The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-05-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 2, Mr. Lewis intimated
that, on the motion for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the
Parliamentary Oaths Act, he would move as an amendment,
"That inasmuch as the proposed alteration of the Parlia-
mentary Oaths Act is brought forward for the express and
immediate purpose of admitting to a seat in the Legislature
a professed atheist, this House declines to be in any way a
panty to a proceeding which is at the same time obnoxious
to the general religions feeling of the country, opposed to
the spirit of the Constitution and common law of this land,
and dishonouring to God."

Mr. Labouchere gave notice that on the proposal for the
memorial to Lord Beaconsfield he would move the "previous
question," and the notice was received with vociferous
cheers from a small number of gentlemen below the gangway.

Sir M. Hicks-Beach having asked whether the Government
was prepared to name a day for his vote of censure on the
Transvaal peace Mr. Goladstone said that since the subject
had been last mentioned the Government had obtained
certain information that the surrender of Potchef-
stroom had been obtained by an act of treachery cn
the part of the Boer commander, who had concealed
the armistice from the garrison. By the admission
of the Boer leaders themselves, uparation must be
made, either by replacing the garrison or in some other way,
and in the present circumstances he could not take upon
himself the responsibility of promoting a discussion on
South African affairs, wliich, he said, had receded somewhat
from the point at which they were when the notice was
given. But he promised to take the earliest opportunity of
making an arrangement.
--- • -

In answer to a question from Mr. Arnold, Sir C. Dilke said
that an Imperial Iradd accepting the latest arrangement on
the Greek frontier question had been sent by the Sultan
from the Palacerto the Porte.

In answer to Mr. Birley, Sir C. Dille said it was not ex-
pected that the French operations would interfere with that
commercial privileges of British subjects at Tunis, and he
added that Her Majesty's ship Monarch had been se,pt for
the protection of the lives and property of British subjects.

In answer to a question from Mr. Long as to the recent
opeech of Mr. Dillon, Mr. Forster replied that the attention
of the Government had been closely directed to the speech,
and that was all he could say. As to the proclamation of
the City of Dublin, on which he was questioned by Mr.
Parnell, he said the Government had tak&l this course be-
cause they thought it necessary; and on Mr. T. O'Connor
giving notice of another question he added that he should
not think it consistent with his duty to give any further ex-
planation.
qiestioned as to the hour after which the Oaths Bill would
not be brought en, Mr. Gladstone said he proposed that, if a
debate on the introduction of the Bill arose after the
Attorney-General had made his statement, it should be ad-
journed until the morning sitting of Tuesday. Subsequently
he moved that the orders of the day after the Land .Bill be
postponed for the purpose of making way for the Attorney-
General, and the motion was opposed by
•
Lord R. Churchill, who commented in trenchant terms on
the inconsistency of the Prime Minister, and condemned the
!notion as a concession to violence and mob rule' aUn-
justifiable interference with the privileges of private mem-
bers, and a first step towards compelling the House again to
eat its own words.

Mr. Newdegate and Mr. Onslow also opposed the motion
and Sir S. Northcote, while deprecating the appearance of
undignified haste, thought it desirable that the House
should know the nature of the Bill as soon as possible. But
it would be too early to resume the debate next day, and he
suggested, therefore that there should be a longer adjourn-
ment. ,
Mr. Gladstone remarked that it was not the fault of the
Government that the introduction of this Bill was needed,
and, though he admitted the necessity of an ample adjourn-
ment between the first and second readings, the adjournment
sug*ested by Sir S. Northcote would be extremely incon-
venient, and he would only assent to it on compulsion.
Mr. Lewis was proceeding to make some observations, but
being interrupted by cries from the Ministerial benches, he
moved the adjournment of the House. The motion was
negatived by 318 to 43, after which Sir W. Barttelot
suggested that the debate should be adjourned until
a Government night, and Mr. Dillwyn mentioned
Friday. Colonel Makins. Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Chaplin,
Mr. Maclver, and others spoke, and ultimately
Mr. Gladstone, desiring, as he said, to avoid a wrangle, inti-
mated his willingless to adjourn the debate on the first
reading, until Friday, if the business of that day would per-
mit of it. He deferred, however, a final decision until
Thursday.
The debate on the Irish Land Bill was resumed by Mr.
W. H. Smith, who moved an amendment declaring it to be
economically unsound, unjust, and impolitic, and continued
by Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, Lord J. Manners, Mr. Parnell, and
other hon. members. Lord J. Manners moved the adjourn-
ment of the debate, which was carried by 263 to 34.

The Attolney-General then proceeded to move the House
into Comffilttee with the object of bringing in his Oaths
Bill, and lfriefly reviewing the circumstances which had
made it necessary, he pointed out that under the law
as it stood there were no means of preventing any one
taking the oath, and that legislation was necessary to
obviate the profanatiQn of which many complained. It
was not proposed t 6 open any new door into the
House, but to widen the existing doors of affirmation, and
the Bill would permit any person hereafter to make the
affirmation fnstead of the oath.

After the Attorney,-General had completed his statement,
the debate was adjourned on the motion of Lord it.
Churchill.

