte4l with the GOVCrIIIIIIOIIt
amvndments, and that lc should then be given into the charge
of the Government.
-

Mr West said he should never have assented to the
second reading of shill containing such provisions as it was
now proposed to introduce. The Home Secretary contem-
plated striking out whole pages of the bill and introducing
subjects which hml not the slightest reference to the orighial
object of the Measure. Ile objected to one of the new
clauses as making great and fundamental changes In the
whole criminal law, and he thought the House was placed in
an extra irlinary position by this endeavour of the Govern-
merit to pass a Mil of their own by tacking it on to a pri-
vate member's bill on another subject.
Mr. Walpole thought that the Government amendments
would entirely remove the two great objections brought
againse the bill by limiting the compulsory appointment of
a public prosecutor ti the Central Criminal Court, unit by
giving other parts of the country the option of having pub-
lic prosecutors it they should desire it. As far as other
amendments were concerned, he thought further time might
he given; but as regarded the other past of the bill, he
hoped the House would at once consider it in committee.
After remarks from Mr. Bouverie, Mr. V. Harcourt, and
Mr. Hardy,
Mr. Brace admitted that that would have been a proper
course to have taken, but it was not possible to take that
course. Every moment of the tiniest the disposal of Govern-
ment was fully mica/lied, and seeing a good bill brought in
by private members they thought it meter:Ode to amend it
where it was necessary, to abandoning other measures in
order to make this a Government bill.

A lengthened discussion followed, and eventually. Mr
Bruce concurred in the suggestion that the bill should be
committed pro formft and reprinted with amendments, and
mid the (loverniueut wculd endeavour to give a day for its
discussion. It it were not ir,sseit this session, they would
undertake to deal with the subject next session.

...... _ _
The hill was then committed pro forma, and ordered to be
reprinted.
Mr. Charley moved the second reading of the Bastardy
Laws Amendment 818, and idefy explained its provisions,
contending that they would decrease infanticide and im-
morality. It was proposed, among iither amendments in the
existing law, to raise the limit of age below which the law
gave protection to girls, from 12 told
After a short discussion, the bill was read a second time.
_ . . .

The order for the second reading of the C iunty Courts
(Small Debts) (No. 2)11111 was discharged and the bill with.
drawn.
Mr. Bass moved the second reading of the Imprisonment
for Debt Abolition Bill, and in support of it quoted a number
of statistics to show the large coat to the country at imprison-
ing debtors far small amounts, and the con-.merit lucre iso
of the rates caused by their hiplines being left without means
of support. The sr perior omit. had no power of Imprison-
ment except In case of a crime, an the judges of superior
courts were opposed to tho power of mprisoument for small
debts which was given to county court judges.
Mr. T.opes moved as an amendment that the bill be read
a second tinie that day six now ths. Ile said that the value
and efficiency of the county cour.s would be entirely
ilestrored The power which they now possessed was to
compel men to pay their debts who were able to do so. the
power of imprisonment was possessed by the snperior as well
ashy the county courts, and it was enacted that it should
only be usad when it was proved that the debtor hail the
means to pay but refused to do so. Ile held in his hand the
concurrent testiniony of comity court judges strongly in
favour of tnia discretionary power of imprisonment.

- -
Mr. Norwood seconded the amendment.
Mr. Roden supported the bill on the ground that the rate-
payers had to pay large sums for Insisting small traders to
carry nn their business Ile maintained that the existing
syste so was that ot one law for the rich and another for the
poor.
Mr. Henley thought it was a great injustice to the poor
that they were ranch snore liable to he imprisoned for debt
then those who owed large sums. Ile should vote for the

The SAicitor-General spoke In favour of the bill, but
urged that it should be postponed until after an ing.dry.
The flonte divided—For the second readlug, 34; against,
136 majority. 101. The hill was therefore rejected.
The other orders were then disposed of, and the Rouse ad-
journed.