The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-01-15 00:00:00

TURDAiI

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, Jan. 10, the space in front of the
throne and that outside the bar was crowded by right hon.
and hon. gentlemen, members of the House of Commons.
Prince Leopold and Prince Christian were in the Royal
Gallery; am! the Peeresses' Gallery was almost entirely
filled. The Strangers' Gallery and the ladies' boxes outside
the bar were fully occupied. There was a large attendance
of Peers.
The Burial and Registration Acts (Doubts Removal Bill),
on the motion of the Lord Chancellor, was read a second
time.
Lord Waveney gave notice that on an early day he would
move that an hunlble address be presented to her Majesty
Praying that the town of Candahar should be formed into an
emporiuln of trade and commerce under British protection.
Lord Lytton, in pursuance of notice, rose to call the at-
tention of the House to affairs in Afghanistan, and to make
a personal statement with reference to his own action as
Viceroy of India in regard to the late Afghan war. He ex,
pressed his opinion that Lord Beaconsfield's assertion on
Thursday evening last that the policy of the present
Government seemed to be to reverse that of the late
Administration was amply proved in the case of Afghan-
istan. The question was, however, whetlier after in-
curring so great an expenditure of blood and treasure, we
ought to abandon Candahar, as was proposed by Ministers,
or retain it, as her Majesty had been advised to do by the
late Government. He held that the war had established
one supremely important fact —namely, the facility pos-
aessed by Russia of establishing an influence in Afghanistan
by which she could always cripple the action and em-
berrass the policy of England in the East, and that the
country was so circumstanced that it must fall under
the direct influence either of this country or of
Weigle: The possession of Candahar, in fact, involved the
only possible control that either Power could have over
Afghanistan, and to abandon the place meant a loss of
legitimate influence. Candahar, moreover, did not stand
alone, for beyond it was Herat, and beyond Herat, Merv,
and by our being established in Candahar we could afford
to regard with a certain amount of indifference what might be
going on at Herat and the surrounding neighbourhood. He
believed, too, that under proper and efficient administration
the development of the resources of the country would
Produce results that would more than repay any expense
we might be put to. If, then, England threw away the ad-
vantages she bad gained from the late war, and reverted
to the previous state of things, he took upon himself to say
that before long she would have to return to Candahar or
make her ehoice between holding India as tenant at will to
Russia, or fortifying the mountain boundary in the neigh-
bourhood of Afghanistan on a gigantic and costly scale.
The Duke of Argyll contended that the only danger to be
apprehended to our Indian Empire from Russian influence
was that which had been brought about by the violence dis-
played towards the late Ameer of Afghanistan, who had
been treated by the noble Earl (Lord Lytton), when Viceroy,
after the fashion adopted by the malcontents in Ireland,
for he had been first overwhelmed by threatening
letters, and then reduced to submission by the process of
"Boycotting." As to the importance of retaining Candahar,
there was nothing in the papers of the late Government to
show that they had finally decided on keeping that place ;
neither was there any justification for its retention, unless
it could be shown that it was an absolute duty. With regard
to the policy of the late Government, he charged them with
having inaugurated a policy that had greatly endangered
• India, while adding thirteen millions sterling to the
burdens of the already overtaxed Indian people.
Lord Cranbrook vindicated the policy of the late Govern-
ment, and argued that the future of India depended greatly
on keeping a good look out on the Afghan frontier, as the
qu_arter from which danger was most likely to come. With
tbis object, therefore, it was necessary to retain Candahar.
Lord Northbrook pointed out, as an objection to such a
Polley, that Candahar was four hundred miles from the
rrontier of India, and that communication with it was at-
tended by immense difficulties.
Lord Waveney thought that Parliament had not heard
the whole of the story yet and that the Government had
not attached sufficient weight to the arguments in favour of
our holding Candahar.
Lord Enfield having replied to Lord Waveney, the discus-
came to a close.
Their lordships adjourned at twenty-five minutes past
eight.
In the HOUSE or COMMONS. Mr Macliver gave notice that
on an early day he would ask leave to bring in a Bill to amend
the Employers' Liability Act, 1880.
, Sir W. Lawson gave notice that he would move the follow-
ing amendment to the Address :—"And we humbly pray Her
Rajesty to take immediate skim either by communication
