The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-08-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

The HOUSE or LORDS, August 2, presented a crowded and
rnore than usually brilliant appearance. On but very few
occasions within living memory has the Peeresses' Gallery
been more largely attended. When all their benches were
completed filled, the wives and daughters of Peers were con-
tented to stand in the open doorways. Prince and Princess
Christian'and the Duke and Duchess of Teck were in the
iloYal Gallery. The Duke of Cambridge was the only
°tie of the Royal Dukes in the House itself; but all the
lenai
--ng members of both the great parties in the State who
are also Peers were present, and the Archbishop of Canter-
bury, the Bishop of London, and the Bishop of Peterborough
'Were among the occupants of the Episcopal benches.
PEord Lansdowne, who recently resigned his place in
ithe Ministry, sat behind Lord Spencer. Lord Derby
'Was on the first seat below the gangway on the Minis
ttrial aide. Round the foot of the Throne stood a large
El:fiber of Privy Councillors and the sons of Peers.
The he spaces outside the bar were densely thronged
ur members of the House of Commons and ladies, the
galleries set apart for those hon. gentlemen being also in-
conveniently crowded, and such had been the rush to the
412cangers' Gallery that the rigid efforts of the police became
Xemssary in order to prevent those who were furnished with
rs' orders and could not find room in it from blocking
hP t tie staircase in the hope of obtaining an entrance at
141 z e later period of the evening.

- -
Ti se Royal assent was given by Commission to a number
of iej
le?ttl Kimberley announced the recall of Sir Bartle Frere,
'Zee being that, as the efforts of the Cape Government to
fe: about a conference on confederation had failed, there
3so longer any reason which would make it desirable or
iietr to Sir Bartle that he should remain at the Cape, there
eter having existed a general harmony of opinion between
-'• acid Her Majesty's Government.
c,&)rd Granville, in moving the second reading of the
saaPeu sation for Disturbance (Ireland) Bill, asked the in-
hee of the House, because the Conservative party had
aetlnajority in that assembly, and on this occasion that
[tr. Y heel, further, the assistance of some of his own political
pritidt. and because in that assembly were the largest pro-
of landed property in the world, and proprietors who
Re,. sue highest standard on the position of landowners. The
es;;Swas an exceptional one, but that the existing circum-
ha'ces of Ireland were also exceptional had already been
eel Vlizeel by Parliament. He vindicated the accuracy of
..,_e statistics brought forward by the Government to show
tTisai,t evictions in Ireland were much on the increase, and
aso * telats aaaistance of the police had to be extensively re-
a,rite,ss to by the Irish Government in carrying out those
ealetie,res; while he freely admitted that good landlords were
tei`ae ee to serve writs of ejectment in order to obtain their
ioee„,_`s Reverting to the Irish Land Act, he reminded their
a-es'uis ips that when it came up to them as a Bill it contained
Jaglt,e leaving it to the discretion of the County Court
auee ue any particular case to say whether ejectmeat for
AiemPaYment of rent might not be regarded as a "dis-
teeeekie ce " entitling the evicted tenant to compensation
ake„"ethe Act. That clause was rejected by their lordships,
aieelg's it had the support of such men as Lord Clarendon
aet, eore Halifax in that House, and of Mr. Lowe and Mr.
las ence la the House of Commons. This Bill, being limited
efeaUearea and time, did not go so far as that clause. He
that the principle of the Bill was a novel
4 ei.i It was one recognized in most European coun-
-, sued, to some extent, in Scotland. He denied it
ee a confiscation of property. He expressed his great
tagret taut his friend Lord Grey should have undertaken to
*se:eve tile rejection of this Bill ; but he owned that" the sting "
br;"„"shevehat taken out of that occurrence by the remora-
ea-40e that tor the last quarter of a century no important
air atire had been introduced in that House which, either in
nciple or detail, had not been denounced by Lord Grey
keen delieet and a never-failing flow of indignant as-
virtts,hhient. Replying to the attacks on this Bill as one
ang the principles of political economy, he asked the
oPtition whether, irf the Seeds Bill and other measures
b.:the( of the late Government, they had observed the
,_,(l Principles of that science. As to saying that
ehesaae away within a limited area and for a limited time
ellOf the landlords' remedies was a concession to the Land
eieTse and Mr. Parnell, he inquired whether the passing of
Measure would be as useful to the Land League as the
C,°wing out by their Lordships' House of the Limitation of
IL''', Bill, which, without argument, the Conservative
V, headed by the late Prime Minister, rejected on
(taY night last, and of the Bill which he now asked their
a Lordship,. to accept. The noble earl concluded a very
.plr tt.ed address which was much cheered, by moving that
eau Bill be read 'a
secondetime.
