asked the Secretary of State for the Home De- partment, Whether he proposes to take action on the Report of the Municipal Corporations Commission?

in reply, said, that he had only had the Report in his hands a week before Parliament reassembled; and, therefore, he had not had time to study it with the evidence. The Commission had bestowed pains upon this inquiry; and, no doubt, their more material recommendations would deserve considerable attention.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Why the Report of the Royal Commission on the Parochial Charities of the City of London has not been presented; and, if he can state when it will be presented?

, in reply, said, that the reason why the Report referred to had not been presented was because it had not yet been received. It was expected that the Report would be received by the Home Office at the end of the present month, shortly after which it would be laid upon the Table.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Government intend to re-introduce the Charity Expenses and Accounts Bill of last Session; and, if not, what steps they intend to take to put into effect the assurance given last Session on the subject by the Government?

in reply, said, that it was not the intention of the Government to re-introduce the Bill relating to Charity Expenses and Accounts, which he had laid upon the Table last Session, because the reception which that measure met with then was hardly encouraging. At present no decision had been come to with reference to any further steps being taken on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he will inform the House what islands Her Majesty's Government have lately annexed in the Torres Straits, and what stipulations have been made with the Colony of Queensland for the due protection of the Native inhabitants; and, whether it is in contemplation to extend British jurisdiction to the neighbouring mainland of New Guinea?

Sir, the boundaries of Queensland have, since the year 1872, comprised all islands within 60 miles of the mainland of that part of Australia. In 1878 the Queensland Government stated to Her Majesty's Government that if they had jurisdiction over certain small islets and reefs in Torres Straits beyond their existing boundaries, but quite distinct from New Guinea, they could take any steps necessary for the protection of the Natives against pearl-shell seekers or other persons resorting there. This request was complied with. The islets are described inThe Queensland Gazetteof July 19, 1879; and I believe that the necessary measures have been taken by the Queensland Government. There is no intention whatever of extending British jurisdiction over the mainland of New Guinea.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether his attention has been called to a statement which appeared in the "Daily News" of 16th January, to the effect that Captain Easton, one of Her Majesty's Consuls, on returning from a visit to the Sultan of Nupé's dominions on the river Niger, had found that the natives of Onitsha, 200 miles from the mouth of the river, had been giving considerable trouble to the Europeans, whereupon he obtained the services of Her Majesty's ship "Pioneer," and bombarded the town and destroyed it; and, whether he can inform the House if this statement be correct; and, if so, whether British Consuls have authority to use Her Majesty's ships to bombard and destroy towns whenever the inhabitants are charged with giving trouble to Europeans?

Sir, I have not seen the statement inThe Daily News;but we have official information with respect to the circumstances to which it alludes. The statement that the town of Onitsha, some 200 miles up the Niger river, has been bombarded by Her Majesty's ship Pioneeris correct, and the following are the circumstances in which the bombardment took place:—British traders have been for some time past established at Onitsha; but in consequence of the outrages committed on their properties and persons by the Natives, for which no redress could be obtained from the Chiefs, the merchants determined to withdraw altogether from that station. When about to carry this determination into effect, the Chiefs and people refused to allow them to remove their goods, and plundered some of the stores. The traders thereupon appealed for protection to Mr. Easton, the acting British Consul at Fernando Po, who happened to be on his way down the Niger, and who laid the matter before the senior naval officer on the station, and thePioneergunboat was sent up the Niger for the protection of British interests. On arriving at Onitsha steps were taken to remove the British property, which was estimated at over £20,000 in value; but while arrangements were being made to embark the property, the sailors and others engaged in this work were attacked by the Natives, and in consequence of this unprovoked aggression the Commander attacked and burnt the town. In answer to the last part of the Question, I have to say British Consuls are not authorized to bombard and destroy towns whenever the inhabitants are charged with giving trouble to Europeans; but there are exceptional occasions when it is the duty of Commanders of Her Majesty's cruisers to act promptly upon their own judgment, and particularly in those cases where British lives and property are at stake. In the present case, the conduct of the Consular and naval officers has been approved.

Will there be any objection to produce the Papers relating to this transaction?

I do not suppose there will be; but I will give a formal answer to that Question, if the hon. Gentleman will ask me again on Monday.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, If he will lay upon the Table Copies of all unpublished Correspondence on the subject of the Kirwee Booty, between officers interested in the Prize Grant and the India Depart- ment, subsequent to the presentation of the last Return of Papers relating to this matter, viz. No. 213, of 1876; and, of the Short-hand Notes of the Proceedings in the Vice-Chancellor's Court, including the Arguments of Counsel and Sir C. Hall's Judgment in the action "Kinlochv.The Secretary of State in Council," on the 4th November 1879?

Sir, on the 28th of January, Mr. Kinloch applied to Vice Chancellor Hall to direct that he should be furnished with the documents bearing on the case which might be in the possession of the Secretary of State; but the Vice Chancellor refused to make the order on the ground that an appeal was pending against his decision. But I should be glad to confer with my hon. and gallant Friend about these Papers. We have at the India Office a copy of the recent Judgment, but not the arguments of counsel; but I hardly think these Papers of sufficient general interest to be printed at the public expense.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether his attention has been called to a "Notice to British Subjects" recently issued by Her Majesty's Consul at Corfu, in the following terms:—

"Notice to British Subjects.—The undersigned has just received from Her Majesty's Consul for the Morea a despatch informing him That the authorities in Acarnania consider it dangerous for sportsmen and others landing from yachts on that coast, as there are several brigand chiefs on the frontier who might form plans for their capture, especially if they remain many days on the same spot.' Ali British subjects therefore leaving Corfu on shooting expeditions are hereby cautioned, as the Greek Government, after giving this notice, will not be answerable for any ransom that the brigands might exact.—Her Majesty's Consulate, Corfu, 11th November 1879. Signed, R. Reade, H.M.'s Consul;"

and, whether the condition of Acarnania so described is exceptional, or may be taken as a fair specimen of the normal security for life and property which is enjoyed, throughout the Hellenic Kingdom?

Sir, it is true that a notice to that effect was issued in November last by Her Majesty's Consul at Corfu. Her Majesty's Minister at Athens reported on the 27th of the same month that some cases of brigandage having occurred in Greece, a very stringent law for its repression, which had been enacted in 1871 for a period of four years, and which had then proved effective, had been a second time put into force for a period of eight months. In respect to the effect of that law on the population, I am not in a position to say more at the present moment.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If the claim of the United States Government for 103,000 dollars for damages alleged to have been done by Newfoundland fishermen in Fortune Bay to the Massachusetts fishing fleet has been amicably arranged; what measures are being adopted for the purpose of abrogating or amending Clause 33 of the Treaty of Washington relative to the Canadian and Newfoundland inshore fisheries; and, whether steps are being taken for the purpose of ascertaining if the Proviso of the Convention of 1818, which admits American fishermen to enter British North American bays or harbours for the purpose of shelter, repairing damages, and purchase of wood and water, is intended to exclude them from going inshore to traffic, tranship, fish, purchase stores, mend nets, and hire seamen?

Sir, the claim of the United States Government for damages alleged to have been done by Newfoundland fishermen in Fortune Bay is still under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. No measures are being adopted for the purpose of abrogating or amending Clause 33 of the Treaty of Washington. The extent of the fishing privileges accorded to the United States on the shores of Canada and Newfoundland is laid down in the Convention of 1818, and in the Treaty of Washington of 1871. Her Majesty's Government have not at present found it necessary to make any communication to the United States Government with the view of defining more precisely the exact interpretation of the language of those Treaties.

said, that on an early day he would call attention to the Convention of 1818 between this country and the United States relative to fisheries.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If the long pending claims of British subjects against Brazil, which on the 23rd of June last he said were on the eve of satisfactory arrangement, are yet arranged?

Sir, last Session I said, in reply to the hon. Member, that the Commission to which these claims had been referred had made considerable progress, and that there was some hope that in a short time a satisfactory arrangement might be arrived at. Some delay in the negotiations has been occasioned by a change of Government in Brazil; but the present Government appears to be really anxious to come to a satisfactory arrangement. They have been furnished with a Report of the exact state of the claims of each country, and have expressed their desire to have the matter settled as speedily as possible. Her Majesty's Minister in Brazil trusts that before long he will be in a position to place before Her Majesty's Government the proposals of the Brazilian Government.

asked the Secretary of State for War, When the Report of the War Office Special Committee upon Short Service and Recruiting, of which Lord Airey is Chairman, may be expected to be presented; and, whether he will lay that Report upon the Table of the House in sufficient time to allow of its being fully considered by Members before the discussion on the Army Estimates?

in reply, said, the Report of the Committee, of which Lord Airey was Chairman, had not yet been received. The Committee were still considering their Report; and, although they had given the most assiduous attention to it, it had not been yet sent in to the authorities. It was necessary to take a Vote of the number of men before the Mutiny Bill was brought in, and he could not promise to postpone the Estimates indefinitely.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, If it be the fact that Sir John Smale, the Chief Justice of Hong Kong, has declared that a system of slavery has grown up there and has been tolerated under British rule, while contrary to British Law; and what steps Government has taken, or proposes taking, to deal with the evil?

Sir, I learn from the Hong Kong Press that Sir John Smale has on two occasions made some remarks from the Bench on the existence and increase of a system of domestic servitude among the Chinese of Hong Kong which is contrary to the law of the Colony. I only learnt this from the newspapers, as the learned Chief Justice did not think it necessary to bring his remarks officially under my notice. He very properly stated his intention to punish severely any offences against the law that might be brought before him. I am quite satisfied that Mr. Pope Hennessy, the Governor of Hong Kong, will take any steps that may be required on the part of the Colonial Government, and I do not see that any action on our part is necessary. But, of course, I shall readily consider any suggestions that may be made to me on the subject.

asked if the Government would not communicate with the Governor of Hong Kong on the subject?

I am expecting a despatch on the subject.

asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he intends to bring in a Bill this Session to carry out the Report of the Poor Removal Committee of last Session?

Sir, a Bill is in preparation, and will certainly be introduced this Session, although I cannot name the day. It will deal—and, I hope, effectively deal—with the subject referred to—the Select Committee on Poor Removal in the last Session; but I cannot say that it will deal with it exactly in the mode recommended in the Report of that Committee.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether the same facilities will be given to Boards of Guardians in Ireland to obtain loans for other than sanitary works as were given to Boards of Guardians in Lancashire during the cotton famine?

Sir, the facilities given to the Boards of Guardians in Lancashire at the time referred to, so far as I can gather from the clauses of the Act of Parliament, consisted of the power to borrow money for the purpose of making roads and footpaths, and widening, deepening, and straightening sewers or brooks; and also for the drainage of common land. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is aware that the Government have issued a Notice enabling presentment sessions to be held for the purpose of carrying out works of that kind in Ireland; and, moreover, in addition to this, the Government has already offered liberal terms to Boards of Guardians enabling them to borrow for various purposes in their capacities as local sanitary authorities, and this at a lower rate of interest than is allowed in ordinary eases.

asked whether the deepening of rivers was included in the works that might be done by order of the presentment sessions?

