The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-02-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the riousE of LORDS, Feb. 14th, Lord Granville, replyin
to Lord Stanley of Alderley, said that neither in the archives
of the Foreign Office nor in the recollection of its permanent
staff was there any record of a communication from Russia
in 1876 in which it was proposed to divide Central Asia
between Russia and England.
Lord Stanley of Alderley asked whether the Foreign
Secretary had brought or intended to bring under the notice
of the Holy See language used by Dr. Gillooly, Roman
Catholic Bishop of Elphin, which he contended was opposed
to the Pope's plain condemnation of the teachings of the
Land League.
Lord Granville read a letter which had been addressed to
him by Dr. Gillooly, and in which Lord Stanley of Alderley's
interpretation of the language in his pastoral was disputed,
and the Bishop said he had always condemned violence.
The question put to him as to a representation to the Holy
See Lord Granville answered categorically in the negative.
The four Bills of Law Reform introduced by Lord Cairns
went through Committee, and were rEported without amend-
ment to the House.
Lord Cadogan asked whether Mr. 'lladstone had
received, and, if he had, whetker he had acknowledged an
address of appeal to him from the Boers, a copy of which
was enclosed by Sir Bartle Frere to the Colonial Office in
May last, and laid before Parliament by the present Govern-
ment in September.
Lord Kimberley replied that, so far as Mr. Gladstone
could remember what occurred during the heat of the
election, the address did not reach him, and he did not
reply to it. The copy was printed in the Blue-book because
Sir Bartle Frere sent it to the Foreign Office.
Lord Spencer stated, in answer to Lord Norton, that for
want of time it was not proposed to make any material
changes in the existing education Code; but the Govern-
ment hoped to be able to simplify the Code and make it
more effectual for the promotion of education throughout
the country, with special reference to the large annual ex-
penditure now voted by Parliament, it being their opinion
that any change should be tested minutely and with due
regard to its financial bearings.
Their Lordships adjourned at five minutes after six.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Commins having asked
whether any officials of the Government were empowered
to open and read private letters in the Post Office, Sir W.
Harcourt said the power had been given to the Secretary of
State by the Ist Vic., cap. 36, section 25, and had been deliber-
ately continued ever since, and it was one imposing the
gravest responsibility and not to be exercised except upon
urgent necessity for the safety of the State and Her Majesty's
flubjects. But the nature of the danger which would justify
Its employment was such that the Minister charged with
this responsibility ought to be protected in times like the
present in his discretion, and he must, therefore, ask the
support of the House in declining to make any statement
which might baffle the object for which the power was