Lord et3ire table, Grey, who had been seated on the cross benches,
weeet to
livered a lengthen
and, standing on the Opposition side, clo-
the
„die engthened address in opposition to the Bill. In
r Part of his speech the noble earl kept his head
turned to the Oppositi benches a circumstance which
afforded :.1 Lord Granville c
opportunity of making a telling
_Mt, which was received with general laughter. " Tarn this
a
,!..' Y—they are converted," saiel he in the mildest tones ;
alssa which Lord Grey, facing round, continued his &seer-
, w ch througkout were strongly denunciatory of
the measure. He held that its effect would be large and
lierious ; that practicallx it would suspend the payment of
Over
e ar‘e_ a large part of Ireland, and drive capital from that
."_Latra'. He held that such legislation was not kindness to
-*au Irish peasants, because it was preserving them in their
as_ksaent condition of misery and degradation by artificial
z .anse • He condemned the Bill as having in every respect
;si nd ncies precisely in the opposite direction to those which
allght to be put in operation, and he concluded by moving
'gat it be read a second time that day three months.
eAfter speeches from Lord Emly, Lord Lansdowne, Lord
''
-raven, and Lord Waveney,
ejsord Waterford followed, and described the Bill as one of
eerrrible importance " to the landlords of Ireland, affirmed
-"'se_as his own knowledge, as a resident, that there was no
'aetress whatever in some of the scheduled districts. He
t'i th
pointed out, as one of the causes why rents were not paid in
°sand, that e people of that country were educated in
e_e_ idea that rent was an unjust impost, and as another,
ieeeeeriesn. He had heard of cases in which the tenant
'ae,.. vrhispered into the ear of the agent a request to
gr" him with an eviction in order that lie might
a , ve an excuse for paying his rent. No more money would
radvanced by private lenders on land in Ireland such was
-:,7_tellaertainty felt as to future legislation. He denied that
~,,S„'i
Si
_th: Government regarded as safeguards in the Bill
saneed b any security to the landlords against perjured evi-
Zin and he sarther denied that this Bill was in the spirit
1%1, 'And Act. I
and would t was founded on Mr. O'Connor Power's
Itasca et did n enormously promote agitation whether it
Lord
e Inahuface °*Pass. His remedy was the restoration of
T, IL"' °I
—era, tee
Ireland.
eeeernative ve' '''prreed res their lordships that if the only
at that th
toration of ee: , oe Government should undertake the
telnedy. ne
nr.isn re
ee —anufactures, he would decline such a
rert one, and 1.1-" Ye longer an Irish landlord, but he had
Ireland and her anyine
Mon. As this w're g thereby obtained eome knowledge of
ahips would hay ple, he ventured to take part in this discus-
a Bill for a temporary purpose, their lord-
not be eno opportunity of reconsidering it, and it
ter the b .• Well that their lordships should give any ground
diced
v;eeuef that they approached this question with preju-
-144 a gr‘ eat . Ile held that if the Government thought there
ardi„e_ . danger.which might be averted by suspending the
law of enctiou, they had as much right to ask Fer-
tile fato do that as they would have to ask it to suspend
l!quired!at Corpus Act if they thought that the public safety
he latter measure. Their lordships had first
whether the emergency existed, and neat,
it4ther the 'provisions of the Bill were such as to
able" it,. in the manner which was least objection-
% idi el such an exceptional measure was necessary
f3e _ eald exteud over the least possible area, and last
1:1 the least possible period. He thought eighteen
, was too long a period, because there would be
dellths
h 'ee,TY of time between February and July next to renew it
a„se were now passed for a shorter time. He was of
ihrel,en, also, that there ought to be a narrower limitation
ae, Isle class of tenants to which the Bill was to
sr,lY- Amid ironical cheers from the Opposition, the
ea°, 'e earl confessed that he did not very well see how
-4,e County Court Judge was to satisfy himself on the
!Medicine which he would be required under the Bill
:9 decide. These points were not to his mind objec-
;lees against the Bill itself, but they were reasons for
:Smiting its operation as much as possible. He admitted
,enat it might haveebaen better if they had never heard of
sse e Bill; but t_rey coned not go back three months. The
louse of Commons had passed it, and the Irish people ex-
bected it. If the only alternatives were to pass the
the, easure in its present shape or to reject it, he would adopt
Lale latter; but as it might be amended in Committee he
'Would vote for the second reading.