There is no reference to the deepening of rivers in the Notice; but the Proviso states that the Lord Lieutenant, with the consent of the Treasury, may add works for special objects.

asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he proposes, either by provisions in the Army Discipline Bill, or by any other measure, to relieve British soldiers from punishment by flogging, and thus put Her Majesty's Army in this matter in the same position as the armies of other civilised powers?

in reply, said, it was proposed to bring in an Army Discipline and Regulation Act Continuance Bill, as was proposed last year.

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, When he proposes to move for the Committee which he promised on the 11th August 1879,

"To consider the subject of local loans generally, and to go into other matters bearing upon the subject, such as the granting greater facilities to local authorities for obtaining loans?"

in reply, said, he intended to make the Motion shortly; but he had not been able to do it yet owing to the pressure of other Business.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Department, If he will lay upon the Table a List of all the appointments, duties, and employments which govern the seconding of officers under the Royal Warrant of February 1880, together with a numerical Return of the officers seconded for their several appointments, showing the ranks and corps?

Every regimental officer is seconded, if he be not altogether removed from the regimental roll, on appointment to any extra regimental position as soon as he has held such position for three months.

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, For what Provinces of European Turkey Commissioners are appointed to give effect to the provisions of the 23rd Article of the Treaty of Berlin; and, if he can state how those Commissions are composed?

Sir, we have received Reports of such Commissions having been formed in the vilayets of Adrianople, Salonica, and Janina. In the vilayet of Adrianople the Commission is thus comprised—President, the Governor General; 12 representative members, of whom four are Greeks, three Mussulmans, two Armenians, one Bulgarian, one Jew; 11ex-officiomembers, of whom nine are Mussulmans and two non-Mussulmans. This Commission has completed its examination and sent up its Report to Constantinople. The Commission for the vilayet of Salonica, as finally constituted, contains 10 Mussulmans, eight Christians, and two Jews. Of these 20 members, 17 are natives of Macedonia and three of Asia Minor. Of the proceedings in the vilayet of Janina we only know that the Vali has constituted a Commission. It consists of 20 Mussulmans and six or seven Greeks, and it is now examining the Organic Law proposed to be applied to the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, When the Papers relating to South Africa, promised in Her Majesty's Most Gracious Speech, will be laid upon the Table of the House, and whether they will extend to cover the period of the arrests of Messrs. Kruger, Pretorius, and Bok; and, whether he can inform the House of the number of the forces of all arms now in the Transvaal, and will make a Return of the revenue and expenditure of the Government in the Transvaal from its annexation; also of the existing liabilities of the Government, showing how the deficiency of revenue to meet the expenditure has so far been supplied?

Sir, I hope to place upon the Table tomorrow Papers relating to South African affairs up to the end of 1879, and that they will be in the hands of hon. Members by Wednesday next. Further Papers up to the date of the meeting of Parliament will be published about a week later, and among them will be found a despatch received last week announcing the arrest of Messrs. Pretorius and Bok. I have not heard that Mr. Kruger has been arrested. I believe that there are at present about 3,900 troops of all arms in the Transvaal; but, of course, it must not be implied from this that this force will be permanently retained there. I have not, at the present moment, any statement of the revenue and expenditure of the Transvaal Government up to a later date than the 31st of March, 1879; but I am anxious to give the House the fullest possible information upon the subject. The hon. Gentleman will remember that a great deal of in- formation, up to a certain date, was supplied in the Report of Mr. Sergeaunt, which has already been published. I am informed, by telegram, that there are financial statements on their way to this country; and I hope, in a very short time, to give the House such information as will enable them to form an opinion both of the past and of the present condition as well as the future prospects of the Province with regard to finance. Perhaps I may say that the deficiency of revenue, which, of course, includes the interest on the heavy debt inherited from the late Government, has been supplied by the grant made by Parliament nearly three years ago, and by an overdraft on a local bank on the terms described in Mr. Sergeaunt's Report.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If it is not the fact that there are at present some three hundred Acts on the Statute Book which relate to the duties assigned to the Board of Works in Ireland; whether it has been represented to the Treasury by the Departmental Committee appointed in 1877 that it was necessary for the due and prompt discharge of the statutory duties of the Board in respect to loans that the work of the consolidation and amendment of these statutes should be at once taken in hand; if so, what steps have been taken in respect to this and the other recommendations made by the Committee in June 1878 with regard to the reconstruction and reorganization of the Board of Works; and, if it is the intention of the Government, and, if so, when, to submit any Bill or Bills to the House to give effect to the recommendations, or any or which of them so made by the Committee?

Sir, the Committee of Inquiry of 1877–8 reckoned the number of Acts relating to the Irish Board of Works at 300, and recommended that they should be consolidated. In accordance with this recommendation, the Treasury have employed Mr. Brougham Leech, of the Irish Bar, to prepare a scheme of consolidation, and he has now been engaged for more than a year on the task. A Bill has been prepared, and will shortly be introduced, for re-constructing the Board of Works and re-distributing its duties.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he can state the nature and source of the information on which the Irish Local Government Board acted when they declined to put Longford Union in the list of Scheduled Unions; and, whether there is any objection to produce the Report or Reports which affirmed that there was no exceptional distress in Longford Union?

in reply, said, that when an application was made by the Board of Guardians to have a Union included in the list of Scheduled Unions, it was referred by the Local Government Board to the Inspector of the district for his Report. On receiving that Report, the Local Government Board made a communication to the Irish Government, which then decided whether or not the Union should be added to the list of Scheduled Unions. In the case of the Longford Union, on the first application some time ago, the Report of the Inspector and the recommendation of the Local Government Board were unfavourable to its addition to the Schedule. The fact, however, of a Union having been in a position at one time which did not justify its being added to the Schedule was no reason why, later on, when circumstances rendered it desirable, it should not be so added. In regard to Longford Union, on the receipt of another application, the Inspector reported that the Union might with advantage be included in the Schedule, and it was now included accordingly. The Inspector's Reports were in many cases of a highly confidential nature, and it would be inexpedient to produce them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he can inform the House when the Bill relating to the Water Supply of London will be introduced?

On behalf of my right hon. Friend (Mr. Assheton Cross), I beg to state that the Bill in question is in a forward state of preparation; but I am not at this moment in a position to say on what day it will be introduced.

wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a Question of which he had given him private Notice—namely, Whether there is any truth in the statement which appears inThe Daily Newsof this morning that a Treaty has been signed, or is in course of negotiation, between England and Persia by which, among other stipulations, the latter Power is released from the obligation not to occupy Herat?

Sir, no such Treaty has been signed. I can only repeat the statement which I made the other day in answer to the Question put by the noble Lord (the Marquess of Hartington), that it is impossible for me to make any further Statement on the subject at this moment.

in rising to move his Amendment, said, he was sorry to interpose himself between the House and the Second Reading of the Bill, and delay its progress for an hour or two, and it was probable that the motives of his Colleagues and himself would be misunderstood and misrepresented in that House and out of it, as their motives had been misrepresented by some of the public newspapers of the country as to the Amendment to the Address moved by the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Shaw). He did not expect that their conduct and their actions, as the Irish independent Party in this House, would be ascribed by the public Press to any high motive of duty; but he had to ask the House not to be parties to such a misunderstanding. He hoped their arguments on this Bill and on the Resolution he had to propose would receive consideration from the Government. The Bill before the House dealing with Irish distress proposed as a measure for relief to lend out money to different parties as well as to different individuals, so as to give employment to the distressed poor of Ireland. It proposed, in the first instance, to give those loans to Guardians of the poor for the purpose of relief, and it proposed to pay those loans by a mortgage on the rates; secondly, it proposed to give similar loans to the sanitary authorities for executing works; but it proposed, thirdly, to give loans under peculiar circumstances to the landlords for the purpose of employing the labourers on their estates to improve their property. To those provisions he had no personal objection. Then the baronial presentment sessions were also to execute works and to charge the rates with the re-payment of those loans. He was not so much in favour of the latter proposal as he was of the others. It was a proposal fraught with great danger. The experience of 36 years ago, which he was old enough to remember, was not very encouraging as to the character of those works or as to the effect they would have. It would require great caution, and prudence, and limitation to make them useful, for they might throw away money in useless works as they did before. He must also qualify his approval of lending money to landlords, because the money lent for them to improve their estates would probably, in some instances, be em- ployed to raise their rents. The money should be lent also to the tenants for the improvement of their farms under the supervision of the Board of Works, and which improvement would do much to prevent future famines. His Amendment called the attention of the House to the 17th clause of the Bill, which said that all the loans to be given to the sanitary authorities were to be with the consent of the Irish Local Government Board. The landlords were to have the loans by the sanction of the Board of Works; and whereas the Commissioners of Works had advanced money to the landowners, the 17th clause threw the whole cost of the relief on the Irish Church Fund, and thus relieved the English Treasury. The rate of interest under the Bill was to be 1 per cent, and the rate of borrowing money, under ordinary circumstances, was from 4 to 5½ per cent. The only difference was the rate of interest; and instead of throwing that low interest on the Consolidated Fund, it threw it on to the Irish Church Fund. The possible loss would fall on the Irish Church Fund instead of on the Imperial Fund. Therefore, they thought that they were bound to bring this matter before the House. He should move—

"That it is inexpedient that any portion of the property accruing to the Commissioners of the Church Temporalities Fund under The Irish Church Act, 1869,' shall he applied towards the relief of the distress in Ireland, and that the provisions of the Bill authorizing such advances out of such property cannot be satisfactory, and this House is of opinion that all advances to be made for the purpose of relieving distress in Ireland shall be made from Imperial resources."