with the Government of Capdapony or by proposing media-
tion between the contending parties, to prevent further
destruction of life and property in Basutoland."
Mr. Bourke gave notice that on Thursday, he would, if it
were not inconvenient, ask the Under-Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs whether the Government would produce the
correspondence with the Government of France containing
records of conversation which the Secretary of State had
With the Count de Montebeljp, in which the former assured
the latter that England had, in taking part in the naval
demonstration, no intpntion of firing a shot, (hear, hear),
and whether they would produce the correspondence in res-
pect to the proposals of Her Majesty's Govprnment.
In answer to Mr. O'C. Power, Mr. W. E. Forster said he
had no objection to laying upon the table of the House a.
return of the proclamations issued for the purpose of sup-
Pressing public meetings in Ireland. Each proclamation
containing in itself a statement of the grounds on which
the meeting was prohibited.
Mr. O'Donnell, amid cheers and laughter, asked the Under
Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he in-
tended this year to bring in a motion condemning the anexa-
tion of the Transvaal Republic.
Mr. Courtney said he had no present intention ot propos-
ing this year a motion condemning the annexation of the
Transvaal Republic. He had done that so often that he
thought the House was in full possession of his views on
that subject. He could only add that he should be sorry if
anything should prevent members who had given notices of
motion relating to the Transvaal from brining them for.
Ward.
In answer to Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Childers could only say that
the War Office had no information whatever as to arms find-
tag their way to Ireland. None were sold by the late Go-
vernment during their last year of office. He might add that
O n the 20th of March, 1879, his ncble friend the member for
Essex (Lord Eustace Cecil) answered a similar question in
these words, "I have to say that no revolvers or breech-
loaders have been sold that I am aware of. There have
been two public sales of old weapons, which for the most
Part were unsafe." (Laughter.) "These sales took place
lad year, and no further sales are contemplated."
In reply to a question from Mr. Biggar, Mr. Gladstone
Bald: I have no power to make arrangements for the levying
of the property-tax from Irish landlords on the sum they
receive from their tenants in excess of the Government
valuation. The income-tax in England is levied, under
Schedule A, on the full rent. The income-tax in bcotland is
levied on the full rent with certain deductions. In Ireland
it is not levied on the rent at , but on the valuation.
(Hear, hear.) The tenant in Ireland, as well as the landlord,
has the advantage of paying much less income-tax, as a
general rule, than the tenant in England. The tenant in
pmgland pays on half the full value of the farm: the tenant
lii Ireland pays on one-third of Griffith's valuation. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. Parnell asked the Attorney-General for Ireland under
What Act or Acts the prosecution against the executive of
the Tralee branch of the Land League had been instituted;
Whether bail had been refused ; and whether such refusal
was approved by the Government.
The Solicitor-General for Ireland said :—ln the absence
of tho Attorney-General, perhaps the hon. member will
allow me to answer his question, No prosecution has
been instituted against any such body as the executive
of the Tralee branch of the Land League, but several
peraons in their individual capacities are charged with
having at a specified place in Tralee illegally and sedi-
tiously termed themselves into a Court to try and adjudi-
cate on questions touching the occupation of land and en-
forcing coercive jurisdiction over the Queen's subjects, who
are required, by written summons or otherwise, to attend
before them. Lawful Courts can only be held by authority
of Parliament or the Crown. This, therefore, is a usurpation
of the prerogative, and at the lowest is a high misdemeanour
at common law, and may be a treasonable practice as an
overt act of intention to depose the Queen from the exercise
of her Royal authority in that part of her dominions. The
question of bail will arise if the accused should hereafter be
committed for trial. At present the case is still at hearing
before the magistrates, who, pending the hearing, have
thought it necessary to detain the accused, and I see no
reason for disapproving that exercise of their discretion
even if I had power to review it, which I have not.
Mr. Parnell gave notice that he would ask the hon. and
learned gentleman whether, among the persons arrested
at Tralee, there were not two editors of newspapers and
three town commissioners, the latter being members of a
body which recently presented the Secretary of State for
/fir with an address of congratulation '(laughter); also
ve ether the charges were not being investigated is the gaol