b.,Lord Salisbury warmly opposed the Bill, and the Earl of
"asraberley defended it.
34 On the motion of the Earl Cairns,cthe debate was then ad-
hrned until four o'clock on Tuesday.
eeTh, e other orders having been disposed of, their lordships
-m.lourned at five minutes to twelve o'clock.
,_lll the Holm or CoMILONS, Sir .T. Lubbock asked the Post-
whether the authorities of the Post Office
reLlartained any objection to the transmission of small EMUS
-.",...1.1g11 the post by means of postage-stamPs.
laj:;enweestt in reply said that in Ma 6,090, in 1877 6,300,
see 6,100, in 1879 7,200 (and during the first six months
leet'SSe Present year the number had risen to 4,100)
coutaining postage-stamps were known to the
4,3l9ftice to have been lost. Therefore, tke insecurity of
etaZng small sums through the post by means of postage-
Would be obvious to his hon. friend. As his hon.)
()pint hAul on more than one occasion referred to the
Mr. Jeffreys, the Controller of the Circulation
1141;sreent, as to the insecurity of sending small sums of
tried. through the proposed postal orders, perhaps his lion.
alsennZeUld allow him to say that Mr. Jeffreys had
lakes esl him to state that if Parliament sanctioned the
War or--- the new postal orders they would be a far safer
th sending small sums than by postage-stamps. (Hear.
bloaae, al,lar, Mils of Hartington, in answer to various clue-
ote afeaft.:' le had received no intelligence as to the position
• the ' 1" ,Candahar since the telegrams which appeared
at Pr°ge had Papers' e was • the month
—.
r"rnujg H not aware that General
4, Illy, „Lox. required reinforcements early in.
ea's") deeectiernether any had been sent immediately after
that rank of the Wall's troops, Ile repeated, however,
Ittrrovea ,erce enients had been ordered up when General
"guTernent was decided on.
,4 discussi
took place on the "count eof
4tlday ayani°n
k,e , yeral oth then t out .
ng i. which Mr. Gorst Lord Hartington, and
etibiset ee er non. members took part, but in the result the
..aa Opped.
Lord ee
the - s'artiagton re
, __eonsultation o
Seet_r W. 'Tenzer andi ad to the House the Bulletin of
Mr. Gladstone's condition between
ens followin
_ could be g
sei effDr. A. Clarke, dated 4.15 pan., to
eet :—" Ur. Gladstone is doing as well
elate„,_ , expected. The fever still continues." The
h s'ul
trcielidtontfrer_isTwent on to make the statement with
. Fmere which had been promised by Mr.
micss ancweadrtZ considering the deepatches jest received,
K:ee Cape had e."lat the special reason for retaining him at
i
irrefu,ed eeethaPPeared, inasmuch as the Caps Parliament
t deraticn, theeee,t to take the initiative n the project of Con-
etigret via _,th "overnment, he said, had decided, with great
adefa, an unabated sense of his personal qualities, to
reent w`nr Majesty to recall Sir B. Frere, This
WI announce-
.L_ hsar_n eettived with much cheering from the Radical
l nifty ' ula I/Jrci Elcho havine asked whether any oppor-
liths,e
ewheeuerald be gl,:i.an to those ev'ho did not sympathize lv,th
arthegton e Ting the subject before the House, rd
'Would said,,.. if any nottee were given. the Government
pold
not eaer what course they would take; but they
en,,,,tiat t be
pelicy. ne expected to offer an opportunity for chal-
I.'" "reuse having gone into Committee of Supply, Mr,
-"111,delle na
lulu _
,00ved the Education vote for England and Wales,
elealT,,!T an interesting statement as to ehe progress of
eitee.larV education during the ten years which have elapsed
le_ewed,*llipe
___E..d.ueatien Act became law. A. discussion fol-
ate. 1, .. winch Sir J. Lubbock, Sir C. Reed, Mr. L. Stanley,
goek—p•arr.rke, Lord G. Hamilton, and many other members
tav and the vote was agreed to.
loarneereal other votes were considered, and the House ad-
ti at twenty-five minutes past two o'clock.

