The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-07-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

/a the noun Or LORDS, June 27, the Royal Assent was
given by Commission to 41 Bills, of which only four were
toublic measures.
The Marquis of Hertford having called attention to the
state of the Cemeteries and Monuments of those who fell
In the Crimean War, the Earl of Morley said a letter from the
Consul-General at Odessa, who had visited the cemeteries,
described them as in very fair order, and expressed
the opinion that the annual grant was sufficient to
ltake good the damage caused by the last exceptionally
seyere winter. Everything necessary to keep the cemeteries
In proper order would be done, but it did not appear that
any extra expenditure beyond that now voted was re-
linked.

The Duke of Cambridge 'said that a small annual sum laid
out under proper supe,:vision was all that was necessary to
to secure that the ce':neteries were maintained as all parties
In this country wc:old wish they should be.
Several Bill :3 having been advanced a stage, their Lord-
ships adjonamed at twenty-five minutes after seven o'clock.
In tb e HOUSE OF COMMONS, the "questions" were close
Upon ',day in number, and ocupied the House until long after
aixrl; clock.
Carbutt asked the President of the Board of Trade
Whether in the returns by the Board of Trade on the 27th of
May on the French tariff it was stated that rice had been
freed from duty; whether that was not a mistake; and
Whether the duty was not about 15 ptr cent. on the value of
lice coming from England, whereas rice coming from Italy
eras admitted duty free.
Mr. Chamberlain in reply said that rice coming from the
country of production was under the French tariff free from
duty, but coming from some other country there was a
etsrectxt d'entrepdt placed upon it, which would amount to
about 15 per cent. It was not upon rice only that this sur-
taxa d'entrepdt was placed, but upon other articles also
Which did not come from the country of production.
Mr. Pease asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs whether the Foreign Office had copies of the corn-
anercial treaty recently entered into between Germany and
'China, which was read to the assembled Parliament at
Berlin on the 23rd of May last, and the treaty recently
+entered into between Russia and China; and whether he
Would lay copies of those treaties upon the table of the
'Rouse.
Sir C. Dilke replied: The German Treaty will be pre-
aented to Parliament. The formal Russian Treaty has not
7et reached the Foreign Office, though we know its sub-
atstnce, but it will be laid on the table as soon as a copy is
teceived.
Colonel Colthurst asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord-
Pentenant whether it had been brought to his notice that
vae funds available for relief works in Ireland were
abatisted, and if so, whaher he would recommend a further
'Aintree to be made for such works as had been applied fdr
azal formally reported upon.
Mr. W. E. Forster replied that he would enquire into the
!butter.
Mr. S. Leighton asked the Financial Secretary to the
aTeasury whether the Government would take steps to pro-
entre the publication of the following particulars in the
ititure lists of the dormant funds in Chancery :—Name of
the cause or matter, cross ref,,..;. to sub-titles, names of
Persons supposed to be entitled, with last knolNn addiebses,
atraount of fund in court, how - unclaimed.
Lord F. Cavendish said: The Government do not propose to
POblish fuller particulars of dormant funds in Chancery. It
4PPeittS to them that the information now given is sufficient
for general purposes. The labour of preparing the list is
already considerable and should not be increased except on
,„,Pr°,of of n(icessity. In any case the Government could not
"'"uertake to offer an opinion upon such a point as supposed
alalmarats.
s. Leighton gave notice that he would take an early
'Ttrtunity of calling attention to the subject.
14 oniPPly to Mr. Biggar, Mr. Trevelyan said: It
litie'Eo"; t e that the senior assistant-paymasters of
al:iNoy reached that rank in 1866, and that
dlib 'l6e is
L.-
-the average that stated in the question,
!Lo it is true ar between 1866 and 1868 promotion :arymaster was
4 after nine years in the lower
It was in conse,,„
raotion that in 1877 the panf of this slowness of pro-
assistant-paymasters was
raised very considerably in the ,•‘ter periods of their
!iervice ; so that the senior among them 11— 4"o 12s. Od. a day,
instead of 10s., an increase of £45 a year. mt._while, the
prospects of the whole class have been much in...roved
114 the great amelioration in the position of retired pa.,
blisters. In 1861 the average retired pay of a paymaster
Laaa £,150 per annum. In 1881 it is £313. All assistant-
veYrnasters rank after lieutenants. A paymaster of fifteen
Years' service ranks after a commander. Assistant-pay-
blisters have the option of going into the ward-room quite
2_l4Y in their career. There are only two ways of quicken-
Lug vromeiclon. One is by increasing the higher ranks,
but in this case, out of 200 paymasters, we have thirty
still r.oemployed, and the Admiralty certainly could not
..ectsent, and I hope that the House would not permit them,
!I? increase the number of officers above what is required by
Sa service in order to give promotion to those below them.
ate other method is for a Government by stinting itself in
Patronage to diminish the number of first entries. In 1865
~acti 1866, 51 and 45 youths were respectively entered in this
Lille of service, and the lists were hopelessly clogged in con-
,lNUence, just as was the case during the same years with
ne executive lists of the Navy. But between 1869 and 1874
the entries were reduced to an average of five a year. They
then rose again to an average of nearly 30, but this year only
_lO Youths were entered, and that policy will continue to be
Ailliaued until the rate of promotion is again healthy and
tattid.