given. -
At this there were cheers from both sides, and Mr. Callan,
having asked the Irish Secretary whether the power had
been exercised in reference to any member of Parliament
this Session, Mr. Forster said if he gave any reply to the
question it would be in the same terms as the Home
Secretary.
Mr. Cowen gave notice of his intention to ask whether
there was any power to detain the contents and whether a
stamp could be affixed to the letter showing that it had
been opened.
Sir W. Lawson asked the Under Secretary for the Colonies
whether any steps had been taken before Sir G. Colley
fought the battle at Laing's Nek, on the 28th ult., to carry
out the suggestion made by her Majesty's Government on
the 26th ult., that the Orange Free State should mediate in
the interests of peace.
Mr. Grant Duff: The telegram of the 26th did not, as
my hon. friend supposes, suggest the mediation of the
Orange Free tate. It was a reply to a suggestion made by
President Brand that certain terms should be offered to the
People of the Transvaal, through Sir Hercules Robinson, if
they ceased from armed opposition. The answer of Her
Majesty's Government was simply an amplification of its
previous letter of the 10th to Mr. Blyth, and his telegram of
the 11th, both of which are in the hands of hon. members.
There was no objeet whatever to be gained by recommuni-
eating to Sir George Colley what he had already known since
the 12th of January—namely, that Her Majesty's Govern-
ment was quite prepared to make certain terms if the Boers
ceased from armed opposition. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel Stanley inquired what decision the Government
had come to in the matter of reinforcements to Sir G.
Colley, and also whether any telegram had been received
that day.
Mr. Childers: In reply to my right hon. friend, I have
to say, continuing the answer I gave him on Friday last,
that the actual offer made to Sir George Colley, and which
I then expressed in general terms, was to send hint two
regiments and a wing of infantry, 1,500 drifts to the infantry
regiments now with him, two regiments of cavalry with
their horses, and a battery of horse or field artillery, all to
arrive in March. Sir George Colley, in reply, late on Friday
night, asked only for the infantry drafts, one regiment of
cavalry, and some artillery drafts. I conferred with Lord
Kimberley and my military advisers on Saturday, and we
determined to send all that Sir George Colley had expressed
his readiness to accept, and in addition another cavalry
regiment with their horses and a transport company of the
Army Service Corps with their mules, and all the necessary
arrangements have been made accordingly. My noble friend
the member for Haddingtonshire will be interested in knowing
that we are sending out with the cavalry regiment from
this country a supply of long Martini-Henry rifles with
slings, and I hope that the experiment will be satisfactory.
(Mr. Childers then proceeded to read a telegram be had re-
ceived from Mount Prospect, under date February 13.)
Sir W. Barttellot inquired whether there was any truth in
the statement that only one troop of the 15th Hussars now
serving in South Africa was mounted.
Mr. Childers : So far as I can recollect, no such statement
has been made by Sir G. Colley or by any officer acting in
Natal or the Transvaal.
In answer to Sir W. Palliser, the Marquis of Hartington
said the calculation that the occupation of the City of
Candahar and the posts on the line of communications
would cost £1.,400,000 a year had been framed by competent
authorities in this country on official data supplied from
India. This was on the supposition that a much smaller
force would be required than was at present employed,
but in certain circumstances it might be nearly two millions,
and, in his opinion, this would be its addition to the ordinary
military expenditure of India.
In reply to Mr. Firth, Mr. Shaw-Lefevre stated that the
new Courts of Justice would be ready for the occupation of
the Judges at Easter, 1882.
The House was in committee during the whole night on the
Person and Property Protection Bill.
In line 4of Clause 1 Mr. It. Power moved the omission
of the words "wherever committed," which, as he com-
plained, snake a man liable to arrest on suspieion of treason,
ese„ not only in Ireland, but in England or the United
States, but after a short conversation the amendment was
negatived by 284 to 45.
Mr. Sullivan next, with the view of preventing the arrest
of men for new offences, moved to insert the qualifying
words that the treason, treason felony, or treasonable
Practices shall be "against the provisions of any existing
statute."
The Attorney-General pointed out one fatal objection to
the.amendment—some of the treasonable practices might be
misdemeanours punishable at common law. As to the
offence of "treasonable practices," whick have been com-
plained of as a new offence—the words have been used in
every statute since 1588.
To this Mr. Commins replied that there have been no con-
victions for treasonable practices and that no indictment
would hold water.
Mr. Leamy, Mr. Daly, and others insisted that there ought
to be a stricter definition of offences, and on a division the
amendment was negatived by 221 to 45.
Mr. Commins proposed next to substitute for the general
definition of "crimes punishable by law committed in a pro-
scribed district, being acts of violence, tko., a long list of
specified agrarian offences, such as murder, aggravated
assaults, but the Committee adhered to the language of
the Bill by 113 to 40.
Kr. T. P. O'Connor next moved that the acts of violence
ahould be violence against the person, but this was nega-
tived by 128 to 42.
M'Coan moved to omit from the definition of offences
the "incitement to an act of violence or intimidation, and
tending to interfere with or disturb the maintenance of law
and order." This led to a conversation of some length, in
the course of which the Irish members endeavoured to
obtain from the Law Officers an assurance that past speeches
at Land League meetings advising tenants not to pay rent
would not subject a man to arrest. No answer being given
to this, and to the request urged by some members that the
Irish people should be told "how far they could go in
agitation,' a motion to report progress was made. The
Chairman, regarding this as "obstruction," put the motion
at once, under the new rules, without debate, and it was
negatived by 214 to 28. In the end the amendment was re-
jected by 237 to 48.
Mr. T. P. O'Connor moved the insertion of a proviso that
nothing in the Act should affect the right of public meeting
or association, with the view, as he said, of giving legal
effect to the Prime Minister's declaration on the second
reading; but it was not pressed, on Mr. Gladstone repeating
that he adhered to his opinion that the Bill would not inter-
fere with the existing law as to liberty of association.
An amendment by Major Nolan, providing that the person
arrested shall be in Ireland of his own free will, and shall
Sot have been brought there on some other charge, was
negatived by 170 to 57.
The Committee was then adjourned.
• After some other business had been disposed of, the House
adjourned at twenty-five minutes past one o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, February 15, Lord Lytton, who
said he had given private notice to the Duke of Argyll of his
intention to do so, entered into a lengthened explanation on
thersubject of the construction of a bridge of boats across
the Indus and the concentration of troops on the north-
western frontier of India, which operations the noble duke on
a former occasion said Lord Lytton was reported to have
ordered In 1876. The noble earl now said that the bridge of
boats was constructed merely as a means of communication
between Feshawur and Kohat, the ordinary road between
those places having been closed by hostile tribes who were
making raids on our territory. The concentration of troops
he denied, and he said he had even rescinded an order of
the Government of the Punjab for military action against
those tribes.