7,4 The goys, LoRDs was again largely attended on
August 3, and "the strangers," including the
tk:reeses and the members of the House of Commons, mus-
ed in unusually large numbers.
Kimberley, in answer to Lord Cadogan, stated that
eLer,s relating to the recall of Sir Bartle Frere would shortly
th "I'd on the table; • and as regarded Basutoland, the au-
orities at the Cape were confident that they would be able
enforce the law throughout the colony.
thatrd Granville, in reply to the Duke of Somerset, slid
1t0,....ne news had been received that or the previous day
C an dah
Ole adjourned debate on the Compensation for Disturb,-
etee Bill was resumed by Earl Cairns, who discussed
E'whole question, mainly from a legal point of view,
er about two hours and three-quarters. Incidentally
the stated that the measure would apply to one-half
„Inc acreage of Ireland and to the whole of the pro-
Of Connaught 'and Munster, where it would
atiDersvessession of all existing contracts and actions, and
xot de the landlords' right of evictions. The Bill would
e
°.entTatencts ead
eairrewiyth freedom of contract, but would disturb
entered into- it would tempt and drive
tenant to make a claim which would • give him ready
'AZ% he Wasted, e he cqui.d, if he faUetl, secure
"" " tiy pa/ft th'e rent aid re-

deeming the holding within the six months during
which grace was allowed. His lordship examined
the provisions of the Bill, and described the effects
he believed would result from them at great length,
and asked whether it could be supposed that if the precedent
were once set that tenants should not be called upon to pay
rent when there was a failure in crops there would not be an
attempt to extend it from Ireland to other parts of the
kingdom. He denied that the Bill was necessary to preserve
the peace in Ireland, and denounced it as unstatesmanlike
and objectionable in many particulars.
The Lord Chancellor urged that the existence of distress
in Ireland could not be denied, and justified the introduc-
tion of the Bill to meet an exceptional state of circum-
stances. There was abundant evidence to show there had
been a dangerous increase in the number of evictions, and
the Bill was simply a check imposed in a most limited and
guarded manner to the abuse of a dangerous power. Prece-
dents for its introduction existed in the decisions of the
Irish Courts suspending the payment of interest on mortgages
in times of national calamity, and in the Act for the re-
mission of rent in certain of the provinces of India when the
crops had been damaged or destroyed. The area taken was
the same as that scheduled in the Relief Act.

The Lord Chancellor occupied nearly two hours in the
delivery of his speech. He was followed by the Duke of
Somerset, Lord Zetland, Lord Monck, and Lord Cranbrook.
The Duke of Argyll, with even more than his accustomed
animation and eloquence, defended the Bill and the Govern-
ment to a very crowded House. He commenced by saying
that Ministers were like the Six Hundred in the Balaclava
charge. Batteries were bearing on them from all sides, and
the strongest was immediately in their rear. Never had he
been more pained by any public occurrence than by hearing
Lord Lansdowne oppose them on this occasion; but when he
listened to his noble friend's speech he felt proud of him,
because of all the speeches delivered against the Bill, none had
been so able, so concise, and so strong. The noble duke
then proceeded to avow that no person was more alive than
he to the objections, some practical, some theoretical, to
this Bill; and yet, all circumstances considered, he felt
it his duty to give the measure his support. He, how-
ever, assured the House that the Government had no
intention to set up the principle of the Bill as applic-
able to permanent legislation. He relied on the preamble
of the Bill as showing that. His justiflcation for the sup-
port of the Bill was the character of the Irish hold-
ings. There were no fewer than 300,000 of them at a
rating value of £B, which would show a rental of £lO or
£l2. They were occupied by a population of about a million
and a half, who were almost all tenants at will. Of those •
holdings 174,000 were under a rating value of £4. There was
no analogy between such a tenantry as that and any other in
the world; and it was nonsense to talk of those people hav-
ing made contracts in the sense in which English and Scotch
tenants made them. He thought there were cases in which
some landlords had shown a disposition to resort to whole-
sale evictions even where the non-payment of rent had
or.tcurred through the failure of the crops, and he quoted sta-
tistics to bear him out in this. In reply to the argument that
the relief which the Government professed to give by
this Bill ought to be given at the expense of the public
generally, and not at that of the landlords exclusively, he
replied that there had been passed in favour of the land-
lords three Acts which were as much a violation of the
principles of political economy as any to be found in this Bill.