It could not be denied that, if there wore no Irish Church Fund, the loans would have to come out of the Imperial Fund. Now, what was the Irish Church Surplus Fund; under what circumstances did it arise? Was it intended to be applied in loans to landlords, or to Boards of Guardians, or to the sanitary authorities? It was the surplus of a fund which was national, and which belonged to the poor. The tithes of the Church were the property of the people; and if the Church was disestablished and disendowed, the funds naturally reverted to the people, to whom they belonged, and to be employed for their purposes. Why, then, should this Fund be taken to save the Imperial Exchequer and allow the Chancellor of the Exchequer to patch up his Budget? This Bill violated the 68th clause of the Irish Church Act. It was to relieve the National Treasury of this country in meeting the great calamity which had fallen on a portion of this great Empire, and which ought to be dealt with by the Imperial funds. He denied that the spirit of the Act had been violated in drawing upon the fund for Intermediate Education and to provide pensions for teachers, because in these cases other funds were not applicable; and Parliament was not bound to draw upon the Imperial Exchequer for these purposes, which were of special interest to all Ireland. Although these two applications did not actually follow the words of the section, they were acy presand an equitable application of the Fund. There were national purposes for which it was desirable to retain the Church Fund. As the churches and residences handed over to the Disestablished Church were valued at £3,000,000 or £4,000,000, it was once proposed, and it might be again, to use the Fund in building residences and churches for the ministers and people of other denominations. But there was another and more paramount application of the money, a purpose for which the Government ought to maintain the Fund. There were many who thought a great experiment should be tried in the way of attempting to establish a peasant proprietary. The objection urged against such a scheme was that the Government would not get their rent-charges. Let the experiment be made to see if peasant proprietors would pay the rent-charges, and if it was successful the Government would be able to carry it out on a larger scale. On the other hand, if the experiment he suggested should be tried, the Irish people would bear the loss for the sake of such an experiment. The Government, if they chose, could force them to pass the Bill in its present form; but he maintained that the Irish people would be unanimously in favour of the application of the Fund in the manner he he had referred to, and it should be adopted for the solving of the Irish Land Question. He thought if there was a statesman in this country who was thoroughly acquainted with the state of things in Ireland and of the opinions of the Irish people, he would see the necessity of this sacred right being adopted for the purpose of settling the question. He was sorry to say that it had been looked upon by the Government as a delusion and a mockery, and that it was proposed in Ireland by agitators for their own purpose; but he was satisfied that the establishment of a peasant proprietary in Ireland would be a most conservative power, and would have the effect of doing away with many difficulties, and be the means of removing the discord and the hostility to the Government which at present existed. Seventeen years ago a great calamity fell upon this country. They all, no doubt, remembered the Lancashire Cotton Famine in the year 1863, and admired the way the people then bore the calamity. The Government, upon that occasion, brought in a Bill in order that an advance might be made out of the Public Treasury of the country to the extent of £1,200,000 to give loans to the local bodies, Boards of Guardians, and other representative bodies, for the purpose of forming a special fund, providing that money should be supplied for useful works, and that the money should be paid back at £3 10s.per cent. The Bill provided 30 years for the re-payment, with power to the Government to prolong the payment. The calamity in Ireland, however, was far greater than that of Lancashire, for the reason that it had fallen upon poor people who could not help themselves. In Lancashire the famine fell upon a rich country, where there were plenty of wealthy men to come forward; but in Ireland, unfortunately, they were driven to seek public charity from Europe and Australia and America. Considering the pauperized state of the country, he thought it would look well for the Treasury of England to advance a sum of money by way of loan, or otherwise, in order to relieve the terrible distress in Ireland. "Were the present Government willing to let it go forth that, while they were ready to give millions to save Turkey, South Africa, and Afghanistan, they would refuse to give a shilling to Ireland, though it would save millions of starving people? If the sentiment of the House was what it ought to be, the great object all hon. Members should have in view was contained in his Amendment, and its adoption would lead to the conciliation of Ireland. It was in this spirit he proposed the Amendment, and in this spirit he hoped it would, be received. Such a measure would act as a means of binding the two nations together; and he hoped that if it were accepted it would have the effect of binding the hearts of the Irish people to the English people with "hooks of steel." In conclusion, he begged to move the Amendment of which he had given Notice.

remarked, that while the main question before them was the necessity of giving adequate relief, the source from which the money was to be taken was a very important consideration. So far as he understood, the proposal of the Government was that a sum of £500,000 should be advanced for several purposes. Advances to landlords for purposes of improvement, advances to Boards of Guardians for sanitary purposes, advances to baronial sessions, the making and improving of roads, and, finally, what might turn out to be the largest and most important item of all—for the purposes of out-door relief. It was proposed that the greater proportion of this sum should be advanced at 1 per cent; and, so far as he understood, the portion to be advanced for purposes of out-door relief was to be at a larger rate of interest. The re-payment of the money was to be guaranteed by the various parties to whom it was advanced at certain rates of interest; but, so far as he understood, where the rate of interest payable was less than 3½ per cent, the difference was to be recouped from the Irish Church Fund. That would involve a charge on the Fund of some £12,700 a-year, which would seriously retard the payment by the Commissioners of the Irish Church Temporalities of the debt which they owed to the Treasury, and would delay the time at which the Fund could really be turned to account and made available for such purposes as Parliament might think fit to apply it to. The security for the principal money advanced would, be security on land and security on sanitary rates and poor rates. There was no fear whatever as to the payment of the principal fund to be advanced; and in these circumstances, and 1 per cent being perfectly secure, he should like to know whether it was unfair on their part to ask that the difference between 1 per cent and 3½ per cent should be borne by the Imperial Treasury? "Was it fair to throw a charge of £12,700 a-year on the Irish Church Fund? It might be said that this looked a very small sum to make any complaint about. It was certainly a small sum, coming from the Imperial Exchequer; but it represented a very large sum indeed, when thrown on the annual income which came into the hands of the Irish Church Temporalities Commission. The Irish Church Fund had been so completely excluded by the Act of 1869 from any operation of the kind, that the Government could not have sufficiently regarded it in making their present proposal. He did not think there was anything in connection with advances already made from the Fund which formed anything like a precedent for, or analogy to, the attempt now made to make use of the Fund for the purpose of relief. Out-door relief to a deplorable extent would have to be met and dealt with during the next two or three months; but they had not yet an adequate idea of the amount of suffering which would have to be faced, or of the suddenness with which it might come. It was only by endeavouring to recall what occurred in 1847 that they could form an adequate idea of the suddenness with which relief might be rendered imperative and necessary. Was there an existing organization, or was there a prospect of being called into existence any organization which would cope with that distress in the various localities over the Island? Had practical steps been taken, had adequate provision been made, to guard against loss of life? He thought not. Taking into consideration the bad seasons which Ireland had encountered, the absence of seed for next year, and the complete destitution which existed in many places, it was not too much to ask that there should be something in the shape of a grant to meet the expenditure for outdoor relief. If it were necessary that out-door relief should be given in money, he should certainly make such a proposal with great diffidence. But if it were considered that it might be unsafe to give money for such relief on the broad lines which must be acted on in this case there was another way of giving it, and that was by the distribution of fuel and food. But they could not distribute food and fuel adequately and in time amongst the people unless they prepared an organization beforehand; and, therefore, he hoped that in the course of the progress of the Bill such Amendments would be introduced as would tend to the formation of an organization for the distribution of food and fuel in every district which was likely to be the scene of distress and suffering. When such organizations were formed he believed they would be able to economize the money to be expended, and considerably lessen the amount which it would be necessary or fair to accept as a grant from the Imperial Treasury. There was one other point to which he might allude without saying one word against baronial sessions. He trusted that certain Unions and Boards of Guardians would have facilities for giving labour similar to those proposed to be given to such sessions when it was necessary. There were many Unions not scheduled under the Act which were still in great distress. "Where organization was necessary, and where it did not exist, the people would fall a prey to famine during the coming months. Something must be done beyond the ordinary scope and operation of the Poor Law, otherwise misery would come upon men, women, and children with this additional horror—that whereas in other quarters it had given premonitory symptoms and gradually increased in force, in these parishes and localities it would not come with such symptoms, but suddenly. Everything would be loft to the ordinary remedy of the Poor Law, and in those districts famine would do its work.

thought that, in the present emergency, it would be at least necessary for the Local Government Board to issue a Circular calling upon Boards of Guardians to give outdoor relief, and stating that the able-bodied had a right either to work or to such relief. This was done in Lancashire in 1863. Boards of Guardians, too, should have power to give relief in money as well as in fuel. He would leave it to their discretion; but he would also authorize them to exact work. As to the mode of re-payment, the Bill provided that the money was to be borrowed for 10 years at 3½ per cent interest. That, after all, was only staving off the evil day, and the Boards of Guardians would have before them the prospect that the rates in 10 years would have to bear a burthen amounting to 7s.,8s.,or 10s.extra in the pound. How was a similar case met in Lancashire? The Boards were authorized that whenever the rates exceeded 5s.in the pound a rate in aid should be struck in the rest of the country not affected by the famine. In addition to that, power was given to Boards of Guardians in Lancashire to undertake works other than sanitary works, to deepen rivers, to improve ports, to widen roads, and so on—why should not similar power be given in Ireland? There would be another advantage in thus using the Boards of Guardians, and that was that it would do away at once with the cumbrous and inadequate procedure of baronial sessions. He hoped the Government would favourably consider the suggestions he had indicated. If they did so they might confidently answer the critics who feared, which he did not, that the presentment sessions would be extravagant, for then they would be for all practical purposes non-existent.