The Duke of Argyll stated that, though two (lays ago Lord
Lytton gave him notice of his intention to make this expla-
Dation, he did not in his private note state any date for the
explanation. The duke added that though since the receipt
Of the notice he had been making inquiries, he was not yet
Prepared with his evidence. but he would give regular notice
Of a date, when Ile felt confident that he. should be able to
Substantiate his assertion that the operations on the Indus
in 1876 were part of the Indian policy of the noble earl.

Lord Beaconsfield, with some warmth, complained that
the Duke of Argyll had not done Lord Lytton the justice
to acknowledge the completeness and fullness of his expla-
nation.
Lord Granville suggested that the course taken by Lord
Beaconsfield was rather warm and riregular.
On the motion of Lord Iluntly, the Alkali, &c., Works
„4.egulacn ti Bill was read a second time after some remarks
by Lord Midleton, who described it an an emasculated copy
of a Bill of the late Government; by Lord Aberdare, who
gave it a general support; and 14.4114 e Archbishop of Canter-
bury, who complained that it would not relieve Lambeth of
its noxious vapours,

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE DOERS.
of State for the Colonies
Earl caa,cratt asked tit?. Secretary
Whether he 'w01.241 state to the House the full text of the
despatch referred to the Prime Minister on Friday last, in
wi
which her Majesty's G-overolt "formally and distinctly
requested president Brand to make then: communication
known to the Boer leaders ; " whether negotiation of the same
character were still going on between her Majesty's Govern-
tent and the leaders of the Boers; and, if so, whether any such
correspondence would be at once communicated to Perna-
naent. They all deprecated and viewed with abhorrence
the war which was being Nvagee against the 4.ioers ; but he
could not help saying that since the 201 h January, when
the last despatch was sent by the noble earl, circumstances
ha considerably considerably changed. Mersages of offers of peace
might up to that time nave been considered
...`aUdable on the part of the Governrnent for the
"I'Pose of avoiding hostilities which had assumed an
!Ihsuccessful character on the side of the English arms,
had now the appearance of suing for peace. It was a pro-
F_eeding unknown to British statesmen and commanders, and
Ile warned the Government that they would incur consider-
able
2 danger in the present aspect of the military situation in
r=ying on the negotiations with the Boers, Ile had no wish
_ embarrass the Government, and he sincerely trusted means
would be found to bring the war to an end with credit to
curselve& and advantage to those with whom we were in
Conflict. But he must express his hope titat the Government
While being desirous of obtaining Nace on favour-
terms, be not unmindful of the credit and honour of
their country, which he confessed would be to a congider-
toindegree imperilled if they insisted upon a course of com-
"4n
,ins ieation with the leaders of the Boers when the English
had been unsuccessful. (Cheers.)
e...Ti1l for the
of Kimberley was quite as anxious as the noble
ii7u'st be
the honour of the country, but the Government
e allowed their own opinion, and be permitted to
take their own course as to what manner they thought the
honour and interests of England were best to be maintained.
As to the "despatch," the noble earl had read the full text