of the town- whether, even if true, those charges would
amount to anything more than misdemeanours ; and whether
they did not constitute, in fact, one of the charges for which
Mr. O'Connell was convicted by a packed jury, the judgment
being afterwards reversed by the House of Lords.
The Solicitor-General for Ireland said he would answer
those questions at once. He believed it was a fact that
there were two editors and three town commissioners
among the accused, and that one of the editors acted as
president of the court. As to the address to the Secretary
of State for War, he was unable to answer, nor was it ma-
terial. The investigation was being held in the gaol on the
ground that the public peace could not be preserved if it
was held elsewhere. There was no resemblance between
the present courts and the courts that were concerned in
the indictment against Mr. O'Connell and his fellow
traversera. The sentence upon Mr. O'Connell was reversed
In the House of Lords on a technical point which had
nothing whatever to say on the point involved in this case.
ba reply to Mr. Duckharn, Mr. Chamberlain said he pro-
Posed to introduce this session the Corn Returns Amend-
ment Bill whenever the public business offered any hope
that he should be able to proceed with the Bill.
Mr. Gourley asked the Under-Secretary of State for the
Colonies if he could inform the House of the exact nature of
the disaster to the officers and men of the Pith Regiment,
Who were attacked by the Boers on their march from Heidel-
"erg to Pretoria, and if it was correct that those who were
taken prisoners were released.
M. Grant Duff said I should have been glad if I could have
given my hon. friend any information which might have
removed in some degree the very painful impressions which
has been made on the public mind by the accounts we have
.tin:ead ; but I regret to say that, owing to the interruption
n.e communications between the Transvaal and Natal, no
further information has reached us. Some of the prisoners
appear t,o have been released, and some not.
Sir IL D. Wolf!: I beg to ask the right hon. gentleman the
igeast Lord of the Treasury the question of which I have
a:,..hit,sin private notice—whether, considering the alarming
can to the relations between Greece and Turkey, he
subjereniently make any statement to the House on the
for gonlft datone : I have to thank the .hon. gentleman
ne
account, e me notice. With respect to the alarming
e
to which he refers. no doubt he speaks of various
Shier i;" in the public journals. I hope he will not con-
of them ° as affirmiug, universally or generally, the accuracy
seme,,,e statements As far as the Government is con-
gaged'. it has been stated already that the Powers are en-
hstw_ In endeavouring to effect a settlement of the frontier
the ;oon Greece and Turkey. It has also been stated that
that 01;'-e!..a are not agreed upon any means for attaining
Viet_ !jest ; but, of course, it will be readily understood
eetti'em" 'Peaking of means, pacific means in effecting a
farthera.htare meant. I am not in a position to give any
MforMation.
The
sharlionnied debate on the Address was resumed by
titin '"v, who asserted that there was much exaggera-
thouelihe accounts of the condition of Ireland, al-
iitrie-7,,,ne admitted there was ninch excitement on the
te
e th'",_estion. This he attributed to the distress, and
9,, inaction of the landlords as a class and the Go-
relieving it. The state of the agricultural
tier*, alief Ireland was bad enough to justify the agile-
deal sehluaatth he was not prepared to defend a great
Rave the "ad happened in the course of it; and Mr. Shaw
of the id °use several instances of the wretched condition
Land
Act tenants gathered from his experience on the
orninisalon . He was not satisfied with what was
it trots Aire done to meet this state of things as he gathered
that . Gladstone's speech, and he warned the Government
eltetsbecrt intentions were confined to the programme
pletely di Y the Prime Minister it would not only corn-
eatiseacto saPPoint the Irish tenants, hut would not be
touch „_ r3' to their own party. It would be better not to
factorpe land question at all if it was not settled satis-
laid and, speaking from the information and opinions
Btu ore the Land Commission, he declared that no Land
act betwen be satisfactory which did not create a tribunal to
,-. en landlord and tenant for the regulation
.ot rent..
'"• ‘-'oromission for that purpose ought to be established at
once
enact'
nantid, above all, he maintained that coercion would
result at all.
Past ratl,ll:, Churchill commented with much severity on the
h vainY of the Government, and reproached them with
ihasvisiagell_a_Ynd action so long for the sole purpose of keeping
the sieemeruit,aild.party together, though, he added, from
now they hn4,°_n the liberal benches, it was evident that even
Men', he m 1 premature. • Vindicating the late Govern-
the tain n" Cured that their prosecutions which were for
the mode et allage, were effectual in putting a stop to it ; but
Procedure chosen by the present Government