said, there was a great deal of practical wisdom in what had been said by the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had just sat down. The Government derived great advantage from many of the observations which had been made in the course of the last few days by hon. Gentlemen who were acquainted with the real state of affairs in Ireland. The Government were anxious, as far as possible, to avail themselves of that experience; and he hoped that in the discussions in Committee they would have the advantage of it. With regard to one or two of the questions raised by the hon. and gallant Member, he did not think that the cases of Lancashire and of Ireland were exactly parallel; in fact, there were several points of divergence, which made it impossible for the Government to follow the precise course that was taken in the case of Lancashire. In that case there was no public money voted, though a considerable extension was given to the Poor Law system; but he agreed with the hon. and gallant Gentleman in what he said about special works. They should be very careful that there would be no indiscriminate or careless application of money which was intended to give employment to the poor, and to keep the people from starvation; and they should see that it would not be available possibly—to use a common phrase—for jobbing. With the deepest attention and the most earnest application, the Government in 1846–7 fell into great errors, and undertook a task which was beyond the power of any Government properly to fulfil. They got into a position in which they had many hundreds of thousands of persons employed on public works which were of no use whatever; the work was not performed with any energy or zeal, and kept people away from what was much more useful. It had been with reluctance and some apprehension that the Government had gone into the question of baronial sessions. They felt it was just one of those matters on which it was necessary to keep a vigilant eye. At the same time, they thought it better to err on the side of giving rather too much than too little; and they believed on the whole that, subject to proper restrictions and control, and to the inspection of the Government, the works of the kind baronial sessions were likely to present might be profitably undertaken. The works would be not only those mentioned in the Bill—namely, road making and improving; but would include operations such as the deepening of rivers, the construction of railways, and so forth. The hon. and gallant Member would see that the advantage of committing those works to the baronial sessions was that they could borrow money for such purposes as roads, and other works that the Lord Lieutenant, with the consent of the Treasury, might direct. He might men- tion that he had that day authorized the Irish Government to undertake, besides roads, other works that might seem desirable; and he trusted that that course would meet the wishes of the hon. and gallant Gentleman. It might be necessary, perhaps, not only to authorize, but also to press the Boards of Guardians to use their powers. For some time past, it had been the desire of the Government, wherever the Boards wished to extend the assistance given, to offer them facilities for doing so; but, undoubtedly, they might have to put some pressure on them to do their duty. Of course, the immediate responsibility rested with the Boards of Guardians. A system of poor relief was established in Ireland; and it was the duty of the Boards, if they found that the law did not permit them to do it, to come to the Government for additional assistance. Undoubtedly, the effect of their doing so would be to add to the charges of the Union; and it was just possible there might be cases in which the Guardians, having too great a desire to spare the rates, might be too slack in coming forward for the relief of exceptional distress. The Government had had that point before them, and they had desired the Local Government Board strongly to impress on Boards of Guardians the responsibility which was imposed upon them. In addition to the three Inspectors, of whose appointment notice had already been given, the Government had authorized, yesterday or to-day, the appointment of three additional Inspectors; and they had impressed on the Local Government Board the importance of causing those Inspectors to be as much as possible in their districts, in order to see what was really going on, and to report every case of distress or destitution which seemed to call for remark, and to exercise their influence in inducing Boards of Guardians to do their duty. In two or three cases the Local Government Board had offered to Boards of Guardians advances by way of loan, to enable them to procure fuel for distribution; but those offers had been declined. Of course, the responsibility of declining those offers rested on the Boards of Guardians; but he thought some power should be vested in the Inspectors and the Local Government Board to compel action even if the Boards of Guardians were slow to pro- ceed. All these points had been and were continually under the notice of Her Majesty's Government, and they had been in constant communication with the Irish Government on the subject. He could assure hon. Gentlemen that they would continue earnestly to press these matters. By the Amendment, a question was raised as to whether any portion of the property accruing to the Commissioners of the Church. Temporalities should be applied to the temporary relief of distress in Ireland; and the House was invited to express an opinion that all advances made for the purpose of relieving distress in Ireland should be made from Imperial resources. It was a very popular thing to say that all advances should come out of the Imperial Exchequer; but it must be borne in mind that, though there was very severe distress in parts of Ireland, there was also a good deal of distress in England. The Exchequer was supplied by contributions from all parts of the United Kingdom; and there might be, and, in fact, had been, a great many applications which the Government had felt it their duty to decline from distressed persons in England, and he thought from Scotland also, for assistance from the Exchequer. They had felt that it was impossible to attend to those applications with justice to the country at large. They desired to continue in a fair and liberal way the assistance by way of, advances which was given to the improvement of land, and to various other purposes which were of national and general importance. They had established a system which had been carefully elaborated for making advances on terms which would involve no loss to the Exchequer, and which yet would be of advantage to the localities to which they were advanced. They were always met, even by gentlemen who in public matters were of a very economical turn of mind, with great objections to the stinginess or illiberality of the terms on which those advances were offered, and it was with the greatest difficulty that the Government were able to maintain the system which they were satisfied was necessary for the protection of the interests of the general public. If they were, in the case of exceptional distress in a portion of the United Kingdom, to allow advances to be made on much more liberal and lavish terms than they were in the habit of giving, the system would break down, and very great confusion would arise. They admitted, however, that in the present case it was desirable that advances should be made on much more liberal terms than usual, not for the purpose of promoting particular works of improvement, but for actually giving employment to the people and keeping them from starving. These were advances much more in the nature of relief works than in the nature of improvement works. If they were to make the advances out of the general fund at the disposal of the Board of Works, they felt they would be introducing a precedent exceedingly embarrassing to them in all their future dealings. On the other hand, they had to bear in mind that there did exist in Ireland a fund of a peculiarly Irish character. It was a fund which belonged to Ireland, and which it was the duty of Parliament to administer for the general benefit of Ireland. It appeared to the Government that the case which had now arisen was one which might be very fairly met by the Church Surplus Fund. They did not propose to exhaust any considerable portion of that Fund. They proposed to make, not grants, but advances out of it; and they understood that those advances would be repaid. That was the principle on which they went; and he assumed that the re-payments would, in due course, be made. It was true, as stated by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy), that there would be a sacrifice of a small portion of the Fund. That would be measured by the difference between the interest on the amount advanced and the amount they would receive in re-payment from those to whom the advances were made. The hon. and learned Gentleman had put the amount at £12,000. It might be that, or perhaps a little more; but he did not think the Fund could be considered to be unfairly charged with an expenditure which was distinctly for the purpose of meeting an unavoidable and sudden calamity. The visitation which had fallen upon that part of the country was a visitation which distinctly needed, and ought to be met to some extent, by charitable efforts. It was impossible to lay down the doctrine that in cases of this kind the whole of the burden should fall on the Imperial Exchequer, and that recourse should not be had to the aid of charity. He did not think that in the case of Lancashire, to which reference had been made, there were public contributions, but that the distress was met chiefly by private subscriptions, and in part by advances from the poor rates and the neighbouring Unions. The present was one of those cases in which they might fairly take advantage of the charity of individuals, and fairly have recourse to a fund applicable to charitable uses. With regard to future measures which might be adopted in order to prevent the recurrence of such evils, that was a question which demanded the most careful consideration on the part of Parliament. He quite agreed with those who said that the lessons they had received now and in former times ought to make Parliament exceedingly careful in considering what could be done to prevent the recurrence of evils of this kind. But at this moment the Government were pressed to meet the danger and the misery which were actually upon us; and he thought they might fairly have recourse to a fund which was of a peculiarly Irish character, and which was available for Irish purposes. But whatever view the House might take upon this subject, he hoped they would not delay the present stage of the Bill. The question of the application of the Church Surplus might very properly and conveniently arise on the discussion of the clauses; but with regard to the progress of the Bill, he might remind the House that the Government were now acting outside the law on their own responsibility. Although they were not at all afraid to take that responsibility, still Parliament ought to take it upon itself, and had no right to leave the matter entirely on the shoulders of the Government. He hoped, therefore, that they would be favoured with the advice and supported by the authority of Parliament as soon as possible. The House, he trusted, would agree to the Second Reading of the Bill; and, in that case, he should propose to fix the Committee for the earliest possible day, in order that the discussion of the clauses might be proceeded with.

did not think it was important whether that Bill were passed now or deferred for a month. He certainly should not do any- thing to delay the Second Reading of the Bill; but he wished to remind the House that there was another Bill before them which was of the utmost importance, and with regard to which delay would be very serious. He referred to the measure for providing seeds of various kinds for the people to sow their ground with during the present spring. If that Bill did not pass into law immediately, so that the seed could be distributed within the next five or six weeks, they would next year have another famine twice as bad as that which raged now. It therefore seemed to him that the Government was labouring at an oar in the boat which was of the least importance to help them over the surf with which they were surrounded. He did not object so much to resorting to the Irish Church Surplus as he objected to resorting to it for the purpose and in the manner mentioned in the Bill. If they were to take out of the Surplus a certain amount for the purpose of restocking the ground during the approaching five or six weeks, he should consider that was a very fair way of disposing of it; but at present the Bill appeared to him to be framed under a complete misconception of the position. As a fact, the measures proposed in the Government Bill ought to have been in operation weeks and months ago. If that had been done, the people would not now have been pauperized and demoralized by the lavish distribution of charity which, coming as it did now, had unfitted them for work or for any exertion in behalf of themselves. The Government should long ago have made arrangements through some of the large houses which dealt in seed for having a stock ready to distribute among the people at the present crisis. When the seed came to be distributed he hoped it would be bestowed as a free gift and not as a loan; otherwise, the result would be to plunge the people still further into debt. It was a pure chimera to suppose that the people would eat the seed potatoes they might receive. They would do nothing of the kind; they would regard the seed as a sacred possession, the purpose of which was to avert famine next year. At any rate, the Government might rest assured that in providing adequate seed for next year lay the only chance of averting another and more terrible calamity.

said, that he objected to the Billin toto,and for the reason that it proposed to place increased burdens upon the already over-taxed ratepayers in Ireland. The principle of the Government Bill was to make the Irish distress a local question. The principle of the Amendment of the hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. Synan) was to make it an Imperial question; and there could be no doubt as to the choice which the Representatives from Ireland should make between the two. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his speech, had intimated that the local Boards of Guardians required pressure to induce them to act. No doubt they did, for the leading spirits of the Boards of Guardians in Ireland were the landlords, and they were perfectly aware that the ratepayers of Ireland were already rented, rated, and taxed up to the utmost amount they could bear. His only object in giving Notice that he should move that the Second Reading of the Bill be postponed until the 19th of February was to give time for the Boards of Guardians, the members of baronial sessions, and others who were interested in the matter, to express their opinions upon it. The title of the Bill was so taking that one was apt to forget its principle. He could not believe, however, that the Liberal Party would ever assent to legislation which was contrary to their policy, and would throw greater obstacles than had ever yet been thrown in the way of the peasantry of Ireland getting that position on the soil which they were determined to obtain. It appeared to him that the main object of the Bill was to enable landlords to dispense with their tenants altogether. He considered that it was an extraordinary thing for the Government to mix up two things together which were totally distinct, one to relieve the distress in Ireland, and the other to assist the landlords. He would, at a future stage, take the opportunity of expressing the objections he felt to the Bill in detail.

objected to the way in which this question had been dealt with by the Government. The Bill ought to be termed, not a measure for the general benefit of Ireland, but a Bill for the relief of landlords in certain distressed districts in that country. The present state of affairs ought to be met by Her Majesty's Ministers in a noble and statesmanlike manner, worthy of a great nation. He submitted that the Church Surplus Fund was not one out of which British generosity should supply money for the purpose; because, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, and as it was expressed in the Church Disendowment Act, the Fund was to be administered for the general benefit of Ireland, and not for the benefit of particular districts. Because there was loud-voiced clamour in the West, the Government seemed to think that only that portion of the country was distressed. Such was not the case. He did not know what authority the Chief Secretary for Ireland had for stating that there was no distress in the county of Kilkenny. On the contrary, the privations endured by both labourers and small farmers had in that county increased and were every day increasing. The labouring class might, perchance, soon get employment in assisting in the spring work; but for the farming class this prospect was most alarming. In many districts, he believed, many of the farmers were without money and already deeply in debt to the shopkeepers, not only for supplies of food, but for the seed which cropped their lands last year. They would find much difficulty in obtaining the seed to crop their farms this year. The Government measure appeared to him to provide no adequate means for the relief of distress amongst the farming class. The system which should have been adopted was one which would have set the tenant to work on his own land. The Government had misconceived the extent and proportions of the distress. He had hoped they would have introduced a fair and generous measure to meet the necessities, not only of the Western districts, but of the whole of Ireland. If his hon. Friend who had moved an Amendment to the Bill (Mr. Synan) went to a division he should accompany him to the Lobby.

contended that the Bill was not of a nature likely to give satisfaction in Ireland. He held that the only way to meet the distress was either to give a free grant of money or to undertake the prosecution of public works, especially such works as the drainage of the Shannon, the prosecution of which would, in his opinion, be of great national advantage.