in his speech. It was simply a telegram, and would be
included in the Blue-book. If his noble friend would
look at the terms of the telegram he would find that
it did not bear the character of sueing for peace, " I
have to instruct you to inform President Brand that if
armed opposition should at once cease, her Majesty's
Government will frame a scheme ;" and so on. He did not
see that such a commissian was suing for peace. The pro-
positions had arisen from communications voluntarily made
by President Brand, and the Government had answered each
of the communications in a friendly spirit due to the very
friendly tone which President Brand had adopted, and the
very friendly attitude which he had maintained thr,oughout
the unfortunate business. There was nothing in the com-
munications of which he had any reason to be ashamed.
Further communications were still going on, but he was not
in a position to make any statement at present to the House.
(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of Beaconsfield said: I am sure none of your lord
ships would wish that Her Majesty's Government should be put
in a position in which they could have a sentiment
of shame. I am sure that was not the wish of my
noble friend in putting his question, which was one for
explanation and not for the purpose of shaming the Go-
vernment. What is wanted is information as to the posi-
tion of this country in circumstances when Her Majesty's
Government are negotiating and making war at the same
time. I cannot but think that to enter upon negotiations
when you are waging war unsuccessfully is a very perilous
process, and I do not think my noble friend was unjustified
in the course which he has taken. It is all very well to
talk about making the cessation of armed hostility on the
part of the Boers a condition of peace, but how can you
lay down that condition when you yourselves are suffer-
ing under military disaster, and conclusive negotiations
naay be entered upon without reference to other military
disasters occurring in the interval between the commence-
ment and conclusion of the negotiations? A possibility of
that kind is one upon which I am not surprised that my
noble friend looks with great distrust and apprehension. It
is with that feeling that my noble friend made his inquiry,
and, as I think, with good results. (Hear, hear.

The subject dropped, and their lordships adjourned at
twenty-five minutes past seven o'clock.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mr. Labouchere gave notice
of his intention to ask the Postmaster-General whether he
is aware that by the Act of July 12, 1837, clause 5, he is
guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted therefor
will be liable to fine or imprisonment, or both,
if he opens or procures to be opened a post letter,
or wilfully procures or suffers to be detained or delayed a
post letter, except in cases of a letter wrongfully directed,
or of a letter returned because the person to whom it is
directed is dead or cannot be found, or of a letter
which the person to whom it is addressed either refuses
to receive or to pay the postage thereou, or of a letter
opened or detained in obedienee to an express warrant in
writing udder the hand (in Great Britain) of one of the
principal Secretaries of State, and in Ireland under the hand
and seal of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland; and whether,
such being the law, he will take care that no letter be
opened or detained in order to aid law and order, except
by the express warrant of a Secretary of State or of the
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in regard to the said letter,
and whether, in the case of letters which have been opened
during his tenure of office in order to aid law And order he
has acted under an express warrant either of a Secretary
of State or of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland in regard to
each separate letter.

Captain Maxwell-Heron asked the Secretary of State for
War whether he would lay upon the table of the House
any copies of correspondence that might hare passed between
Sir Garnet NVolseley and the War Office at the close of the
Zulu war with reference to the number and description of
troops that it was thought advisable to leave in the Trans-
vaal in order to ensure the maintenance of law and order
there, taking into consideration the dissatisfaction of the
Dutch Boers with the policy of annexation carried out by
the Government then in office.

Mr. Childers in reply said: No, Sir, it is not usual for the
Secretary of State for War to lay on the table correspond-
ence with Commanders-in-Chief abroad as to the prospective
airength of their commands. I may, however, say that the
Mite in the Transvaal and Natal when the recent insurrec-
tion broke out was precisely of the strength recommended
by Sir Garnet Wolseley at the close ef the Zulu war.
Mr. Richard asked the Under-Secretary of State for the
Colonies whether he was able to confirm the announcement
made by telegraph from Cape Town that Letsea, the para-
mount chief of the Basutos, had asked for an armistice,
and that a suspension of hostilities for seven days had been
accorded, and whether he was able to inform the House on
what terms the Government of the Cape Colony were pre-
pared to make peace with the Basutos.

Mr. Grant Duff, in.reply said: Yes, Sir, the news of thii
armistice has been officially confirmed. In reply to my hon.
friend's second question, I think nay best course will be to
read a couple of sentences from a telegram which the Cape
Minister agreed to the Governor's sending to the chief
magistrate at Maseru :
"Let their sincerity be proved, if they are sincore, by im-
mediate surrender of their arms and submission to the
authority of the Government. In that case I will try after
all to secure that they shall be treated with the utmost
leniency consistent with the vindication of the law's
authoi ity."

The Cape Minister further agreed to the Governor's adding
the words, "In the event of their placing themselves unre-
servedly in my hands, they may rely upon me to exert my
influence to procure for them terms not only just, but
generous.."
Mr. Otway said he wished to ask the Secretary for the
Home Department a question of which he had given him
private notice. It was whether the Government had any
information as to the movements of James Stephens, the
head centre of the Fenian conspiracy, who had some
years ago escaped from gaol in Dublin when committed for
trial.

Sir W. Harcourt : Yes, Sir, I have information that James
Stephens recently arrived in Paris. (Cheers and laughter.)