Several Bills were forwarded a stage, and the House
adjourned at half-past two o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 3, Mr. Arnold asked the
Vice-President of the Council whether his attention had been
called to the fact that £44,999 was paid last year by local
authorities as compensation for animals slaughtered; that,
in the opinion of the Veterinary Department of the Privy
Council, this addition to the cost of meat "might be easily
prevented by a proper system of investigation," inasmuch as
that department had reported that "a large number of
animals are slaughtered every year on account of disease
from which they are entirely free." Whether, with regard
to the 63 sheep reported to have been infected with foot-
and-mouth disease, in a total of 66,722 sheep imported last
year from the United States of America, he could state what
was the number of cargoes of which these 63 sheep, or any
of them, formed part; and whether, having regard to the
very serious decline in the importation of sheep from the
United States from 119,350 in 1879 to 66,722 in 1880, in con-
sequence of the OrCler In Council of 23rd November, 1879,
and to the impossibility of this disease being latent in a
cargo arriving healthy after a voyage from America, he was
prepared to advise the Lords of the Council to reconsider
the terms of that Order.
Mr. Mundella, in reply, said: My attention has been
drawn to the amount, £44,999 is. 3d., paid last year by
local authorities on account of animals slaughtered under
the Act of 1879. The amount in the previous year was
£65,049 18s. 6d. It is the opinion of the Veterinary Depart-
ment that the saving would have been greater if a careful
inquiry was instituted by the local authority in the case of
every outbreak, and if in all cases of slaughter a post-mortem
examination was required. The 63 sheep referred to formed
Part of eight cargoes. The subject of relaxing the order as
to American sheep, (tc., has been carefully considered by
the Privy Council, and the difficulties in the way of doing
this with safety have been found to be insuperable. Sheep
are brought in the same vessel with cattle and swine, and it
might well happen that the sheep might remain uninfected
until on the point of being landed, and only develop the
disease after they had been allowed to go inland. If, on
the other hand, they should cipvelop the disease in a landing
place for foreign animals, altlibugh it is true that the whole
cargo would be slaughtered, it is equally certain that the
animals which lvve been landed there from other cowitries
whose animals are not subject to slaughter would be exposed
to the infection, in which case they would also have to be
slaughtered instead of being allowed to go inland as they
are entitled to do. linger these circumstances, we regret
that we cannot advise any relaxation of the terms of the
order which applies to the United States.
Mr. Forster, answering a question from Mr. IL Power,
said he had heard by telegraph that Mr. Dillon was arrested
at Portarlington on Monday, and he had no doubt the Lord
Lieutenant would lose no time in communicating the fact to
the House as required by the Act, probably by letter, as in
the case of Mr. Smith O'Brien.
Mr. M'Carthy gave notice of his intention to move a reso
lution condemning Mr. Dillon s arrest as an abuse of the
exceptional powers conferred by Parliament, calculated to
promote disaffection and to mar any possible good likely to
result from remedial legislation, lie added, amid some
laughter from the Ministerial benches, that on Wednesday
he would ask the Prime Minister to give him a day for the
motion.
Sir W. Lawson, referring to the motion to be proposed on
Monday next by the Prime Minister for the erection of a
monument in memory of the late Earl of Beaconsfield, said
it was stated in the journals of the House that the Queen's
recommendation of that motion had been signified. It was,
he believed, a rule of the House that in the case of such a
recommendation it should be signified by a Minister of the
Crown. He desired to ask the right hon. gentleman in the
Chair whether her Majesty's recommendation had been duly
ajgnlfied to the House, and, if so, when.
-rhe Speaker said Her Majesty's recommendation was duly
signified to the House by a Privy Councillor of the House—
if he remembered rightly, by Lord R. Grosvenor.
Mr. Blenn, rhassett, seconded by Mr. B. T. Williams' moved
a resolution in favour of abolishing the power of levying
distress for the rent of agricultural holdings. They con-
demned the power as an odious class privilege, unnecessary
and unjust, which gave an unfair preference to the landlord
at the expense of the tenant's other creditors, and created a
prejudicial competition for the hiring of land.
Mr. H. T. Davenport, who met the motion by the
" previous question," on the ground that it was injudicious
for the House to commit itself in view of the legislation
which might follow the report of the Agricultural Commis-
sion, urged that the landlord was not the only creditor who
enjoyed a preference, and that if it were abolished the tenant
would have to give security, and might fall into the hands
of creditors not so easy as the landlords. Tenants as a body
did not desire the law to be abolished, but at the same time
he agreed that the power should be limited to one or two
years.
After Mr. Heneage, Sir W. H. Dyke, Mr. Howard, and
Mr. Pell had spoken, Sir W. Harcourt commented in an
ironical vein on the arguments against the motion, and
pointed out that the question had been virtually decided
when the law Gf hypothec in Scotland was abolished. He
could not see that the tenant would in any way suffer; and
though he admitted that the landlord ought to have means
provided by which he could re-enter on possession of his
land if the rent were not paid, he cordially supported the
motion.
The debate was continued by Sir G. Goldney, Colonel
Berne, Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. Arnold, Sir W. Barttelot, Sir R.
Cross, Mr. Courtney, and other hon. members. Eventually
Mr. Davenport offered to withdraw the "previous ques-
tion," but this the House would not permit, and it was
accordingly negatived. The resolution was then agreed to
without a division.

A discussion followed on a resolution relative to the busi-
ness of the House, submitted by Mr. Monk; and some other
business having been disposed of, the House adjourned at
ten minuies to two o'clock.