expressed his satisfaction that the Government had taken up the question of supplying seed potatoes to the people; but he hoped the Bill would not be limited to potatoes. In some of the distressed districts in Donegal which he had visited, the people were in great dread that they would not have any seed, and the question was one to which the Government could not devote too much attention. He was surprised that there should be any objection to using the Church Surplus Fund for the relief of distress, more especially as the money would be advanced as a loan, and the only loss the Fund would sustain would be a small deficiency in interest. The object of the Bill was to enable the Guardians to give out-door relief, and anything that could be done to tide the people over the distress, without compelling them to enter the workhouses, would be a great boon. Owing to last year's winter, they had more work than they had last year; but it was not sufficient to stop the famine they were now suffering from. He hoped this Bill would proceed concurrently with the Seed Bill; but something more must be done if they would avoid the recurrence of this distress. Railways must be made with a view to cheap transit; harbours must be built and improved, and trade must be developed, if they would permanently remove the evils under which the country was suffering. He trusted the Government would give that subject their most earnest consideration.

in opposing the Bill, said, that the Government ought to look to the Consolidated Fund, and not to the Irish Church Fund, for the means of relieving the existing distress. He wished particularly to call attention to the case of the fishermen on the West coast of Ireland, who were at the present time suffering great distress, and hoped that, from whatever source the relief funds might come, something would be done to encourage the fisheries along the Irish coasts generally.

said, he had expressed his views on this subject at some length the other night, when there did not seem to be much interest felt in it; in fact, there were only four or five hon. Members in the House. The Government proposed this scheme as a remedy for admitted distress; but they were acting in a somewhat Irish fashion, for, under the baronial sessions, they would be raising money from a class who themselves required relief—he meant the ratepayers. He regretted that there should have been any appeal to the charity of foreign nations for that relief which the Government should have afforded, and thought the question ought not to be complicated by reference to the Irish Church Surplus Fund. In his opinion, the principle laid down in the case of the distress in Lancashire during the Cotton Famine should be followed in that of Ireland, and that the funds for relieving the distress, unfortunately prevalent in that country, should be obtained from Imperial and not from local sources. It would be unwise to treat the distress in Ireland as a small matter compared with that of a distant English county, and he should like to hear from the Bench opposite whether they would deny that the present distress was not as great as during the Cotton Famine; and, as one of the Irish Members, he would ask why the same course should not be pursued in each case?

They were not given anything from the Imperial Funds.

must insist, however, that a loan of £1,200,000 was granted to Lancashire on Imperial security. It was admitted that relief to a large extent must be given by the Boards of Guardians; and he called upon the Government to grant out of the Imperial Exchequer a sum in aid of outdoor relief in Ireland equal to that appropriated by the Guardians for that purpose. The sum requisite for the purpose would be much less than the money which would have to be paid to Crown solicitors, Queen's counsel, and others employed to put the law in force in bloody arrangements, perhaps, before the year was out. The adoption of his suggestion would at once prevent the famine which many people anticipated, and for which, if it did occur, the Government would, after the warnings they had had, be solely responsible. He hoped that in whatever they did the Government would rise superior to Party.

said, that the favourable manner in which the Bill had been received was a proof of the sympathy which hon. Members on both sides of the House felt for Ireland in her distress, and of the approval with which the Government proposals had been received. It was undoubted that the measure before the House would be most beneficial for Ireland, as it would enable the Guardians to make ample provision of food and fuel for issue in case of necessity. It would also enable baronial presentments to be made. It was advisable, however, with respect to these presentments in aid, that due care should be taken to prevent waste of money or the perpetration of jobs. It was most advisable that railways should be promoted in every way in Ireland; and he was, therefore, glad to hear from the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the various propositions in the Bill were likely to be extended in that respect. With regard to the county with which he was connected, there were no less than three railways in course of construction. Under the present distress the proprietors had not sufficient money for carrying out the purposes they had in view, and the result was that the works were at a standstill. If aid were given to enable the construction of local railways and branch lines to be proceeded with, it would considerably benefit the particular localities, and would not lead to that influx of labour from elsewhere which large railway works would be certain to create. Local labour would be employed, and that upon reproductive works. Irish Members on both sides of the House, he believed, would agree with him, when he said that they did not want so much the formation of roads, or the making of fences to improve those roads, but they wanted something of general and practical utility, and that which might hereafter be of permanent benefit to Ireland. He might also mention the formation of piers and harbours. It was a matter of regret that the Irish fisheries were not in a satisfactory state. The fishermen of Ireland were poor; but they were industrious and brave. They had no means of buying boats, nor the means of buying sufficient gear to carry on their occupation. If the Government, during the present crisis, which he was sorry to say was likely to increase on the "West coast of Ireland, would grant loans for the purpose of erecting permanent small fishery piers, it would be of vast benefit to the fishing community of that country. He trusted that before this Bill passed they might find that some satisfactory means had been adopted not only to promote reproductive labour throughout the internal districts of Ireland, but also to promote the formation of railways and fishery harbours.

said, that a serious question was raised as to whether the Irish Church Surplus was prohibited by the section of the Act of 1869 which dealt with it from being appropriated to such a purpose as was now in view; the section contained a special provision that the Fund was not to be employed in any way to cancel or impair the obligations now attached to property under the Acts for the relief of the poor. Under the present Bill, however, it was intended to apply the money in relief and in aid of the poor rates of Ireland. Besides being a possible misappropriation of the Fund, it would make inroads into the capital, which had already been very seriously diminished. As a matter of fact, there was no such fund in existence as the Irish Church Surplus. The Irish Commissioners, he believed, had not the command of a single 6d.of capital, and they had been indebted to the savings banks for the money which they had been able to place at the disposal of Parliament up to the present time. What the Bill did was to propose that the Commissioners, who had no capital, should borrow money to lend it again to the Board of Works, which in itself was an absurd proceeding. It was improper to fritter away the Surplus Fund. A national demand had been made that it should be applied to the purpose of creating a peasant proprietary in Ireland; and he thought that until that question was settled no further inroad should be made into that Fund. In the face of these considerations, the Government actually proposed to hand a large portion of the money over, not to the tenants, but to the landlords, who would thus receive exceptional facilities for improving their land. He thought that money advanced to the owners of land for the improvement of their property was most just and useful; but the question now was whether landlords should have exceptional advantages granted to them which might as usefully be granted to the tenants, and whether these exceptional advantages should be granted at the cost of the tenants. If the land were improved, the consequence would be that the tenants, at no distant time, would have to pay increased rents. He (Mr. Meldon) had suggested, in the debate on the Address, that the money should be given, if at all, to the tenants, for the purpose of improving the land, and he had been met with some representation about the rights of property. Yet the tenants would be improving the land; and if they paid all the instalments, they ought to be enabled to claim compensation for the improvements, as under the Land Act of 1870 it had been admitted they were entitled to. Was it fair that when a national calamity overtook Ireland it should be dealt with in a different way from that in which the distress in Lancashire in 1863 was met? Lancashire was then treated as an integral part of this Kingdom, and the question became an Imperial one. Why was famine in Ireland, dealt with as a local question? In the case of the Lancashire Cotton Famine, £1,200,000 was advanced directly to the local authorities for the execution of permanent works. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: At what rate of interest?] He would come to that presently. They extended the period of re-payment to 30 years. In regard to Ireland, they now proposed to make the advance of £500,000 out of a purely Irish fund re-payable, in some cases, in 10 years. [The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER: In 37 years.] The money which was to be advanced to the landlords was not to be repaid in 10 years; but some of the advances to public bodies were to be repaid in 10 years instead of in 30, as was the case with the Lancashire loan. The difference between the periods allowed made up for the difference in the rate of interest, which was 3½ per cent in the Lancashire instance. Moreover, in the Lancashire ease there were provisions for extending the time of re-payment. The advances during the Lancashire distress were made directly to the local authorities for the purpose of works of a permanent character, whereas no such advances in the case of Ireland were to be made to the Boards of Guardians. The Government treated Ireland differently from Lancashire; and he protested againt making the relief of distress in Ireland a merely local question when the Imperial funds were without objection applied to the relief of the distress in Lancashire. He appealed to the Government to deal with the distress in Ireland in as just and fair a spirit as the distress in Lancashire had been dealt with, and to provide for the emergency out of Imperial resources. They had no right to take the Church Surplus, for it already belonged to the people for other purposes.

, referring to the allusions which had been made to the Lancashire distress, said, he was in a position to inform the House that on that occasion the relief had been mainly by very large private subscriptions. In London £520,000 had been raised, and every penny of it distributed; and by the Central Belief Committee in Lancashire, of which the late Earl of Derby was Chairman, £1,250,000 or more had, been raised, not all of it being distributed. For his own part, he could not understand how hon. Members opposite could believe for a moment that the Government would be indifferent to this great calamity, or could believe that Ireland was not almost an eternal worry to them. Knowing that hon. Member after hon. Member would rise in his place and denounce the Government when Parliament met, they were not likely, even apart from any other consideration, to withhold their most serious consideration from the calamity impending in Ireland. The Irish Members seemed to him to take the bread that was offered, to them and to throw it over their heads, instead of putting it in the mouths of a famishing people. He called upon Irish Members to desist from using epithets in reference to the Government, and from expressing sentiments calculated to produce a false impression on the minds of the Irish people, which might not be eradicated for years, and which he could not believe the Irish Members themselves could believe in, except as sentiments useful for political purposes.

said, the question before the House was simply whether the funds to be charged for partially relieving the existing distress should be purely Irish funds, or whether they should be Imperial funds, as was the case in 1863 in the Lancashire Cotton Famine. He trusted the debate would not conclude until they heard in some intelligible and conclusive manner why the Government purposed taking, with regard to a national calamity in one part of the United Kingdom, a course different from that which they had pursued on a previous occasion of the kind. He had heard no good reason yet given for subjecting Ireland to the exceptional treatment now proposed, and should therefore support the Amendment, believing that this national calamity in Ireland ought to be met out of the National Exchequer. Attempts had been made from time to time to fritter away the Irish Church Surplus Fund, which the Act of Parliament had intended should be appropriated for the permanent benefit of the whole of Ireland; whereas the object of the present Bill was to meet an exigency now existing in parts of that country, and not in the whole of it.

