The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-09-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HonsE OF LORDS, August 80, Lord Granville made
a statement as to the present position of the Eastern Ques-
tion, it which he informed their lordships that the Powers
ad under consideration a rejoinder to two answers—one
yerbal and the other in writing—given, to them by the Porte,
regard to the Montenegrin question. • Those replies viere`
tot the same in terms, and it was not clear that they
•
Were to the same effect. In the meantime the Powers
had given orders for a certain number of their ves-
sels
to go to Ragusa; and instructions had been given
to the Admiral in command of our contingent which could
tot for the present be included in the correspondence
about to be published. The Powers had refused to re-open
at Constantinople negotiations on the Greek question, but
were willing to entertain proposals by the Porte as to the
raanner of the evacuation of the territory to be ceded to
Greece. The Powers had agreed also as to the reforms
Which should be adopted in Armenia. Moreover the labours
of the International Commission had come to a satisfactory
end.

„ Lord Granville, in reply to an inquiry from the Duke of
'loraerset, read the telegram announcing the progress of
General Roberts in Afghanistan.
„On the motion of Lord Spdeley, the Merchant Shipping
arriage of Grain) Bill was read a seoond time.
_ Lord Kimberley, in moving the second reading of the
wound Game Bill, argued that the necessity for some such
Measure was admitted, because no one denied the injury
is,liffered by the farmers from the ravages of ground game.
Pie objection strongly urged against the Bill was its
f.titerference with freedom of contract; but he contended that
the farmers were allowed to contract themselves out of
provisions it would be null and void, and that it did not
`Pterfere with freedom of contract more than did the Truck
ekct, our Shipping laws, and the Hosiery Act passed by the
v.e Government. He held that the only alternatives for this
ill were striking hares and rabbits out of the Game Laws,
aad the payment of compensation; but he asserted that
°Aber of those would be a much more objectionable form of
l'emoving the grievance.
,Lord Redesdale, in moving as an amendment that the Bill
me read a second time that day three months, expressed his
Pinion that the Bill as it stood would revolutionize the
Pasition of the landlords of this country. The main ground of
!us objections was the claw; prohiblting landlords and tenants
'Ann coutracting themselves out of the Bill, which he said
anist be Mended to create disagreement; but he also strongly
objected to the sub-section of the first clause which allowed
°et_ such extensive arming of the farmers and their
"lends. He asked why should not the two parties who were
roost interested in coming to an agreement be permitted to
Lio SO; and he denied that the grievance spoken of by Lord
auraberley was any more than a partial one. He reminded
their lordships that, in opposing further progress with the
ill at this period of the Session, he was only following his
oonsistent course of asking that their lordships should have
u,afilcient time for the consideration of measures submitted
Lo the judgment of that House.
Lord Beaconsfield, though concurring in much that had
'Jet% said against the Bill by the Chairman of Committees,
"ELa not prepared to support the amendment. He thought
it a most deplorable state of affairs, and one no longer
to be endured to the same extent, that business should
'Jo laid before Parliament at so late a period of the
par. Re disliked the animus which pervaded the
till. There was neither conciliation nor compro-
°llse in it. The sub-section of Clause 1, to which his
noble friend so strongly objected, armed not only the
larmers and their families, but also "experts,” who, in-
!tead of shooting in the moonlight, would be able to appear
La the sunshine of the Constitution and flourish their arms
au sight of the lord of the manor. But after the report of the
Select Committee, he had never doubted that there must be
,‘_loilislation on this subject; and it could not be denied that
aoe House of Lords had before now sanctioned an invasion of
the principle of freedom of contract where they thought
there was an imperative necessity for doing so. Means
lit be found of mitigating that invasion as carried out
"I this Bill; but that was matter for Committee. The
.toble earl, in very earnest and energetic terms, advised their
,lordships' House not to come into collision with the House of
uommons on a measure like this. If they felt obliged to
come into collision with the other House, it ought, in his
lidgment, to be on a question which deeply affected the in-
terests of the country. Such questions were at this moment
the government of Ireland and the principles on which landed
Droperty was at present established. On a measure touching
the former subject, which had been sent up to them in
a spirit of menace and arrogance, their lordships had
asserted their right of dissenting from the Commons; and
their action had received the approval of the country. He
Was not a candidate for power; he sought neither to make
her to disturb Ministries; but he felt he would be blinding
their lordships if, in this instance, when, perhaps, a trap
Was laid for them, he did not express his opinion that the
.00casion was not an adequate one for a collision between the
%Ivo Rouses of Parliament.