Having emphatically denied that the measure would en-
courage agitation, suggesting that such a result was much
more likely to be brought about by the rejection of the
measure, he concluded by contending that there was not
sufficient temptation to make tenants fraudulently avail
themselves of compensation for eviction, which they
would not value as much as the possession of their holdings.
Lord Beaconsfield, amid marked attention from both sides
of the House, said it was impossible to come to a decision
on this Bill without reflecting on the probable effects of the
course which their lordships might take. He then entered
on the history of the Irish question since the date of the
Devon Commission, and quoted a speech of his own in 1870,
when the Land Bill was under dissuasion, as containing in a
condensed form an account of the remedial legislation passed
for Ireland from the date of that Commission up to that of the
Land Bill. He charged the Duke of Argyll with having in his
speech taken no account of that legislation, and claimed for
the Tory party that in 1852 they brought forward three Bills,
which would have formed a Code for Ireland, founded on all
the recommendations of the Devon Commission, and that
afterwards they assisted to pass measures brought in by the
Liberals which carried out those recommendations. The
general policy of the Bill of 1870 was in harmony with the
opinions of the Tory party, and they did not resist the second
reading, though they moved amendments in Committee Sub-
sequently, though they did not approve the form in which it
passed, they accepted it as a final settlement, and for himself he
could not say now that there was any portion of it which he
would wish to see altered. But this Bill proposed to alter it.
He held that the proposals in the Bill were essentially of a
permanent character. He could not admit that the same
thing could be said of the advances for seed, the advances
for useful works, or the extension of out-door relief, which
had been fallaciously cited as precedents for the proposals
in this Bill. He was as anxious as any one to prevent
civil war in Ireland, but he would not sacrifice the
eternal principles of justice to prevent it, nor did he
think it would be prevented by strange and fantastic
proposals. There was no evidence of the imminence
of civil war in Ireland, and the language used in the
Queen's Speech could not have led the people of this
country to suppose that such a catastrophe was possible. It
was not until this Bill was introduced that anything was
heard of this civil war, though mention was made of several
measures of relief for Ireland, and although they had since
heard of a Commission which, if the Ministerial anticipa-
tion was correct, must conduct its inquiries amid civil war.
He could not think that the best way of relieving agricul-
tural distress in Ireland was by plundering the landlords.
He repudiated the idea that the Irish question was a party
one, and was, therefore, glad that the rejection of the
Bill was moved by Lord iGrey. It was an unwise Bill,
and it had been introduced to the country in an objection-
able manner. There had been vague rumours before it
was brought forward of some large measure for Ireland, and
it had even been rumoured that England would not escape
the careful consideration of Her Majesty's Government. lie
regarded this Bill as what military men called a reconnais-
sance in force. It had been an effective, but not a successful
one. The Bill had been sent up to their Lordships by a
majority composed of that section of the House of Com-
mons who despised the measure, and whose aim it was to
transfer the land from the legal possessor to the casual
occupier. This Bill was only the first of a series, which
would change the character and the Constitution of this
country; and if their Lordships rejected it they would do a
deed for which their country would be grateful and of which
their posterity would be proud. The noble earl, when re-
suming his seat, was loudly cheered.
Lord Granville, in briefly replying, proceeded to one
more vindication of the much disputed statistics. Out of
respect to the House lie thought it right to state that the
Government had resolved not to refuse any amendment in
Committee which would not destroy the character of the
Bill. He closed by saying he could not pretend that a great
responsibility would not rest with the House if they threw
oat the Bill.

The question on the second reading was put at five
minutes past 'one o'clock, and a division was then taken,
when there appeared—Contents, 51; Non-contents, 282.
