The Sun.
London, England, 1870-04-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, 'WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL (3, 1870.

Mr. ComuNcE proposed to insert after " compensa-
tion. " "to be paid by the landlord for any
loss sustained by him on quitting his holding, and for im-
provements made by him or his predecessor in title, as
the Court may think fit, so that the sum awarded shall
not exceed five years' rent, or extend to any holding valued
under the acts relating to the valuation of rateable pro-
perty in Ireland at an annual value exceeding fifteen
pounds." The necessity of a Land Bill had been generally
recognised, and he thought his amendment provided ample
compensation.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE said the amendment raised certain
important points, which would come on in due course. He
did not think, therefore, that the present was the best
opportunity to consider the matter ; and as in a short
time they would come to consider the scale of compen-
sation, he hoped the hon. gentleman would not press his
amendment.

Mr. BRUEN' approved of the amendment and therefore
he should give it his support.

Mr. SYNAN opposed the amendment as it went to sweep
away the small holders altogether. If there was any.
thing that could make the bill unpopular in Ireland, and
altogether defeat the object of the Government, it would
be the agreeing to such an amendment as that now
submitted to the House.

After a few words from Mr. Dent and other members,
the amendment was withdrawn.

Sir G. JENKINSON moved that the chairman report
progress.

Mr. GLADSTONE hoped the hon. baronet would *not
press his motion, as it would be inconvenient to leave off
at the present point.
Sir G. JENKINSON refused to withdraw his motion.

Mr. GLADSTONE regretted that the right hon. baronet
refused to accede his suggestion; he therefore should
oppose the motion.

Sir G. JENSINSON objected to the Prime Minister
exercising his great power of stifling private members.
He hated and detested the bill, and as he had not yet
spoken upon it he felt he had a right to do so at the next
sitting.

The motion for reporting progress was ultimately with-
drawn, and another amendment—that proposed by Mr.
Bowring—was agreed to.
The subject to be taken into consideration by the coin-
Aittee on Thursday will be the scale of compensation for
disturbance of holding.
The sitting was then suspended until nine o'clock.

Mr. P. TAYLOR moved for leave to bring in a bill to restore
"the ancient constitutional practice" of paying members of
Parliament. He supported his proposition by reference to
ancient precedents in our own history, and to the universal
custom of all other constitutional countries. Leaving it to
the Committee on the bill the amount of n muneration,
which he proposed to take from the Consolidated Fund, he
indicated his own preference for a sum which would tempt
men of education and culture, say £5OO a year, to a poor
one £l5O as mere subsistence money.
Mr. GLADSTONE, without receding from his oft-expressed
desire to see the less opulent classes more numerously
represented in the House, was of opinion, looking to the
merits of the question and the circumstances of the times,
that it was undesirable to entertain the question now.
On a division, the House refused leave to bring in the bill
by 211 to 24.
Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE brought on his annual motion
condemning the House Tax as unequally assessed.•
Mr. STAYSPIELD, who replied for the Government, ad-
mitted that there might be an amendment in this respect in
the mode of assessment, but he could not hold out any chance
of its repeal.
Alderman LAWRENCE did not press his motion to a
division.

The House adjourned shortly before 1 o'clock.

SALMON FISHERIES.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY.

The Select Committee upon the Salmon Fisheries
resumed its sittings this morning. Mr. Dodd, in the
chair.

The first witness "was Mr: Frederick Bateman, civil
engineer. He was examined at some length, with respect
to the proper mode of procuring a sufficient supply of
water for the various mills on the rivers, and said that-
the effect of the notch in, the weir which constituted a
ish pass, would always sensibly affect any mill race.
Of course, in many large rivers, it would not
be felt at all, but looking to the spawning grounds of the
small tributaries to which the salmon resort it would not
do to allow such a notch to remain open long, except in
time of flood. Water flowing over weirs was often
required for special purposes, and the notch must be
closed when the miller could get no more water than he
required, when he had the whole force of the stream
to drive his machinery. He considered that
the objections entertained by some millowners
to have notches made in their mill-dam was a
well-founded one, and ought to be considered. Of course in
many cases where it would be very. advantageous to the
fishery the rights of the millers might be bought up, and
they would have no reason to complain, seeing it was for
the publir good.
Mr. Samuel Robinson, civil engineer, gave it as his
opinion that the making of weirs throughout the country
in such a condition that there should be fish passes either
by notches and ladders in the weirs themselves or by a
passage round the weir, was a mere question of money, and
that it was quite possible to effect that object without in any.
degree injuring the mill_owners. He was of opinion that
if proper means were adopted there would be no difficulty
in improving our salmon fishery, to as great an extent as
the Irish fishery had been.
Mr. Gray, an hydraulic engineer, gave similar
evidence,
After which the committeee adjourned. .