In the subsequent discussion Lord Onslow, Lord Camper-
Lord Hardwicke, the Duke of Argyle, Lord Stanley,
Alderley, Lord Carrington, Lord Shaftesbury, the Lord
;utace,, nor, and Lord Denman took part, and on a division
'uo second reading of the Bill was carried by 68 to 20.
Their lordships adjourned at 25 minutes past eight o'clock.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Sir W. Lawson gave notice of
Ma intention to move a resolution on the liquor traffic at the
1,17 earliest period of next Session.
In answer to Sir H. Wolff, who asked for further informs-
tion in reference to the circumstances under which General
_Burrows was ordered to march to Girishk, and also that Lord
Atipon should be desired to supply it, if necessary, before the
discussion of the Appropriation Bill, Lord Hartington said
he was not able to give any information beyond the state-
s:netts he had already made in answer to previous questions.
Sir H. Wolff thereupon gave notice that in consequence of
this unsatisfactory answer, he would call attention to the
subject at the earliest possible stage of the Appropriation

In answer to Sir U. Tyler, Lord Hartington gave an ac-
ceunt of the guns handed over to the new Ameer.
LO`rd Ifartington also read th9r telegram announcing
General Roberts's arrival at Khelat-i-Ghilzai.
The Have having gone into Committee of Supply on the
Civil Service Estimates, the discussion on the Irish Consta-
bulary Vote was resumed by Mr. Parnell, to whom
Forster replied with a repetition of his former statements on
the question.
Mr. T. P. O'Connor, Mr. 'Shaughnessy, Mr. Hopwood,
Mr. gan, Mr. Cowen, Sir G. Campbell, and other hon.
members contilhued the discussion in a singularly thin
House, and shortly after ten o'clock the Committee divided
and carried the vote by 105 to 29.
The remaining Civil Service Estimates were speedily
agreed to, almost without discussion. The Revenue and
tt-office Estimates and several postponed Navy votes
svaitVelar° ,aa'reed to, and at twelve o'clock exactly the Coro-
'uPply was closed for the year.
The R •
aaiecaegledstration of Voters (Ireland) Bill was 'considered
, and several other Bills were forwarded a stage.
The House was counted out at a quarter past two o'clook.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, August 31, the attendance of
Peers was remarkably large.
Lord Granville, in reply to Lord Ellenborough, said Her
2tiajesty's Government had requested the Government of
India to send home, with as little delay as possible, a list of
the casualties in the 86th Regiment.
On the motion of Lord Spencer, who explained the provi
Cons of the measure, the Savings Banks Bill, which had
come up from the Commons, was read a second time.
On a motion to read a third time the Employers' Liability
Bills Lord Stanley of Alderley moved to reinsert sub-section
2 in the first clause, which had been struck out in Com-
Inittee, bat the motion was rejected without a division, and
the Bill read a third time and passed.
In the Wild Birds Protection Law Amendment Bill, the
ecn,mons' consequential amendment was considered and
agreed to. The Merchant Shipping (Carriage of Grain) Bill
Passed through Co nunittee.
The House then went into Committee on the Ground
Game Bill, in which two impoeant amendments were intro-
duced. On the motion of Lord lareland, and by a majority
cf 108 against 58. the right of shooting ground game under
the Act was limited to the occupier or to one other person
authorised by hint in writing. On the motion of the Earl of
nchester, and by majority of 94 against 59, an amernent
as Introduced establishing a close time for ground gam,
to date from the Ist o August to the last day of March in-

elusive.
A lengthy discussion arose On the proposition of the Earl
of Faversham go to amend the third clause es to enable
landlord and occupier to make mutual agreements as to
ddlling the ground game. This amendment was, however,
s.withdrawn.,
Some amendments, moved by Lord Kimberley and others,
to which there was no objlection, were agreed to, and the
prearoble having been also adopted, the Bill passed through
Corami„ttee, and their lordships adjourned at twenty-five
Minutes past nine o'clock.