io reply to Mr. Jackson, Mr. Fawcett said he would en-
141avour to obtain specimens of the forms of telegrams used
07 other countries and exhibit them along with the speci-
'llene of postcards.
Mr. O'Donnell asked the Secretary to the Treasury
Whether he was aware that the telegraph clerks at numerous
YoPertant centres had instructed their committees to
&urn. Ish the Members of Parliament with copies of the ob.
I•otions of the clerks to the last scheme for the organization
11 the telNraph department, so that Parliament might be
r's Possession of such information previous to voting public
..,,ITno9 for the Government scheme; and whether the clerks
Zuu furnished such information to members of Parliament
;Quid be punished by exclusion from any benefits under the
e°Yernment scheme.
Lord Fredeiick Cavendish: No, sir. I have no knowledge,
part from the intimation conveyed by the question of the
n. member, or any such intention on the part of the tele-
raPhists as that described in his first question. As regards
supposed object of such instructions—namely, the in-
Infination of Parliament, I would suggest to the hon. mem-
;7_ll of this House when voting public money not to depend
zs‘v its information upon representations made to individual
but upon information open to all members
;luxe, Which can be duly examined into and tested. With
(Ins„Pee‘ to the second question, it is the wish of the
sWerun.,nt that the scheme which has been framed with
care 'Ay the departments responsible for the service
71th the view of Vomoting efficiency and of removing all
!arises of well-foundec complaint should be applied with as
Ilttle delay as possible vi the various offices throughout the
eo
etintry. It would, howt,et, be impossii,le to acquiesce in
Ma continuance of organizua agitation, acurnpauied with
,!areats of a general strike, unless as.ims whici
cannot
2ut regard as entirely inadmissible are conceded. 'IA,
I?_re such an agitation were to be continued, it may be nee,.
rzY to suspend in particular cases the introduction of the
'ow scheme. I trust, however, that no such necessity will
Mr. O'Donnell had not asked any question relating to
• es, but whether clerks in the Telegraph Department
latang furnished information to members of Parliament
..Would be punished by the Government by exclusion from any
Benefit under the new scheme.
Lord F. Cavendish did not think it useful to answer such a
OlUestion. (Hear, hear.) There might be exceptional cases,
Which would be dealt with accordingly.
4,11 r. O'Donnell felt he was strictly in his right in putting
uto question, which was a simple and straightforward one,
and he thought the noble lord was bound to reply to it. He
Wished to know what rule it was the intention of the Depart-
kont to apply to such cases.
.Zord if. Cavendish: All I can say is that I am not aware
°L any such intention as the hon. member refers to.
Mr. O'Donnell: The Secretary of the Treasury appears
...astriotts to provoke a motion for the adjournment of the
40use. I must ask him to reply to the concluding part of
~.113Y question—whether the clerks who furnished such
w torrnation to members of Parliament will be punished
al exclusion from any benefits under the Government
*ahem&
Lord F. Cavendish : I have already stated that the action
'the Government would entirely depend on the circum-
Blances of the case.
O'Donnell : Does the noble lord intend to make the
4A▪ 101 general?
t....,Th0 Speaker: The hon. member has put his question
"Lee arid received an answer. (Hear, hear.)
tikir. O'Donnell said he was not about to repeat the ques-
t:lt Fie was going to ask whether the Government in-
apply as a general rule the curtailment of
talaries of all officers who engaged in extra official agita-
meas.
raLord F. Gavendish : I do not know how the Govern-
at!nt can Make a rule general, the rule never having been
(Hear, hear.)
td; question put by Mr. R. Power as to the reasons for pro-
Oling the city ot Waterford occasioned a long ‘dis-
z_gssion by several Irish members on Mr. Forster's adminis-
'ration of the Coercion Acts. Mr. O'Donnell moved the
tiloiumment of the House Mr. Healy, Mr. T. O'Connor,
O'Connor, Mr. Leamy, Sir J. Mlienna, Mr. Blake,
ned Dlr. Parnell spoke, and, a division being taken, the
Motion was negatived by 305 to 28.
ansvver to a question from Mr. Firth, Sir J. M'Garel
r°gll said that the Metropolitan Board of Works had re-
'erred the subject of Fish Supply to a committee.
„nil() House then went into Committee on the Land Bill,
—Burning with Clause 4, when several amendments were
!onsidered, and eventually the Fourth Clause, which had
:rou under consideration for three days, was agreed to, and
"“o Committee again adjourned.
The House adjourned at five minutes past one o'clock.