said, he could not agree with the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down (Mr. Cogan), that in the proposal now submitted to the House there was anything which ran counter to the Act of Parliament which dealt with the Irish Church property. The right hon. Member said it was never contemplated by that Act that the money should be expended on local matters, but only for purposes which could benefit the whole of Ireland. He would find, however, if he referred to the words of the Act, that it stated that the Church Surplus should be appropriated mainly to the relief of unavoidable calamity and suffering, and there was nothing in it which said that the calamity and suffering must equally prevail at the same moment in all parts of Ireland. He maintained, therefore, that the Government wore fully justified in proposing to use a portion of that Fund for a purpose like the present one. The hon. and learned Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon) had compared the treatment Lancashire received in a great emergency with that received by Ireland, and appeared to think—and, no doubt, did so with perfect sincerity—that the comparison was unfavourable to the latter country. Now, the money advanced to Lancashire was advanced at 3½ per cent. But it was said the period of re-payment was easier and more advantageous to the borrower in the case of Lancashire. [Mr. SYNAN: In some cases.] Well, the principle on which they had gone in regard to these repayments was that the payments should be regulated according to the operation of the ordinary law, with certain excep- tions. The period for re-payment was to extend as long as the benefit to be derived from the contemplated works should last. For example, in regard to advances for paving, it was impossible that loans for works of such an ephemeral description should be allowed to burden the ratepayers for SO or 40 years. The loans under the Public Health Act varied in the times of re-payment from two years up to 50, according as the work was of a permanent or a temporary character. With regard to advances to Irish landowners, the Government had relaxed the ordinary rules as to re-payment, and they had done it on that principle. It had been represented on authority given in evidence that the benefit arising from draining would extend over a longer period than 22 years; and they had, therefore, extended the time for repayment. Anyone who chose to study what was done in Lancashire would find that the terms offered to Ireland were more liberal than those imposed in Lancashire. He was not referring to the large amount of local contributions raised in Lancashire; but the hon. and learned Member for Kildare had spoken of benefits conferred on the landowners as if they were a national injury to Ireland. That notion seemed to underlie a great many of the fallacies to which they had listened for several nights. But to say that advances made to persons in possession of the soil for the purpose of improving the soil could be considered as a national injury appeared to him a proposition which did not require an answer in that House. The ground on which the Government had selected the landowners as the medium for giving employment and wages to the people was one which he thought must commend itself to the common sense of every hon. Member. The Government had felt itself bound to adopt exceptional measures to meet the extraordinary distress which prevailed in certain parts of Ireland. They might have had recourse to the system which broke down before—namely, that of public relief works conducted by the State; but it seemed better to allow employment to find its way to the people through the ordinary sources. They had, therefore, enabled owners of land to apply large sums of money, amounting already, he believed, to something like £500,000, upon the express condition that the works upon which they were to be expended should be confined to such occupations as would afford immediate employment to unskilled labour. Buildings and other works, however profitable, which did not fulfil this condition, were not to enjoy the facilities they granted. If there was one thing more than another for which the Government deserved credit, he thought it was for avoiding any unnecessary disturbance of the ordinary relations between employer and employed, and for having in no way set aside the ordinary sources of employment of labour in the country. The hon. and learned Member for Kildare had spoken of lavish distribution of charitable funds. It was a pity that such an expression should go forth from the House of Commons. There was no reason to believe that those excellent organizations which, fortunately, had come to the aid of distress in Ireland had been distributed upon a lavish scale. No doubt, it was the intention of those who distributed those funds to meet every case of need which came before them; but it would be a great injury to the good cause of charity if it went forth from that House that the distribution of those funds had been in any manner extravagant. The hon. and learned Member had also spoken of the largo inroads which had been already made in the Irish Church Surplus Fund, as though he would have liked every penny of it to be embarked in the speculation of endeavouring by artificial means to create a peasant proprietary in Ireland. But his hon. and learned Friend was himself, perhaps as much as anyone, responsible for a very considerable inroad into that Fund, an inroad which had commended itself to the general opinion of Ireland and of every portion of the United Kingdom. The hon. and learned Member seemed to proceed upon the assumption that any sum advanced out of that Church Surplus Fund would be lost, and some hon. Members had appeared to think that the Government were unfairly protecting the Consolidated Fund at its expense. But this would imply that the Unions of Ireland were not capable of maintaining their credit. The Government proposed to lend money, in the first place, upon the security of the landed property; and he supposed the hon. and learned Member would admit that to be good enough They also proposed to lend upon the security of the rates; and this, he presumed, the hon. and learned Member did not think good enough. But he hoped his prognostications of ill would not be fulfilled, and that, as had been the case up to the present time in Lancashire, not one penny would be lost. He thought the House must have seen that the Government had, in the present crisis, exerted themselves to meet everything that could be reasonably urged upon the Executive, and that, without discouraging local effort or charitable organization, they had in no way failed in their duty. And lie further believed that the House and the country would not for a moment believe they had neglected their duty.

hoped the hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. Synan) would not divide the House that evening upon his Amendment, as there would be another opportunity of discussing its principle upon the question of the Speaker leaving the Chair. The Government had already taken action on the lines of the Bill, and he was sure they would all be willing to pass a measure of indemnity to the Government for what they had already done; all the Irish Members complained of being that they had not acted with sufficient promptness. It was certainly not his opinion that any benefit conferred upon the landlords must be a public injury, and he did not know from what hon. Member's speeches the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland could have gathered such an idea. He thought the drainage of land was one of the best things that could be done, and the lending of money at a low rate of interest for that purpose would be not only an immense advantage to the community, but would also bring labour nearer than any other way to the workmen. Every provision in this direction deserved great praise. What they blamed the Government for was for not issuing the Circular of the 12th of January on the 12th of October. They also feared lest the landlords, after getting this £500,000 of public money at 1 per cent, by means of which the land would be increased in value, should thereafter raise the rents. He was sure the Government did not wish that; but it was hardly in human nature to do otherwise. Foreseeing that such a result would be sure to raise unpleasant relations between landlord and tenant, he hoped the Government would insert some words to prevent the raising of rents on account of the improvements effected by means of public money. It would be a great hardship that public money given at such a crisis, freely and generously, should be followed by a burden which, in some cases, the people would not be able to bear. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had announced what was a matter of great importance—namely, that the proposed works should not be confined to mere road-making and road-fencing. He hoped that the Government proposals were not all that Ministers intended to do. He did not ask them to answer him at once; but if the Bill embodied the whole of their scheme he did not think it would be worth taking. He thought that they ought to make a grant to Ireland, and he thought that Ireland had a right to expect such a grant as had been made in 1847. The Irish people were unfairly taxed, and that was an additional reason for a grant. No doubt, there was a great outflow of charity; but charity would not help the small farmers, and would not be a permanent benefit. He hoped the Government would give another opportunity of considering the measure, and would not press it forward too hastily.

said, he would not ask the House to take the trouble of a useless division, but repeat his Motion on going into Committee. He was determined that the Treasury Bench and the Opposition Bench should speak out further on the subject.

said, that, although the Bill had only been in their hands 36 hours, yet, as it was substantially the same as that brought before the House last Session, he should not delay the Second Reading by asking for time to consider it. The only material alteration in the Bill, as compared with that of last Session, was that a debtor was not allowed to be made a bankrupt on his own petition, which he regarded as a great improvement. As he understood it to be the intention of his hon. and learned Friend (the Attorney General) to have the Bill referred to a Select Committee, he did not think it desirable to enter into a discussion of its provisions in detail on the present occasion. He should give his hon. and learned Friend all the assistance in his power to pass this measure and the Criminal Code Bill, because the character, not so much of the Government, as of the House, was at stake, and he hoped they would do something to redeem their character during the present Session.

said, he should have been inclined, on an ordinary occasion, to ask for further time; but the matter was so urgent and time had become so precious that he did not think he would be justified in doing so. He agreed with the remarks of his hon. and learned Friend, and said that by the Controller's Report it appeared that £25,000,000 was lost annually in this country by bad debts in bankruptcy alone, a sum nearly equal to the interest on the National Debt. Such a state of affairs was a disgrace, he would not say to the Government, but to Parliament, and he looked upon the Bill as a step towards a better state of affairs. He contemplated with satisfaction the fact that the Bill was to be referred to a Select Committee.

believed that the best way of getting some measure on bankruptcy passed in the present Session was to send the Bill to a Select Committee, as the Government proposed to do. He was of opinion that it would be useless to attempt to introduce any very ambitious innovations in Bankruptcy Law, and believed that the fundamental principle of the Act of 1869 was a right one. What was wanted by business men was not to sweep the Act of 1869 away, but to amend its blots, and he believed that these could be amended by a very short Statute. The principal evils from which they suffered under the existing law were, after all, but few. They suffered, in the first place, from an absolute want of control over liquidations; and, in the second place, it would be well if the costs of all officers connected with liquidations were officially taxed. Then they wanted what the Government Bill did not provide for—namely, the Scotch system of making trustees pay dividends periodically, and he trusted the Select Committee would come to that conclusion. He should also like to see some provision to prevent fraudulent men who had failed disgracefully three or four times from going into business again and underselling the honest tradesmen; and he hoped some of the legal Members of the House would be able to provide some that would be found effectual in preventing that evil. He concluded by expressing his satisfaction that the Bill was going to a Select Committee.

expressed a hope that the Bill might be taken in hand without any delay. He could say, on behalf of his constituents, that they took a deep interest in the matter, and were most anxious that there should be some legislation in reference to it this Session. He agreed that it would be unwise to enter into a discussion of the details at the present time, but thought it might be convenient to hon. Members if the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General would point out in what important particulars, if in any, the Bill differed from that of last year.

said, he had looked through the Bill, and could say that it differed from the Bill of last year in being a supplementary Bill, instead of a consolidating one; but that, like the Bill of last year, it provided that all liquidations should be by deed of arrangement, instead of resolutions of shareholders. Of this he very much approved; the execution of a deed being a deliberate act and giving a man time for reflection; whilst, generally speaking, at a meeting of creditors, the resolutions to be passed and the appointment of the trustee were a foregone conclusion. He was glad that the Bill was to be referred for consideration to a Select Committee, as some of its details required attention; for instance, those referring to the discharge of the bankrupt. He also thought it was a defect in the Bill as it stood that the onus of showing the cause of failure should be thrown on the creditors. It ought, in his opinion, to be thrown on the Court. There were several other points that would require serious consideration; but he did not think it necessary to enlarge on them, as it was intended to refer the measure to a Select Committee.

said, that the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General had shown himself anxious that the country should possess a really good Law of Bankruptcy. He fully approved the course which had been accepted by the hon. and learned Member for Taunton (Sir Henry James), that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee. It was just the kind of measure the country wanted, being not a reversal or change of the law, but an amendment of the law, and he trusted it would soon become the law of the land.

expressed a hope that no time would be lost in appointing the Committee, whose duty it would be to consider the details of the measure. There were several clauses of the Bill which would require special consideration; but he would refrain from discussing them until they had been dealt with in the manner proposed.