Mr. A O'Connor asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland
whether any preparation had been made by the Govern-
ment for the reception in the gaols of Ireland of a large
number of ladies who were likely to be arrested under the
operation of the Coercion Bill.
Mr. W. E. Forster, there being loud cries of " No, no"
from both sides of the House, returned no answer to the
question.

_
Captain Price gave notice that when the motion of the
hon. member for Scarborough with regard to the stopping of
the sailor's ration of grog came on for discussion he should
oppose it.
In reply to Mr. M'Coan, Lord Hartincr,ton repeated the
answer (with the same protest) given by Lord Granville on
the previous evening that there were no minutes at the
India Office nor the Foreign Office of a conversation with
the Bussian.Minister in 1876 proposing a partition of Turkey
and an absorption of Afghanistan.
The House went into Committee on the Person and Pro-
perty Protection (Ireland) Bill at five o'clock. Proceeding
with Clause 1, the Committee discussed at some length an
amendment proposed by Mr. O'Donnell that each person
arrested shall have his case investigated before the Lord-
Lieutenant or Chief Secretary, and shall have full facilities
for making any explanation he may have to offer.
Mr. Forster, in opposing it, repeated that the enforce-
ment of the Act would not rest with the magistrates or
police, but with the Lord-Lieutenant, assisted by his re-
sponsible advisers. Having that responsibility placed upon
them, they must be allowed to choose their own means of
discharging it, and they would not undertake that responsi-
bility if the House took upon itself to prescribe those means.
Mr. M'Carthy, Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. Daly, and Mr. T.
O'Connor supported the amendment, but in the end it was
negatived by 274 to 56.
After the Committee had negatived, without a division, a
proposal by Mr. Biggar that each suspected person shall'be
released after two weeks unless Parliament shall otherwise
order, Mr. Cowen proposed to give the Lord-Lieutenant
power to release a prisoner on bail.
The Attorney-General for Ireland opposed the amend-
ment, and after Mr. T. P. O'Connor, Mr. Labouchere, Mr.
Rylands, and other hon, members had spoken, it was nega-
tived by 141 to 44.
Mr. Stansfeld next proposed an amendment in line 16,
requiring that the specific crime or crimes on suspicion of
which any person is arrested shall be stated on the warrant,
with particulars of time and place ;but Mr. Forster objected
to it, on the ground that it world inevitably lead to Parlia-
ment being made a court oi appeal in each case. Each case
of imprisonment would be brought before the House, and
'made the subject of a debate.
The discussion was continued for some !time, and on the
one side the amendment was supported as a protection to
tke prisoner and a salutary check on the Ezecutive by Mr.
Pugh, Mr. Bradlaugh, Mr. H. B. Samuelson, Mr. I.l.'Coan,
Mr. O'Donnell, Mr. Dillon, anti other Irish members. On
the other hand, Mr. Gibson and Mr. M. Lloyd opposed the
amendment, and the Attorney-General maintained that
those who desired to fetter the Executive as now proposed
should have voted against the second reading.
The Attorney-General for Ireland, in the course of his
remarks, offered to insert words at a future stage requiring
the offence to be stated, but objected to the specification of
time and place. On a division the amendment was negatived
by 220 to 96.
The discussion was renewed on an amendment next moved
by Mr. O'Donnell requiring that every person so arrested
shall at the time of his arrest be furnished with a copy of
the warrant, and with a statement of the act or acts for
which the arrest has been made.
The Attorney-General and the Attorney-General for Ire-
land urged that the point had been decisled by the previous
division, but Sir J. Holker and Mr. S. Hill held that there
was a distinct difference, and that it was monstrous to
refuse to tell a man on what offence he had been ar-
rested. On a division, the amendment was negatived by
222 to 70.
Mr. O'Donnell next proposed that the Lord-Lientenant
shall be bound firfFise each case every three months; and
Mr. Forster pro ed to consider hefore the next stage
whether this eon be done.
On the next amendment, which proposed to leave out the
words which make the Lord-Lieutenant's warrant conclusive
evidence "of all matters therein contained," as well as o 4 the
Jurisdiction, &c., there arose an animated controversy
between the present and the late Law Officer as to the exact
meaning of the words and the necessity for retaining them.
Mr. Forster protested himself unable to understand the
matter, and desired to postpone his decision as to striking
them out. In the end a motion to report progress was made
and negatived by 212 to 38, but shortly after the Committee
adjourned before the amendment was disposed of.
The House adjourned at ten minutes to two o'clock.