the Rom OF LORDS, June 28, their Lordships went
Connnittee on the Veterinary Surgeons Bill.
,Lord Aberdare, who had charge of the Bill, moved the
Yusertion of a clause to exempt veterinary surgeons from
•erving on juries.
The Lord Chancellor opposed the motion. '
a. Their Lordships divided and the motion was rejected by 52
to 82. The clause was consequently rejected and, certain
fliendments having been made in several of the clauses,
,‘45 Bill passed through Committee and was reported to the_,
Jzouse.
some points connected with the scheme for the reorganiza-
tion of the army were, at the instance of Lord Dorchester
sztd Viscount Bury, discussad, and their Lordships adjourned
at & quarter to eight o'clock.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, at the Morning Sitting, Mr. J.
wen asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
wAether any steps had been taken to renew the commercial
treaty with Italy.
i3ir C. Dilke replied : The commercial treaty with Italy
!'et:ains in force till the 31st of December. A hill is before
91 Italian Legislature to prolong the duration of the
Veaty, and will probably prolong its duration up to March or
dtthe next. Negotiations were last year begun by its with
view to the conclusion of new commercial treaties with
Fle coutitriee that produce strong wines, especially Spain,
al), and Portugal. The change of Government in Spain
!aused these negotiations to be temporarily set aside, but
tlisre is every prospect that they may be soon resumed.
nder certain eventualities the simultaneous conclusion of
commercial treaties with these countries might be of con-
Siderable importance to British trade. (Hear, hear.)
flladstone moved, pursuant to notice, that, on and
rafter Wednesday, the Land Bill have precedence of all other
b„usiness on all days when it is down among the orders of
luo day. Premising, at the outset, that he recognised
general desire that the Bill should pass, although he
7,0 disappointed by the inexplicably slow progress of
its Committee, tad that he expected, therefore, a toler-
-44:4 unanimous acceptance of his motion, he admitted
" Was only fair that the House should ask to be informed
of the views of the Government as to the other business
of the Session. Until the Land Bill had made more pro-
-4rcss it was impossible to give this in detail, but he
llndertook that the catalogue of measures beyond the
Land Bill should not be long, and he did not look
r_orward to the possibility or even propriety of pressing on
"41Y measure which would lead to prolonged or general
controversy. There were, however, other questions of a
tecondary character not coming within this category, as to
Which he promised to speak more definitely at the begin-
l'utog of next week. As to the duration of the Session, he
rught that if a fair rate of progress were maintained,
a_.."zight be brought to a close about the end of the
t week in August ; at any rate, he promised that
it_o Government would not interpose any obstacle to
5,"._,14 consummation beyond the Land Bill. As to the Trans-
mi7l debate, for which a day had been asked, he proposed it
if tri be taken between the Committee arid the Report, but
thou ea Committee were unduly prolonged, he undertook,
gn. with reluctance, to interrupt it. in order to make
"al' for air M. Elicks-Beach.
.Bir 8. Northcote, while acknowledging that the assurances
the Prime Minister were more or less satisfactory, as far
they went, pointed out that, owing to its peculiar form,
the motion would enable the Government to use private mem-
pers' nights for the Land Bill and their own nights for other
*business.
e The House, therefore, ought to have some further
as-
at met: that the Government would not apply the time placed
ought dippovsal to any but indispensable measures, and they
e
await To ha:. 0 Speethe information what the Government
ci With such Bills as the Bankruptcy, Ballot,
.•

.1 hit{

Corrupt Practices, and, above all, the Parliamentary Oaths
Bills,

Mr. M'Carthy took the same view and asked for some
pledge that the concession asked for should be used to press
forward the Land Bill.

Mr. Chaplin, with the view of securing this result, moved
to omit the words "when it is down among the orders."
To this Mr. Gladstone replied that the words were neces-
sary in order to give him the power of interrupt-
ing the Bill, if necessary, for such subjects as the
Transvaal and Supply, and also for permitting the
necessary interval between Committee and Report. As
to the pledge required from him, which he thought un-
necssary, he said, of course, the Government intended to
employ the time given them for the purposes of the Land
Bill only, but at present he could give no specific pledge.

- -
After considerable debate, in which Mr. Newdegate, Mr.
O'Connor Power, Lord Sandon, Lord It. Churchill, Mr.
Healy, Mr. Parnell, Sir W. Harcourt, Mr. Forster, and
several other hon. members took part, Mr. Chaplin inti-
mated his willingness to withdraw his amendment, but it
was negatived without a division, and Mr. Gladstone's motion
was agreed to.

The House then went into Committee on the Irish Land
Bill and was occupied all the rest of the afternoon on Clause
5, which enlarges, in certain cases, the scale of compensation
for disturbance in the Act of 1870. The details of the new
scale were canvassed with some minuteness, but it had not
been settled when the hour for adjournment arrived.
At the Evening Sitting the House was counted out before
any business was done. •