said, he felt that the appeal which had. been made to him by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for London (Mr. Goschen) was a perfectly reasonable one, and he should briefly explain the leading provisions of the measure. The Bill of last Session was not designed to sweep away the Act of 1869, but rather to amend it, at the same time repealing the Act and consolidating the law upon the subject—a more ambitious design than that of the present Bill. On reflection, and considering the difficulty of passing through the House of Commons—at all events of this day—a Bill consisting of 150 or 160 clauses, upon every one of which a discussion might be raised, if any hon. Member thought proper to raise it, he thought it best to bring in a Bill not to amend and consolidate the law, but to attempt merely to amend the law, leaving its consolidation for some future period. The Bill of last year proposed to amend the Act of 1869 in several respects—in the first place as to liquidation by arrangement, in the next as to compositions under the Act, and to substitute for liquidation by ar- rangement, deeds to be entered into between the debtor and a majority in number and three-fourths in value of his creditors. After providing certain minor amendments, especially with regard to the audit of accounts and the action which the Controller might take in regard to the accounts of trustees, last year's Bill provided that a debtor should not, in the first instance, be absolutely declared a bankrupt, but that there should be made against him a provisional order, and that he should not be made a bankrupt until the creditors had been called together and had decided that he should be made one. The present was an amending Bill; but not a consolidating and an amending Bill. It did not adopt provisional orders; but it allowed adjudication in bankruptcy to be declared at once, as under the present system. The Bill of last Session enabled a debtor to petition against himself and to cause himself to be declared a bankrupt. Upon consideration it had been determined that that provision should not now be inserted, as it would be taken too much advantage of by debtors. What this Bill did was to provide certain amendments in the Act of 1869. One of these was the entire abolition of liquidations by arrangement. There were provisions for compelling trustees to pay all monies they might receive from time to time into the bank, and to provide for the taxation of all costs and, the audit of all accounts, not only in bankruptcy, but under deeds of arrangement as well. There were a variety of smaller provisions designed to protect estates from waste and to preserve them for the benefit of the creditors. He was not at all inclined to differ from the hon. Member for Plymouth (Mr. Sampson Lloyd), when he said that the Act of 1869 was founded on a right principle. At all events, it was one which was perfectly intelligible, because it did away with the system of officialism which had existed to a considerable extent before, and it vested the administration or management of a debtor's estate and the dealing with the debtor in the creditor. He dared say the Act of 1869 would have worked well but for two circumstances. One was that the creditors would not let the Act work well; they would not look after their own affairs. In Scotland it was different; creditors were more canny than in England, where they were apathetic, put the pen through au account as a bad debt, and would not trouble themselves to look after their own interests. It was difficult to legislate for people who would not exert themselves on behalf of themselves; but it must be done. Creditors must be protected against their own apathy and supineness, and this might almost be called a Bill to protect creditors in spite of themselves. There were restraints proposed by the Bill for the purpose of rendering it difficult that an estate should be wasted, notwithstanding that the creditors would not look after a debtor's estate. Another reason why the Act of 1869 had not worked well was that it provided what might be called a gentlemanly way of getting rid of a man's liability. It was then thought desirable that every case should not go into Court; that, in certain circumstances, a man should not be exposed to the stigma of bankruptcy; and that he should not be subjected to the disagreeable ordeal of a public examination. It was therefore enacted that a man might liquidate by arrangement and offer to make a composition with his creditors. For some reason, Parliament forgot that it was necessary to have checks and restraints in these cases as well as in ordinary bankruptcies. There was no provision for taxing bills or auditing accounts. So if the debtor and his friends could get a sufficient number of proxies, they did pretty much what they liked. The Report of the Controller showed the disastrous working of this system. There could be no doubt that liquidations had worked badly, and that there had been enormous waste in dealing with estates. He proposed to do away altogether with these liquidations and with compositions as well, and to substitute for them arrangements by deed. His opinion was that, as a rule, a man who was not able to pay his debts ought to go through the Bankruptcy Courts, and be subjected to a public examination as to the mode in which he spent his money, and how it had happened that he had fallen into embarrassment. There were many oases in which it was desirable that there should be no adjudications in bankruptcy, but that men who were unable to fulfil their engagements should be allowed to proceed in business in order that they might subsequently pay their debts without the stigma attached to them of having been adjudicated bank- rupts and passed examinations as bankrupts in public Courts. In order to meet cases of this kind, it was proposed by the Bill to allow debtors in such circumstances to compound with their creditors; but it also provided that this should only be done with the consent of a large proportion of such creditors, both with regard to number and value. Furthermore, it was proposed that this consent should be given personally, and not by means of proxies. He, for one, thought it important that the system of proxies in bankruptcy proceedings should be abolished as far as possible. This was most important as far as arrangements by deed were concerned; and the proposal in reference to it contained in the Bill would, he thought, have a satisfactory result as far as the commercial world was concerned. As far as compositions were concerned, it was proposed to enact that they should not be accepted unless the debtors offered 5s.in the pound, or any similar sum was accepted by four-fifths in number and value of the creditors. His intention was—when the Bill got before a Select Committee, to take such steps and to secure the calling of such witnesses, mercantile as well as legal, as would enable the Government in the course of the present Session to pass an Act which would amend the Bankruptcy Law in a satisfactory manner, and a manner superior to the Scotch system, of which they had heard so much.

said, there was almost an unanimity of opinion that the Government had shown great judgment in introducing an amendment Bill instead of a consolidation of the law. The Act of 1869 was a consolidating Act; and under the existing Act the trustee was invested with too much power, being practically the master of the creditors, instead of their servant. Speaking for the other commercial Members of the House, he would say that they would endeavour to associate themselves thoroughly with the legal Members, and would endeavour to turn out, as soon as they possibly could, an amendment of the Bill satisfactory to the whole House.

in moving that the Bill be read a second time that day six months, said, he must be allowed to express his surprise that, when introducing a Bill involving principles so important, Her Majesty's Ministers, who had charge of the measure, had not given some explanation as to its provisions and intended effect. He need not occupy much of the time of the House in stating the reasons why he objected to its passing. He had opposed the Bill when it was before the House last Session, and he had hitherto heard neither explanation nor justification of it. What was proposed by the Bill was to grant certain powers, privileges, and immunities to particular institutions specified in the Schedule, and he could see no special reason for granting such powers and privileges. He did not desire to say anything against the institutions in question. He had no doubt that they were perfectly respectable; but he could see no reason for granting to them special powers and privileges which were not conferred upon other bodies carrying on the same business in the same localities, and which did not enjoy such special advantages. That was the chief ground upon which he urged his objection. He would not feel disposed, seeing that these Charters were terminable, to object to a proposal to extend their provisions for a certain period, say five years; but when asked to perpetuate indefinitely those powers and privileges on some in- stitutions which others did not enjoy, all he could say was, rather than sanction a proposal so exceptional, it would be better that the Charters should be swept away at once, and that all who carried on the business of banking should be placed on the same footing. Certain institutions had obtained by Charter powers which, in fact, constituted a sort of monopoly, and that by the Bill Parliament was asked to sanction for ever. To such a proposal he had serious objection. He thought it detrimental to the public interest in the Colonies and in the United Kingdom. As he had already said, if the proposal was for a limited period, he would not offer opposition; and probably within five years the whole subject of banking would have to be dealt with by Parliament. In Scotland they had an analogous state of things to that which it was proposed to institute by the Bill. Three of the leading banks had certain powers and privileges which other institutions did not enjoy, one by Act of Parliament and two by Charters, and the Bill proposed to establish a similar inequality in the respective Colonies. To that system might be traced a great deal of the evils which had attended the operations of some of those institutions which were not so favoured. Further, as an inducement to the House to pause before going on with the Bill, they had not got the Charters before them, in order to judge of what they were doing; but they were really being asked to legislate entirely in the dark. It was not reasonable to ask the House to sanction a proposal to confer exceptional powers and privileges, of the nature and extent of which neither the Members of that House nor the public had any knowledge. Let the Charters be produced and explained that they might know what they were doing. He did not say that he had any objection to the institutions sought to be favoured by this measure. They were, no doubt, as was said, highly respectable. He felt sure of that, and when waited on himself last year to try to pursuade him to withdraw his opposition to the Bill, he said that if a Bill were introduced to confer on all banking institutions having offices in the respective localities the same privileges, he would not hesitate to give such a measure most favourable consideration, and, at least, it might pass without his oppo- sition. But he did decidedly object to confirm a monopoly of this character—if not a monopoly, at least an exceptional advantage—for if it was not an advantage, why were they asked to legislate on the subject? Those were the grounds upon which he opposed the Bill at first; they were now equally strong, and he should, accordingly move its rejection.

, in rising to second the Amendment, said, that if any hon. Member of the House desired to inform himself on the subject of chartered banks, he would find great difficulty in doing so. He had asked the Treasury and the Board of Trade to lay before the House a Return on the subject, and he was told that the Charters were public documents, and that they could Be obtained. He had found that statement correct; but on examination he found that these Charters were preserved in the Record Office in such a form as rendered them practically unavailable for reference. They were often extremely voluminous and complicated documents. Yet they were asked, without a word of inquiry, to renew all the Charters of the colonial banks by a stroke of the pen. His hon. Friend (Mr. Ramsay) had referred to the banks scheduled as being the only banks dealt with by the Bill; but that appeared not to be the case. So far as he could make out, it was proposed in the case of the banks scheduled that they should be able to do some things, which at present they required the sanction of the Treasury to do, without any sanction at all; but as far as other banks were concerned—[The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: Those are the only banks.] The words of the Bill were—

"Nothing in this Act shall authorize any Banking Companies mentioned under the Schedule of this Act to exercise any power in relation to the issue or otherwise in respect of notes, or in relation to the establishment of branches in the Colony that is not exercised at the time of the passing of this Act."

That did not refer to all the chartered banks. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: Yes.] On what grounds, then, were they to deal with the chartered banks in the Colonies without dealing with those at home? The Government did not, and never had, carried out the investigations with regard to these banks, for which they were responsible. For instance, banks were compelled to hold gold against notes, and the Treasury had the power of seeing that they did so; but, as was shown after the City of Glasgow Bank failure, they never performed that duty. There were two privileges conferred on these chartered banks by the Charter which it was proposed to perpetuate. These were the limitation of liability, and the power of issuing notes. The power of issuing notes was a matter which did not so much interest the public in this country; but the matter of limitation of liability undoubtedly did. Now, they would find in the banks scheduled that in some cases the liability was limited to the amount of shares; in other cases it was limited to twice that amount; in the case of the Ionian Bank, it was limited, in respect of the shares held in Greece, to the amount paid up; while in respect of those held in England, it was double that amount. Again, in the case of the Egyptian Bank it was twice the amount of shares, and the liability ceased at the time of transfer. That was quite a different liability to any contemplated under the Companies Acts. Why were they to give these banks perpetual Charters? Even the Bank of England had no such Charter. Its privileges were terminable one year after the payment of the Public Debt. Under this Bill they proposed to give perpetuity to all the anomalies existing in chartered banks—a power and privilege which they did not consider necessary in the case of the Bank of England. He would also point out that it was not easy to arrive at what the limitations of the liabilities of these banks were. All his information was gathered from theStock Exchange year Book;but the compiler of that work was compelled to rely for his information on the officials of the various Chartered Companies. There was practically no means of obtaining independent information as to the liabilities of these banks, and the subject was pre-eminently one which, before being dealt with, should be investigated by a Committee. He should have no objection to what was proposed, if the Bill limited the privileges of the Charters to two, three, or five years; but he most decidedly objected to their being made perpetual. He, therefore, seconded the Amendment.

