The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1882-06-24 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) BILL. The House went into Committee on the Prevention of Crime Bill. Clause 9, which empowers the arrest and holding to bail of suspicious strangers, was discussed until past midnight. At the outset several attempts were made to define who is to be regarded as a stranger. Mr. Callan proposed that he shall be a person residing outside a radius of Ave miles, but this was negatived by 72 to 32, and a suggestion by Mr. Commins that he shall be a stranger to the district was also Uegatived by 73 to 29. Colonel Nolan proposed that the constable shall not retain te custody any person who can give proof of his identity, unless he fears an escape, which the Committee megasived by 77 to 30. An amendment by Mr. O'Kelly that the police shall make a sworn information as to the cause of the arrest. dm. was mot pressed, on the Home Secretary giving an assurance that there should be a record of the whole proceedings on oath. The Home Secretary accepted an amendment by Mr. T. P. O'Connor, reducing the amount of bail to £6O for each surety, and a proposal by Mr. Sexton giving an appeal to Petty Sessions. A. proposal by Mr. Parnell that no person shall be deemed a stranger if any justice of the peace, clergymen, or ether credible person shall certify before the justice to his good character was negatived by 161 to 46. A division was taken on the question that Clause 9 stand Part of the Bill, with the result that it was carried by 194 to al. Clause 10, relating to newspapers, which the Government Propose to amend by limiting it solely to the power of seizing copies of objectionable papers, was then taken up, sad after some discussion, the clause was agreed to, subject to additions on Report, and the Committee adjourned. Some other business was disposed of, and the House adieUrned at twenty-live minutes to three o'clock.  In the HUSE OF LORDS, June 20, Lord Faversham referred te the recent events in Egypt, and maintained that Sir difficulties there had arisen in consequenee of Her awsiesty's Government having departed from the traditioaal L'oney of this country as regarded the integrity of the Ottoo Empire. He asked what measures the Government had 'amen, or intended to take, with the view of exacting reparation for the murder and outrage of British subjects in Alexandria, and for the future security of the lives and prowertY of our fellow-countrymen in Egypt. This was a matter L n respect of which we had a right to act for ourselves without addressing ourselves to other Powers. Lord Granville believed it to be the opinion of the House that it was not desirablethe policy of Her Majesty's Government in Egypt should be discussed piecemeal. He held that the Government had not departed from the traditional Polley of this country in respect of the integrity of the OttoMan Empire. They had faithfully adhered to the terms oi the Treaty of Berlin. He agreed with Lord Feversham that We should act for ourselves in respect of the outrages on British subjects. Sir E. Malet had given the Egyptian Government to understand that her Majesty's Government would exact full satisfaction for those outrages; and notice had been given to all British subjects who had suffered outrage, either in attack on themselves or in the murder of relatives, to register their complaints at the Consulate. Orders had been sent to our Admiral, which, in the belief of Her Majesty's Government, would be sufficient to Meet the case of further disturbances. They had been informed that the French Government also had sent instructions to their Admiral. - • - -• Lord Carnarvon did not think the explanation given by the Government to Parliament were such as might reasonably have been expected. He commented on the situation in oVt, and asked for some farther information as to measures otection. Lord Kimberley replied that means had been taken to Ova aufticient protection to refugees. He declined to follow Lord Carnarvon into a discussion on the situation. Lord Salisbury complained of the delay in the prod nctirbn of the papers on Egypt which had been promised to Parliataw. A debate afterwards arose upon the question of Irish evictions, j which the Marquis of Waterford, Lord Carling. lerd, the Earl of ,Dunraven, Earl Cowper, Lord Inchiquln,