was the most dilatory and costly. Among other ill-conse-
quences of the non-renewal of the Coercion Act last year,
he asserted it had created a feeling among the police that
over-activity would be displeasing to the Executive, and he
mentioned also other instances in which the Irish Govern-
ment had shown want of judgment in dealing with the
police.
Mr. C Russell, speaking as a member of a rapidly
dwindling party—the Irish Liberals, who were neither
Home Rulers nor Land Leaguers, supported the amend-
ment, because he foresaw from the Royal Speech that
there was to be strong coercion and weak remedial
measures. Such a policy would entirely extinguish the
party to which he belonged. Although lie admitted
that there were good landlords in Ireland, the con-
duct of many of them justified the tenants in taking
manna for their own protection. The Land League
In its aims and means was quite legal, although much
had been said and done by aubordinate members which was
deeply to be regretted. At the same time he held that the
outrages, had been grossly exaggerated. But if the Land
League had not carried with it general concurrence it would
not have lasted so long, and whatever terrorism existed
was the terrorism of a whole people. The Ministerial pro-
gramme appeared to be the result of compromise, and
designed solely to reconcile contending parties in the
Cabinet, and lie earnestly warned the Government of the
mischief which must ensue if they trusted solely to
coercion.

The debate was continued by The O'Donogbue, Mr. Brad-
laugh, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. O'Shea, Mr. Litton, Mr.
Richardson, Sir J. M'Kenna, Mr. Daly, and Mr. Thorold
Rogers.
•• • • - - -

Mr. Plunket, commenting on the speeches of Mr. Shaw
and Mr. Russell, described them as an • attempt "to
'Boycott' the Whigs," and designed not so much to defeat
coercion as to force the hand of the Government on the
land question. Protesting agnst the imputation that the
Conservative party was unfavourable to land reform, he pro-
mised on their behalf to give a fair consideration to
the 3linisteria 1 measures, though at present, he remarked,
it was premature to speculate what these measures would be.
After contrasting Mr ParnelYs speeches in and out of Parlia-
ment, he assured the House, giving instances from his own
personal experience, that protection was urgently needed
for the law-abiding classes, and that it - was no
longer a question between the ordinary law and
exceptional law, but • between exceptional law and
nc law at all. The result of the agitation of the
Land League had been most disastrous, and unless checked.
it would lead, as it was intended to lead, to the banish-
ment of all the educated classes from Ireland and the dis-
ruption of the Empire. He earnestly urged the House,
therefore, not te delay conferring on the Government the
exceptional powers so urgently needed.

The debate was then adjourned on the motion of Mr.
Henry.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Mr. Palmer obtained leave to introduce a Bill to con-
solidate and amend the Acts relating to the property of
married women.
Sir A. Gordon obtained leave to introduce a Bill to extend
the time of warning to remove in the case of agricultural
holdings in Scotland.
Mr. Trevelyan obtained leave to introduce a Bill to amend
the Naval' Discipline Act, 1866, with a view to abolish
corporal punishment and for other purposes. He explained
that the object of the Bill was to abolish, in any circum-
stances whatever, the punishment of flogging in the Navy,
and to enable commanding officers, after summary trial, to
infict somewhat longer terms of imprisonment than at pre-
sent upon offenders. He trusted the House would give the
Bill an unopposed first reading.