said, that he would not have moved the Second Reading of the Bill in silence had it not been identical with that which was introduced last Session, but did not pass into law. The reasons for the introduction of the Bill were very simple. The House was aware that, before the passing of the Limited Companies Liability Acts, there had existed for more than 30 or 40 years certain banks which possessed Royal Charters. For any alteration or extension of their branches, or for the renewal of a term upon which their Charters were originally granted, those banks had to come to the Treasury for such renewal or increase of their powers. A responsibility was thus thrown upon the Treasury in regard to matters on which it was not very well able to form an opinion or to exercise a sound judgment. It was, therefore, thought at one time that it might be possible to let the Charters expire; but the disadvantages of placing those banks under the Limited Companies Acts were found to be so great that the Charters were renewed for a short period, in order that a Bill might be submitted to the House for the purpose of relieving the Treasury from a responsibility which it could not properly exercise. Under the present Bill the banks would simply have the same powers which they now possessed, subject to the legislation of the countries in which they existed. The only object of the Bill, therefore, was to relieve the Treasury from the responsibility of renewing the Charters, and to place the banks under the jurisdiction of the countries in which they carried on business.

understood the object of the Bill to be the perpetual renewal of the Charters under which these banks existed. The House had had no time to look into the matter, for this Bill was not introduced until the end of last Session, and was withdrawn without being fully discussed. He should like to know whether it was proposed to give the Legislatures of all the countries in which the banks carried on business power to alter their constitutions? For instance, was the Bank of Egypt to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Khedive? Then, with regard to Canada, he doubted very much whether the House had power to make laws with regard to banks in the Dominion. Before a measure of this kind was passed they ought to have time to consider the subject fully. There must be some object in view with regard to the Bill; and if that object were only to relieve the Treasury from an unpleasant duty, he should suggest that the Charters should be renewed for five, seven, or 10 years, and not in perpetuity.

said, that one of the greatest objections to continuing these Charters for a limited time was that one of the banks held a perpetual Charter. He would endeavour to explain how the matter stood. A good many years ago, before the establishment of joint stock banks was authorized by law, banks could not exist without some kind of Charter. About 1840, and in later years, the promoters of banks in the Colonies were in the habit of asking the Crown for Charters to enable them to exist. In no other way could they be established, and the Crown usually granted the Charters. Almost all those Charters contained a proviso that the actions of the banks should be regulated by the consent of the Treasury. Subsequently, joint stock banks were founded under the sanction of Parliament. The 11 banks referred to in the Bill had, however, remained in the condition of chartered banks, and as such had, no doubt, certain advantages, both as regarded their standing and also as being, to a certain extent, independent of the legislation of the Colonies. They were under the regulation of the Treasury; but, as time went on, the Treasury found it exceedingly awkward to exercise the power confided to it. Matters requiring alterations of the Charters, either by the establishment of branch banks or by changes in the system of issuing notes, had to be decided in Downing Street by officers of the Treasury, who had no great knowledge of the matter. The Treasury would have been glad to renew the Charters for a limited time, and then allowed them to cease. But that would have thrown the banks out of gear, and it would have been exceedingly difficult for them to register themselves as joint stock hanks, and there was the further difficulty that one of the banks had a perpetual Charter. The banks had carried on their business exceedingly well, and there was no reason for wishing to put an end to their existence. The difficulties in the way of altering their constitution by bringing them under the Companies Acts were very great, owing to numbers of the shares being in the names of trustees, and other matters of that kind. Moreover, the effect of that measure would have been still to leave one chartered bank, and one only, in existence. The Government, therefore, thought it best to get rid of the responsibility of having to revise and correct the proceedings of these banks, and to establish, in the first place, certain general principles as to the mode in which they were to act in matters affecting their constitution; and, in the second place, to leave to the Colonial Governments such power of regulating their proceedings as might prevent their having any unfair advantages in comparison with other banks. They, therefore, proposed in this Bill to make Charters perpetual, and to leave to the bank itself, under proper conditions, the power of increasing its capital, altering the amount of its shares, and other such matters—in fact, to apply to them similar provisions to those by which other joint stock banks were regulated. Clause 6 was very important, for it was the clause which put the bank under the regulation of the Government of the Colony in which it existed. First of all, with regard to the issue of notes, it was provided that nothing in the Act should authorize the banks to exercise any power which they were not exercising at the passing of the Act, save with the consent of the Governor of the Colony. Further, the banks were to do nothing at any time or place which might, at that time, be illegal according to the law in force in the Colony. If the Legislature of any Colony passed a law regulating banks, then these banks would be as much subject to it as other banks in the Colony. The Treasury had considered whether it would be best for it to take the responsibility of extin- guishing the Charters of the banks, or introducing new restrictions. They had found that they would not be able to extinguish the Charter of one of the largest and most important of these banks; and they had, therefore, thought it best to introduce the present measure. If the House rejected the Bill their present difficulties would continue. He, therefore, hoped the House would see that there was nothing in it which should cause anxiety, and would allow it to proceed.

did not see that there was any objection to relieving the Treasury from its present responsibility; but he thought they should know exactly what they were doing. No doubt, if the House had everything before it, it would agree with the proposal of the Government; but it had not at present the materials before it upon which to form an opinion. He should like to know what the provision of the Charters in question were? He would venture to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to lay the Charters before the House prior to asking it to come to a conclusion. He did not mean to suggest that the Charters should be printed and circulated, but that hon. Members should have access to them. No doubt it would be found that the banks had been well conducted, and that their Charters were good; but at present they had no means of knowing whether the banks were complying with their Charters or not. It seemed to him to be very important, for the safety of the public and of the proprietors of the banks, that they should have every information before them before passing this Act.

did not object to the Bill, but, on the contrary, was entirely in its favour. The Bill appeared to him to be not only a reasonable but a necessary measure. He was aware that the gentlemen connected with the chartered banks had found great difficulties in developing their business in consequence of the restrictions imposed by the Treasury. His hon. Friend (Dr. Cameron) looked with very great suspicion upon the proposal to place these chartered banks upon a permanent footing. The possession of a Charter was a considerable advantage to a bank, and the public had a right to know that the powers and privileges given to the chartered banks were of such a nature as not to be injurious to the public at large, or to be an interference with the fair prosecution of business by similar institutions. With every disposition to support the Second Reading of the Bill, he was very much inclined to think that, before the Bill was absolutely passed into law, it would be desirable that an opportunity should be given, by referring the matter to a Select Committee, to ascertain the exact position now occupied by the chartered banks. It did appear to him that, without the publication of Charters, it might be possible for a Committee to which the Bill could be referred to ascertain the nature of the Charters and the way in which business was now carried on. If it were found that the nature of the Charters was unobjectionable, then he did not think there was any right to refuse to grant the holders a permanent interest in them. He observed that there was a provision in the Bill which met some of the objections raised. It was provided that nothing in the Act should prevent Her Majesty revoking the Charters if necessity should arise. There was another provision—namely, in the event of insolvency the Charters and supplemental Charters issued to the bank should be revoked and become void. That was necessary to prevent some arrangement being made by which, in the case of insolvency, the bank could pass its Charter over to another institution. He presumed that, had there been any legal means of establishing joint stock banks in former days, these Charters would never have been granted; and, undoubtedly, no further Charters would be issued, because banks would be established under the Acts now in operation. But they were dealing with property which did exist, and which ought not to be interfered with unless good cause could be shown to the contrary. Before legislating on the subject, it would be, however, only reasonable that the House should know exactly, through a Committee, or otherwise, the position of the banks under the Bill.

wished to say a few words upon the Bill from more than one point of view. In the Colony with which he had been many years ago connected, they had some banks chartered by the Imperial Government, and others by the local Legislature under special Acts. The question was more than once raised in the Colony of a general Banking Act, especially in connection with the issue of paper money; and it became his duty as a Minister of the Colony to look carefully into the question whether these anomalies could be removed, and especially that Charters should be made uniform. He was bound to say that the result of his consideration was that something like the present Bill would be an improvement. He did not think that the Treasury or the Board of Trade should be allowed to retain the power of granting Charters in Her Majesty's name; but he thought that the banks that now existed might be allowed to retain their Charters permanently if they were adapted to the present condition of things. He quite agreed with the general scope of the Bill which was now brought forward. From an Imperial point of view, he was strongly impressed with the necessity of taking the conduct of this business from the Treasury and the Board of Trade, by passing some general Act which would relieve them from functions which they could not satisfactorily perform. From both points of view, therefore, he could not but give his support to the Bill. The only question that presented itself was whether the Charters were well adapted to the state of things which now existed; and it struck him that the words of the Act did not make it sufficiently clear that it was absolutely left to every Colony to make its own general laws with respect to banks and to deal with the privileges of the chartered banks provided the Acts referred to all other banks in the Colony. On the other hand, it was necessary to remember that many of these banks did not carry on business in one Colony, only but in several, and thus could not, without complication, rest on local Charters only. In providing, therefore, that the Colonial Legislature should be at liberty to take away the privileges of these banks they must be careful to make them also subject to Imperial legislation, where they existed in more than one Colony. He thought it very desirable that the Bill should pass into law, subject to such minute inquiry as would be made before a Select Committee. He could hardly support the suggestion that all they required to know was the nature of the Charters. Al- though, from one point of view, this was a public measure, yet it was also essentially a Private Bill, because it endowed certain private companies with various powers and privileges. It partook, therefore, both of the nature of a public and a Private Bill, and he did not think the House should pass it without careful examination; and he would propose that it should be referred to a Select Committee. If the Government would consent to that course being taken, he thought the objections of his hon. Friends would be very fairly met. The Bill could be referred to a Select Committee, with power to make the fullest investigations into each Charter, and when their Report had been received the Bill would again come before the House.

entirely concurred with the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ponte-fract that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee. He thought that if Her Majesty's Government would modify Clause 2 by allowing the Treasury, after the expiry of the Charters, to terminate them at any time on giving reasonable notice, and that until this was done, they should continue in force, the proposal, he believed, would meet a great many of the objections raised.

would ask leave to withdraw his Amendment, on the understanding that the Bill went before a Select Committee, with power to have the Charters before it. He hoped that the question, in all its bearings, would be fully gone into before the Committee. He only required investigation of the subject, and fully approved of the proposal in the Bill to relieve the Treasury of the responsibility of dealing with these Charters.

did not think that this Bill should be proceeded with at so late an hour. The measure interfered considerably with the rights at present enjoyed by owners of property in Scotland. He did not wish at the present moment to express any opinion concerning the measure; but he considered that it ought not to be brought on without those interested—landlords, tenants, and municipal authorities in the various towns in Scotland—having some opportunity of making their views known on the subject.

said, it was with very considerable surprise that he had heard a borough Member from Scotland object to this Bill. The object of the measure was to enable municipal authorities in Scotland to carry out more effectively the provisions of the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Act. The whole purpose of the Bill was to extend to Scotland the provisions of the amending Act with regard to artizans' and labourers' dwellings which passed through Parliament last year, but which was only made applicable to England and Ireland. Certain Scotch boroughs had not taken it very kindly that they were left under disadvantages from which England and Ireland were freed by the Act of last Session. It was at their instigation that he had introduced the present Bill, the sole purpose of which was to place local authorities in Scotland in the same position as those in other parts of the United Kingdom. Under those circumstances, he trusted that the hon. Member would not throw obstacles in the way of the Bill.