In the IfOUSli OF ComaioNS, Lord If artington, in Vaply to
a question from Sir J. Play, made a statement in regard to
the proposed naval demonstration, which was substantially
a repetition of that made by Lord Granville in the House of
lords on the previous evening.
Sir W. Lawson asked what was the object of this demon-
Stration, to which Lord Hartington replied that he could not
, give a satisfactory explanation without going into details
which he did not think it desirable to touch upon at present.
ISir W. Lawson thereupon gave notice that he would call
attention to the interference of this country in the affair
of other countries by force of arms, and move a resolution.
•In answer to other questions, Lord Hartington said he had
ae information regarding General Roberts beyond that
alreadY publiehed,
On the Report of 511PPlY, Sir J. Hay called attention to
what he regarded as the unsatisfactory condition of the
Ironclad Navy, and analyi.ing the lists in detail, he showed
tilat, while we had 71 on paper, only 30 of these were
'available for offensive purposes; This, he argued, was a
loree quite insufficient to discharge eji the duties expected
rera, our Navy, and redueed us to a position, in corn-
n with foreign navies, which was full of danger.
Mr. Shaw-Lefevre disputed the accuracy of Sir J. Hay's
"At:mites, and pointed out that, according to all former
:rpOrienee, it would be a foolish policy to rush into an
lasive construction of any one type of ship. As to
ieadnivisons with foreign navies, he aiought them mis-
nz
a Mr. W. ye Smith agreed with him in this, and also in
mePrecating ii, reliance on any one particular type of ship.
. eaDtain Price also spoke on this subject, and after some
'eroarks from Mr., Callan on the Irish Constabulary Vote,
Courtney, on the South African vote, took the °ppm-
of repeating his objections to the annexation of the
vaal. The country, be argued, was not sufficiently
s`eveLoped for English rule, even if the people had not been
Utterly repugnant to it. On this point he asserted that
there arts no evidence whatever that the Boers had in the
Least,, relaxed in their hostility to us, and as one proof of
I,Jus he mentioned the unwillingness a the colonial authori-
Les to convene the Volksraad. Another oNaction which he
kirfted was the necessary costliness of the administration,
he dwelt also on the difficult native questions in which
''ar annexation weabi involve us. The reversal of the policy
n_atinexatrion which ite strongly urged on the Government,
"eag other advantages, would remove serious obstacles to
-viuederation.
Sir M. Hicks-Beach, in defence a the original annexation,
I"o,..inted out that when we took the eotry over the Govern-
iiTat was bankrupt and incapable of defec4ing itself, and as
the practical policy of the present, he asseited that if we
dr
Withew it v
ould be impossible to re-establish the ei4 form
°bl government, find that the result would be a civil war
etween the whiteeand the natives. His chief object, how-
irr, %%rising was te Obtain some explicie information from
t ' Government as to the policy wt,l4h they in-
. 2:aded to Pursue after the rebuff which the is.,me of
rnfederation had received. With regard to this
e, the eight hon. baronet railed attention to
Vale paasages in the Midlothian speeches, which lie con-
ee.‘eo with it, and to the fact that since the present Go
~,,, -
x.x;„'ament came into office Sir B. Frere had acted wih t a
NoTie round his neck. Considering the difficulties ww-i
eh the new Governor, Sir IL Robinson, would have to
• mVstend, he hoped the Government would make it clear
nat, though they had obeyed their Its4ical supporters in
recaiong Sir B. Frere, they slid not intend £,,, accept their
Policy. With regard to Lord Vimberley's geacral policy,
Vs laid desvn in his despatches, be was quite satiined with
• it, as it waa practically identical with tbat which he Ilia-
self was Pursning when he left office- .