Mr. Onslow said before the second leading of the Bill he
should move for a return of the communications which had
been received from naval officers on this subject.

-
Mr. P. Smyth obtained leave to introduce a Bill to esta-
blish local tribunals in Ireland.
-

Mr. Callan obtained leave to introduce a Bill to amend
the law relating to the admission of barristers in Ireland.
Mr. Stevenson obtained leave to introduce a Bill to pro-
hibit the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday.
Mr. Dilwyn obtained leave to introduce a Bill relating to
the care and treatment of lunatics.
The House adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock.

In the HOUSES OF LORDS, Tan. 11, the Earl of Kenmare, as
Lord Chamberlain, brought down the following reply from
Her Majesty to the Address of their lordships' House :
"My Lords,—l thank you sincerely for your loyal and
dutiful Address. I rely with confidence on your cordial co-
pperation in all my efforts to itnprofr and strengthen the
laws and institutions of the country and to promote the
welfare and happiness of all olasses of my people."
Lord Dunsany moved for returns the enumeration of
which extended over more than two pages of the notice
paper, and which had reference to all the ramifications of
the land agitation in Ireland.
Lord Spencer, on the grounds that some of the informa-
tion asked for had already been supplied, that some further
portions of it had been ordered, that the production of
other parts of it would be unjust and dangerous, and that,
as a whole, it would he very voluminous and of no adequate
value as compared with the labour of compilin<, it opposed
the motion on the part of the Government.

The motion was negatived without a division.
Lord Kimberley, replying to Lords Brabourne and Bury,
said the Colonial Office had no information in addition to
that which had already appeared in the newspapers as to
the massacre of a large number of British soldiers by the
Boers and as to the attack on Captain Elliot and another
officer.

Their Lordships adjourned at six o'clock.
Inlite ROUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Biggar asked how long
the Government meant to go on examining the policemen
reporters at the Dublin trial, every one of whom had con-
fessed his inability to take notes. Mr. Gladstone replied
that the allegation was untrue, as not a single witness had
made such an admission, and added that as this was the
first time such a question had been put respecting a
trial in progress, and by a person, too, concerned in it,
he hoped it would be the last. At this there was
much cheering, and Mr. Biggar proceeded in the usual
manner to move the adjournment of the House to correct
the Premier's misstatement. Mr. Pease appealed to the
Chair, and the Speaker, while declining to interfere with
3lr. Biggar's discretion, expressed his surprise that he
should have put the question, as he had been told by the
Clerk at the Table that it would be irregular. Mr. Biggar
persevered for some time, amid much noise and confusion,
but ultimately gave way in deference to the Speaker's inti-
mation.
Mr. Mitchell Henry resumed the debate on the Address,
and urged that, knowing the cause of Irish disorder was the
miserable condition of the people, the Government should
have announced boldly that they adopted the principle laid
down by Mr. Chamberlain at Birmingham. If Mr. Glad-
stone had made such a declaration, he believed it ,would
have been responded to in a conciliatory spirit by the Irish
members.