Majority-231.
The Bill was accordingly rejected, and the announcement
of the numbers was received with loud cheers.
Their lordships adjourned at twenty-five minutes to two
o'clock.
In the "[miss or COMMONS, at the Vorning Sitting, in
reply to Mr. Gorst, Lord Hartington said he had no recent
Intelligence from Candahar, but he had just received a
private telegram from the Viceroy as to events in Cabul,
which did not mention any interruption of communication
between Candahar and Cabul, nor did it contain any alarm-
ing intelligence, at least up to the Ist, when negotiations
were still going on.

Sir G. Balfour asked Her Majesty's Government whether
all the despatches and paragraphs omitted from the pre-
viously published documents, as well as the more recent
documents bearing on South Africa, would be promptly laid
en the table of the House, together with such extracts from
the confidential and private documents as would show clearly
and fully the measures on which the Government had
differed from Sir Bartle Frere, as well as those measures on
which they had agreed, and generally if Government would
supply all those papers in the Colonial Office which would
show the manner in which Sir Bartle Frere had carried on
the duties entrusted to him. _

----------- -
Mr. Grant Duff in reply said: I suppose my hon. friend's
question is founded upon a phrase in the statement ilium
yesterday by the noble lord the Secretary of State for
India:—" The conclusion at which Her Majesty" Govern-
ment have arrived is that there had never existed between
themselves and Sir Bartle Frere that harmony of opinion
on many important questions now pending in' South Africa
which alone could have made it desirable in itself or fair
towards Sir Bartle Frere that he should remain at the
Cape, but for the reason that he had been specially sent
out to forward, and it appeared possible that it was in his
power materially to forward, the policy of confederation."
I thought that want of harmony was notorious, and had
been made clear to all the world by the debates of March,
1879, in both Houses of Parliament, in which so many
members of Her Majesty; present Government took part.
There is already on the table a great mass of documents
which way be studied with reference to the policy of Sir
Bartle Frere in South Africa before the resignation of the
late Government—say, in round numbers, 3,000 pages. To
the best of my belief, all the despatches of any interest
which have passed between Sir Bartle Frere and the
present Secretary of State, except the very most recent,
have already been presented, and the most recent—those
which relate to confederation—together with my noble
friend the Secretary of State's telegraphic reply, will be laid
on the table forthwith. I do not lumw of any documents
which would be in any way useful which are mot on the
table, except these quite recent despatches- but if my hon.
friend will communicate with me, I should hope we may be
able to gratify him by presenting any further papers bear-
ing upon Sir Bartle Freres policy which he may desire to
have. Of course, no private or confidential papers are or
ever could be presented without the fullest communication
with the persons to whom they relate or from whom they
came ; but I understand my lion, friend only to ask for such
things as can properly be given according to the well-known
practice of the House. (Hear, hear.)

Sir S. Northcote asked the hon. member whether he was
in a position to say when the South African vote was likely
to be taken, and whether, if he could not so say, due notice
would be given and an opportunity would be afforded for a
discussion of the recall of Sir Bartle Frere.
Mr. Grant Duff said the question of the right hon. baronet
referred rather to the department of the Secretary to the
Treasury, but he apprehended there would be no difficulty in
giving such notice as the right hon. gentleman desired.
The House then went into Committee on the Employers'
Liability Bill, but at seven o'clock had only succeeded in
disposing of the first of the thirteen pages of amendments.
The Epping Forest Bill was passed through Committee.
and read a third time ; and at the close of the sitting, Lord
Hartington read a telegram just received from the Viceroy
of India, the most important point in which is that Sir F.
rvoberts is about to march from Cabul to Candahar with a
strong force of all arms. The Chief Political Agent has had
interviews with the Aroeer, with whom are the principal
filbilzai chiefs and representatives of Maidan and other dis-
tricts. Tribesmen .are reported to be gathering between
Charnan and Candahar, and Ayoob is said to have detailed a
force to attack Chaman.
At the evening Sitting the consideration of the Employers
was again resumed in Committee, occupy-
Bill was
of the House until a late hour, and several
Liabilityohtigh etil
e
Bills having been forwarded a stage the House
adjourned at half-past one ooc
'cl k