The Penny Bee-Hive. — 1870-04-30 (London, England)

PARLIAMENTARY SUMMARY.  HOUSE OF COMMONS. MONDAY.  A question was put by Mr. Beresford Hope relative to the continued enjoyment of Epping Forest by the public, and elicited from Mr. Gladstone the answer that measures tor secure ing that object were in progress, and that he had every reason to hope they would lead to a satisfactory settlement. Mr. Crawford gave notice that he should propose the rejection of the Metropolitan District Railway Bill on the order for its third reading. The Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, at the instance of Mr. Monk, explained that information has been received at his department, which confirmed the intelligence published in the morning papers concerning the recent murders of English sub 4 jects by Greek banditti in the neighbourhood of Marathon. No efforts, he proceeeded to say, had been wanting on the part of our Minister at Athens to avert the sad fate that had befallen those gentlemen. There had been no difficulty with regard to the payment of the sum demanded as ransom. Nor had our Minister been remiss in his efforts to induce the Greek Government to grant the amnesty which the brigands required as a condition of the captives' release. Unfortunately, however, that concession was not made, and according to intelligence received on Friday Mr. Herbert and the Secretary to the Italian Legation had been put to death by the brigands under the pressure of an attack upon them by the Greek troops, that Mr. Vyner had been carried off, and that nothing was known of Mr. Lloyd. A later telegram from Athens, on the same day, announced that both these gentlemen had shared the fate of their companions, and been killed near Thebes. There was reason to believe that Lord Muncaster was safe. The House having gone into committee of ways and means, agreed to the resolutions abolishing the impressed stamp on newspapers, substituting for it a id. postage stamp, reducing the postage on books and other printed matter to a id. for every two ounces, and establishing the new scale of stamp duties proposed in the eudget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The third reading of the War Office Bill of the Government, which created two new under secretaries, having seats in the House, with salaries of £l,soo'a year each, was opposed by Mr. J. Fielden, who remarked that one of these officers was to be a financial secretary and the other a clerk of the Ordnance—the latter an office which it became absolutely necessary to abolish during the Crimean war. He objected to the Bill because it threw an increased burden upon the taxpayers, and came with bad grace from the professing friends of retrenchment and economy whilst they were engaged in dismiss. ing dockyard labourers, soldiers, and sailors by thousands ; in short, that it was a palpable Whig job. Sir J. Pakington hoped Mr. Fielden would not press his opposition to a division, though he owned he was not surprised at his hon. friend noticing the inconsistency involved in Ministers proposing to create these offices, and so adding at once to the public expenditure and to the Parliamentary power of the Government. Mr. Cardwell generally commended the bill to the approval of the House by showing that its object was not to increase salaries but parliamentary responsibility. On the right hon..gentleman resuming his seat Mr. Fielden intimated that he should persist with his amendment for reading the bill that day six months ; but upon a division he was defeated by 80 to 6, and the bill was therefore read a a third time and passed. The next order was the Metropolitan Poor Relief Bill, the second reading of which was moved by Mr. Goschen. It was opposed by Dr. Brewer as a violation of the principle of the poor law, and on account of its centralising tendency, and by Mr. W. M. Torrens as a disfranchising bill; whilst Mr. Samuda regarded it in the light of a measure which would redress inequality of taxation by distributing the burden over a wider area of the metropolis. Sir H. Hoare thanked the Government for introducing the proposal, and hoped the principle of the Bill would be extended ere long to outdoor as well as indoor relief. Mr. W. IL Smith objected that it was a considerable step towards a national rate. In Mr. Locke's opinion there was no objection that could not be removed or remedied in committee. In the course of the  subsequent discussion Mr. Hardy declared against an absolute equalisation of rates in London. Mr. Gosehen replied upon the whole debate, and having promised to consider various suggestions in committee, the Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday next.