The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-11 00:00:00

THE CONTROL DEPARTMENT.

Colonel SYKES asked the Secretary of State for War
whether he would lay upon the table a return in detail of
the savings effected by the Control Department since its
establishment in the War Office.

Captain VIVIAN said there would be no objection to
Lay the papers on the table.
THE SETTLEMENT OF THE GAMBIA.

Sir JOHN HAY asked whether it was likely that the set-
tlement of the Gambia would be transferred to the Em-
peror of the French without the consent of Parliament
being obtained ?

Mr. GLADSTONE said his impression and belief was that
it would not be so. There never had been any intention
to take any proceedings of that kind without the sanc-
tion of Parliament.
CANADA RAILWAY LOAN.

Mr. MONK called attention to the correspondence laid
before Parliament relative to the Canada Railway Loan
Act, 1867, and moved that, in the opinion of the House,
the provisions of Lhe Act of the Canadian Legislature,
31 Vic., c. 13, did not satisfactorily fulfil the require-
ments of the " Canada Railway Loan Act, 1867."
Opposed as he was to the whole system of
colonial guarantees, believing that they increased
the taxes of the ratepayers of this country,
he should not have felt it his duty again to
have brought the subject before the attention of Parlia-
ment, if satisfactory explanations had been given to the
House, or if he had not concurred in the opinion of the
law officers of the Crown, that the spirit and intention of
the Imperial Act had not been complied with, that the
investment of money under the limits of the Privy
Council of Canada was in violation of the provisions of
that Act. He reminded the House that in 1867 an Act
.was passed for guaranteeing the payment of interest upon
£3,000,000 sterling for the purpose of constructing an
inter-colonial line between Quebec and Halifax upon cer-
tain conditions. One of these conditions was that an Act
should be passed by the Parliament of Canada providing first
for constructing the railway, and then for its use by her
Majesty's troops. It also required that the route should
be approved by the Secretary of State. In the next
place, it provided for the raising, appropriation, and
expenditure, for the purposes of the construction of the
line of the £3,000,000, and further, for the raising of a
sinking fund managed by trustees. It was to this point
of the subject that the hon. gentleman directed the atten-
tion of the House. He quoted from the Act passed in
Canada in December, 1867, providing for the raising of
£1,000,000 additional in order to complete the railway.
He felt some degree of surprise that the Lords Com-
missioners of Her Majesty's Treasury should have without
a little more consideration expressed their satisfaction at
the terms of the Act. He thought they would scarcely
contend that it was the intention of the Imperial Par-
liament that the money which was raised under the
authority of Parliament should be used in paying off
temporarily a portion of the debt of the Dominion. He
thought that with the Commissioners of the Treasury in
1868 must rest the blame if they signified their approval
of an Act which did not fulfil the requirements of the
Act of 1867, and he thought Parliament and the country
would hold them primarily responsible for the temporary
misappropriation of the loan.
Mr. WHATMAN seconded the motion.

Mr. MONSELL in reply said he differed from the hon.
gentleman who had brought forward the motion. He
believed that Canada was faithfully discharging its duty
and proceeding with the railway in the most satisfactory
manner. They were pushing the works forward
with the utmost despatch, and he believed
the railway would be opened in the year 1872, and that
there was no ground to find fault with the Canadian
Government. The great point in the matter was, Did
the Canadian Act satisfy the Imperial Act, and after con-
sulting the best authority he could he had to say that he could
discover no divergance between them. Indeed there was
no divergence between them ; and the one fulfilled
the other in every single requirement. He thought the
hon. gentleman had altogether failed to substantiate his
motion, and he hoped therefore the House would not givo
its assent to it. Considering the gallant conduct of
Canada, it was unwise, unjust, and far from generous to
raise the question. As he had already said, he believed
that the Canadian Legislature had faithfully carried out
all that was required of them.
The motion was withdrawn.
• LOCAL TAXATION.

Mr. CAMPBELL called the attention of the House to
the subject of county government, and moved that in
the opinion of the House the principle of representation
ought to be applied to the Government and financial ad-
ministration of counties. The hon. member urged the
desirableness of forming county financial boards all over
the country, and expressed his opinion that the best results
would follow such a proceeding,. With regard to repre-
sentation, he said that those who paid the rate should have
the power of expending the money which they contributed.
In Scotland, he went on to say, a knot of country gentle-
men had the power, according to the present system of
petitioning Parliament in name of the county, whilst their
opinions were in direct opposition to those entertained by
the county which they professed to represent. The hon.
gentleman commented on the vagueness of the functions
of a Lord-Lieutenant of a county, and remarked that he
was selected not only on account of his character, but his
politics, family influence, and property. The powers of
nomination possessed by the Lord-Lieutenant in respect
to the magistracy was condemned by the hon. member,
who remarked that on the point he had indicated a great
and radical change was required.
Mr. BRUCE alluded to the wide scope of the speech made
by the hon. member, and remarked that if the House
assented to the motion they must be prepared to give
effect to the large scheme of local taxation which the hon.
gentleman sketched out in his speech. He called attention
to the fact that in the Queen's Speech it was stated that
the admission of the representative principle into the
local administration in counties was necessary, and the
principle was assented to by both sides of the House.
The Government could not adopt the motion of the hon.
member, and he referred to the committee appointed with
reference to County Financial Boards.
Sir R. ANSTRUTHER, without saying a word as to the
way in which the Commissioners of Supply in Scotland