THE ABOLITION OF COMPULSORY
PILOTAGE BILL.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY.

The Select Committee of the House of Commons sat
to-day to inquire into the expediency of abolishing com-
pulsory pilotage, Mr. Shaw Lefevre in the chair.
Mr. Ogram, superintendent of the Gloucester and
Berkeley Canal, gave evidence with reference to the pilot-
age of the Bristol Channel. He said till 1861 the pilots
of the Channel for Cardiff, Newport, and Gloucester
were under the control of the Corporation of Bristol.
On representations being made of the high rates and
injurious effect of this privilege, it was abolished, and a
non-compulsory pilotage system, was introduced. The
rates of pilotage had been reduced 33 per cent.. and he
believed the change was considered advantageous by the
authorities of Cardiff and Newport. The average earnings
of pilots for 1869 of the Gloucester pilots, who found their
own boats, was £245. The pilots bought their boats at a
cost of between £2OO and £250, and a man and a boy, or
two men, had to man it, in addition to the pilot, the
earnings to be divided. The twenty-one licensed pilots
had eight apprentices and eighteen boats ; and these had
been found sufficient by the Pilotage Board of Gloucester.
Witness believed the returns of the pilots to be correct,
though they had not a good way of controlling them. A
false return would be a serious thing to a Gloucester
pilot. The apprentices served five years, and had to be
two years at sea before they could be be licensed as pilots.
By the Chairman : He was not aware if two ships came
into collision, the one with a compulsory pilot on board
exempted the shipowner from liability, whereas the other,
with a non-compulsory pilot, made the shipowner respon-
sible.
The Chairman : But it is so ?
Witness continued : They never had any difficulty in
filling up vacancies, among the pilots at Gloucester ; and
they never had had any complaints from the shipowners.
Sir Henry Arrow, deputy master at the Trinity House,
said that the Trinity House up to 1862 had been in favour
of compulsory pilotage ; but as they held a position be-
tween the pilot and the public, they had not
given their opinion since. Speaking for him-
self he was in favour 'of non-compulsory pi-
lotage : he believed that ' the same number of
pilots would be employed, the shipowners being
moved by the instinct of self-preservation to employ them
under a voluntary system. He thongnt it was wrong to
give a pilot command of a vessel, and make him liable for
damage done. He considered the position of the pilot
would be to give advice as to the dangerous places of navi-
gation, leaving the captain to manoeuvre and retain the
command of the ship.
The committee then adjoined,

THE MILITARY _DEBATE IN BAVARIA.—The
Augsburg Gazette contains an account of the discussion.
which took in the sitting of the Bavarian Chamber,
on the 30th and 31st of March, and which is likely to
have important consequences. The Minister of War,
Herr von Prankh, had introduced a war budget, which the
preliminary commission were anxious to reduce. When
the matter came on for debate in the Chamber, Herr von
Prankh warmly_opposed the recommendations of the com-
mittee, and declared they would entail a complete change
of the whole military system. "The question,"
he said, is whether or no we can change the
existing system ; and if so, what can we put
in its place ? • As the Foreign Minister has justly
said we cannot infringe the faith of treaties without com-
promising our independence. If we are to folloiv the
policy indicated by the Minister, we must do it with good
will, but we must have the power to do it, and
this power depends entirely on a good army."
In conclusion, Herr von Prankh declared that the
recommendations of the committee would entail
a disorganisation of the army of which he, as War
Minister, would not accept the Neverthe-
less,responsibility. after the clauses of the measure had been fully die-'
cussed, the Chamber voted the whole of the reduc-
tions,whether for men or material, for the force for active
service or for the Landwehr in spite of the
reiterated remonstrances of the Ministers. The Budget,
as amended, was then voted by a larse majority. It is•
thought probable that this decision will entail the resig-
nation of . the War Minister, and it has created the,
greatest egAtignent throughoot§cuthern Germ_ any and
rositik: • ....._..