• Grant Duff repeated in detail the egplanatious
7.:7l_readY given of the motives which induced the Govern-
iment first to retain Sir B. Frere at the Cape and then to
tk:ll him, and incidentally he contradicted emphatically
_ assertion that the Governor had not received full
Port from the present Ministry. With regard to the
we Policy
of confederation, he said the present Ministry
diefe as anxious kr it as their predecessors ; but they
thetrnot see their way to do anything. As to Natal
and views were the same as their predecessors',
they were of opinion that to give responsible
-**l7,e,_nitnent to the colony At present was out of the question.
to the Transvaal", Pough he admitted that the
zzexation, at the time and an the F.,lanner it was carried
a sh was Premature, he believed thae ; 4 i,t had been delayed
GP
thne a W 7 for protection wouitiihe,ye come from the
e.Panieralanic which could not have been resiste,ii. No reason-
would be impossible e'xiste4.
• thing% wig as„Serted, eould wish to go back IA e,.1:41,f, state of
, and even if it were destre4 it
Moe& Posaible witlioat passing through a sea of
The debee— a
,wke s waa then adieurned until th.e Evening Sitting,
,stisiugn iron? G. Campbell spol/e for some tim' e on the difficulties
t of the management of the „native races, and re-

• • • •
rA (let

commended the establishment in Natal and the Transvaal of
a "White Pale," to be governed by a responsible Govern-
ment, while the natives were administered by an independent
British authority.
Sir H. Holland said, with regard to confederation, though
all might desire it, the House could take no further step
in the matter, but must leave it to the colonists te take the
initiative. Although he himself had supported the vote of
censure, he did not think the present Government was at
all botrad to recall Sir B. Frere; but the course they actu-
ally pursued, of leaving him in his office, was neither just
nor wise. As to annexation, he held that the original an-
nexation and the retention of. the Transvaal were justified
I by the existing state of things.
Mr. Wodehouse argued that, though there was no reason
why the present Government should have recalled Sir B.
Frere on account of the Zulu war, which was a res judicata
when they came in, they were quite justified in recalling
him on the ground of the wide divergence of his views from
theirs. Personally, he had never anticipated much from
the proposed conference on confederation, but it would have
been a great mistake to give a "handle" to the local politi-
cians by recalling the Governor before that matter was
settled. He believed there had always been an undercurrent
of insincerity about it, and that it had never received any
genuine adhesion in the Cape Colony, for reasons which he
explained. As there was nom no immediate prospect of the
plan being being revived, and as there were great difficul-
ties in the way of withdrawing the troops, he urged the
Government not to be in a hurry to enlarge the area of self-
government in South Africa.
Lord Elcho strongly condemned the treatment of Sir B.
Frere as unjust to him and injurious to the colony.
Mr. Chamberlain, replying to Sir M. Hicks-Beach, con-
tended that the speeches on African affairs of members of
the present Government had no influence on the Colonial
Legislature in considering the confederation scheme;
and, in answer to Mr. Courtney, he said that the
Government had come to the determination to retain
the Transvaal after much deliberation, and under a
strong sense that no other course was open to
them. As to Sir B. Frere 's recall, he repeated the explana-
tion already given, that as soon as confederation was found
to be hopeless for the present the differences between him
and the Government naturally led to his recall ; and,
among other illustrations of these divergencies, he men-
tioned the disputes in Pondoland and the disarmament of
the Basutos. With regard to the general policy of the
Government in South Africa, it would be found in Lord
Kimberley's despatch, which laid it down that, while main-
taining friendly relations with the frontier tribes, there
should be no interference with their internal affairs.
Sir G. Balfour had for many years watched Sir Bartle
Frere's conduct in matters of great difficulty, and he re-
gretted that members of the Liberal party should have
spoken in the way they had of so distinguished a man.
Although he (Sir George Balfour) stood up in defence of Sir
Bartle Frere, he did not want it to be thought that he was
in favour of a policy of annexation. In conclusion the hon.
and gallant member contended that Sir Bartle Frere had
shown himself a wise and able administrator in most difficult
circumstances.
Mr. Macarthy brought the debate to a close by- remarking
that Sir B. Frere ought to have been recalled at once or not
at all.
Mr. Courtney then moved to reduce the vote for Grants in
Aid of the Colonies by the sum of £2,000 for the salary of the
High Commissioner for South-East Africa; and on a division
this amendment was negatived by 113 to 32.
The consideration of the report of Supply having been
completed, the Appropriation Bill was brought in and read
a first time, amid much cheering.
The Burials Bill, as amended, was considered, and read a
third time amid cheers, and the House adjourned.