The Solicitor• General for Ireland argued that the Land
League movement had at its base the disintegration of the
Empire, and justified his contention by copious quotations
from the speeches delivered at meetings and descriptions of
the proceedings of the last few months. Adverting to the
charges of supineness and inaction made against the present
Government, he pointed out that their predecessors had
taken no step to stop the Land League meetings except by the
prosecution of a few obscure individuals, which he showed was
never intended to be pressed to trial. A statement which he
made incidentally that he knew nothing of the character of the
coming Land Bill was received with much ironical cheering.
Justifying the proposal for exceptional legislation, he described
in detail the salient features of the Land League operations,
the agrarian outrages, the mutilations of cattle, the intimi-
dation of juries and witnesses, the summotises and sentences
of the Land League Courts, all of which he condemned in
vigorous language, which provoked many protests from the
Irish party. In an animated peroration he declared that
the tranquility said to be prevailing in the country was the
paralysis of terror and the coercion of honest men, and that
the Government could no longer delay asking for additional
powers which would protect the law-abiding people of Ire-
land, and repress the wicked and wrong-doers.
Mr. M'Coan and Dr. Lyons and Mr. Gill supported the
amendment; Colonel Dawnay opposed it; Sir J. Hay sng-
gested emigratioir as a solution of the Irish land difficulty.
Mr. Jacob Bright regretted that the Government had been
obliged- to bring in a Coercion Bill before a Land Bill, which
might have obviated‘the necessity for it.
. .

Mr. Chaplin regarded the chronic misery of Ireland
as due, not to the landlords, but to the peculiar conditions
of the country, and especially to the fierce competition for
land, and to the fact that agricultural was the sole
resource of the population. Emigration, therefore,
must play a chief part in any remedies which
were devised, though the reclamation of waste lands
and the settlement of a portion of the redundant
population on them were suggestions to which he pro-
mised to give a candid consideration when any practical
measure was produced. As to the Ministerial Bill, though
the Ministerialists seemed deeply disappointed with it, he
advised them not to be too premature, and maintained that
the Prime Minister should either have said more about it or
nothing at all. Passing to the condition of Ireland, he laid
on the Government the responsibility of the anarchy and
terrorism which existed there, and censured tif. especially
for their neglect to renew the Peace Preser on Act and
for their long delay in calling Parliament toge er.
Lord Hartington, while acknowledging the kindly tone of
some of Mr. Chaplin's remarks, repelled the responsibility
attempted to be thrown on the Government, and in a
bantering tone replied to Lord R. Churchill's criticisms,
thanking him for the promised support of his party, though
he regretted that it would not be a numerically strong
support. Passing next to the speeches of Mr. Shaw and
Mr. Russell, he pointed out the fallacy of the reason-
ing by which they arrived at the conclusion that
the outrages had been exaggerated, and assured them
that the Government Bill would not be founded on news-
paper concoctions. He pointed out, too, that the Govern-
ment did not accuse the people of Ireland either of com-
plicity in or sympathy with the outrages, but that their real
feelings were stifled by the acts of a bans of miscreants.
Replying to a remark of Mr. Russell, he decrared, amid much
cheering, that if such a state of things existed in England the
House of Commons would not be slow to demand that it
should be dealt with firmly. Adverting to the complaints by
anticipation of the weakness of the coining Land Bill, he
asked on what grounds those anticipations were formed. He
suggested, too, that it was not of so much importance to
consider whether a Bill was to be strong or sweeping as
whether it was to be founded on Justice and sound policy and
likely to afford a permanent and adequate remedy for
admitted grievances. He declined also to be coerced by the
arguments urged on him from some portims of the Liberal
benches that even Conservative landlords had accepted the
" three F's." After vindicating the Government from the
charge of not renewing the Peace Preservation Act
and shrinking from meeting Parliament, he turned
to Mr. Parnell's speech and, controverting his statis-
tics, maintained that in no year had agrarian out-
rages been so numerous since 1844 as in last year.
Moreover, they were on the increase, and he showed, too, by
the statistics of eviction that they had not been brought
about by the action of the landlords. As to these outrages,
'though they disgraced the Land agitation, he was not so sure
that they did not serve its cause. Lord Hartington then
described in vivid language the acts of intimidation by
which the Land League carried out its unwritten laws, and
wound up a much applauded speech by an eloquent appeal
to the House to meet these mischiefs by a temporary sus-
pension of the forms of the Constitution.
After some observations front Mr. Healy, the debate was
adjourned on the motion of Mr. Blennerhassett.
The House adjourned at a quarter to two o'clock.