in rising to call attention to the Papers laid before Parliament respecting the Island of Cyprus; and to move—

"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to be graciously pleased to direct Her High Commissioner in Cyprus to propose to his Council to repeal the Ordinances establishing forced labour, giving power of arbitrary exile, and prohibiting the sale of land to any but British or Turkish subjects; and further directing him to call upon his Council to consider the reform of the tribunals of the Island by the admission of the Greek to an equality with the Turkish tongue, and by the nomination of Cypriote Christian Judges to an equality in numbers and power with the existing Turkish Judges; and also directing him to report whether, in his opinion, some measure of constitutional or elective government might not wisely be introduced into Cyprus,"

said, that on former occasions, when his hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke) and others brought forward the question of the occupation of Cyprus before Parliament, they were met with statements based on illusions which the late Government studiously fostered, and which were accepted with almost childlike simplicity by the majority of the House of Commons. They were asked to look at Cyprus as through the halo of historical associations, and they were told that the Island would become a most valuable and important property of the English Crown. He was glad to see the late Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, because he wanted to call his attention to a prophecy which he made on March 24, 1879, when he said that—

"He had no doubt that Cyprus would become a place of arms for England, and that Famagousta would become one of the finest harbours in the world; and these results could be obtained without any appreciable expense on the part of the English Exchequer."—[3 Hansard, ccxliv. 1535.]

The idea that Cyprus would become a place of arms for England, and Famagousta one of the finest harbours in the world, without any appreciable expense to the Imperial Exchequer, had vanished, and we could now judge of the probable value of the Island apart from those poetic associations, and in the dull light of practical experience. He (Mr. By-lands) regarded our taking possession of Cyprus as the fulfilment of a dream of a youthful novelist. Forty years ago, that youthful novelist had said "The English want Cyprus;" and when he became Prime Minister he had introduced to his Cabinet the question of possessing an Island in the Mediterranean. The Members of the Government appeared to have selected the Island in an haphazard fashion. They did not know anything about Cyprus except what Lord Salisbury said he had learned from the Encyclopœdia Britannica. In order to obtain possession of the Island, which was now admitted to be worthless for the purposes intended— ["No!"] —well, it was, at any rate, worthless in the opinion of good judges—we entered into a secret Convention under circumstances that were disgraceful to this country; we violated the Treaty understandings of Europe, and excited the suspicion and disapproval of the European Powers. Of all the marvellous pieces of folly which he had ever read of in the history of statesmanship, the Anglo-Turkish Convention was the worst. He hoped the time was not far distant when England would be relieved from obligations of the character which were contained in it. The taking possession of the Island was a blunder, and its occupation had been marked by a succession of blunders. A number of soldiers had been sent to Cyprus under conditions which were certain to produce that which actually followed—disease and death. But that was not the only blunder which had been committed. Upwards of 1,000 enormous coal-boxes had been sent out for their use, so large that four men were required to carry one of them, and that they filled the entire hold of one of Her Majesty's ships; yet, when they were landed in Cyprus, they were found to be totally useless, as there was not a single fireplace on the Island. Our wise Administrators had, moreover, sent out some hundreds of copper warming-pans, in order, he supposed, to comfort the troops in a climate where the temperature ranged from 100 to 120 degrees. What had become of the coal-boxes he was unable to say; but he might observe that he had heard something of the same kind had been going on in Zulu- land. Instead of the British soldier, he might add, we had now got in Cyprus what was called a military police; for the Government, finding they had no right to enlist foreigners as soldiers, had evaded the law and converted a regiment of 800 Natives, who had been enlisted, drilled, and clothed as soldiers, into a force of police, for which a sum of £26,000 was put down in the Civil Service Estimates, which sum he would move should be expunged if it did not disappear from the Estimates next year. The House had been informed by his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that it was the intention of Lord Granville to remove Cyprus from under the control of the Foreign Office to the Colonial Office; and the only reason, so far as he could see, why it had ever been put under the Foreign Office was that it was the pet child of Lord Salisbury, who retained the entire direction of it in his own hands, and in those of his satraps, and who was entitled to whatever credit or discredit attached to its administration, which he was afraid reflected upon the noble Lord much more of the latter than the former. The great vice of that administration was that we stepped into the shoes of the Turk; we had adopted Turkish laws and customs and clothed ourselves in the spirit of Turkish despotism. The Christian population not unnaturally expected to be relieved from the Turkish incubus, to be governed in the free spirit of English institutions; but they soon found that the sympathies of the Government officials were entirely on the side of the small Turkish minority, and that the entire Cypriote and Greek population were regarded with suspicion. According to Sir Samuel Baker—

"The Cypriotes had expected to see England and the English as their rulers; hut, like the well-known saying 'Scratch a Russian and you discover the Tartar,' they might have' scratched an Englishman and found the Turk,' in the actual régime"

In another passage of his book on Cyprus Sir Samuel Baker said—

"If Cypriotes were Candians (Cretans) their voices would he forcibly heard, and the Turkish rule beneath the British uniform would he quickly overthrown. The Cypriote, downtrodden for centuries, is like sodden timber that will not awaken to the spark; he is what is called 'easily governed,' which means an abject race, in which all noble aspirations have been stamped out by years of unremitting oppression and injustice."

His hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke), by the admirable speeches he had made in the last Parliament, had excited the gratitude of the Christian population of Cyprus by showing how great was the hatred towards them of the English authorities, and how bad was the treatment which they had received at their hands. Mr. Oratis, of Alexandria, in a letter quoted by his hon. Friend, said—

"It is quite impossible for me to describe to you the hatred of the English authorities against the Christians in Cyprus."

The Bishop of Citium, speaking of Colonel Warren, the Commissioner of Limasol, said—

"His conduct towards the Christians is such as to lead one to believe that he is dealing with some uncontrollable people, who, under the Turkish rule were, forsooth, troubling a paternal Government."

Within the last fortnight or so letters had also appeared in the Journal des Lebats, written by a gentleman who had been a short time before in Cyprus, fully confirming that view of the state of things in the Island. M. Charmes, the gentleman to whom he referred, said—

"The First Commissioner of Larnaca, Colonel White, has left behind him in the country a legendary renown. No Turkish Pasha had exercised a more despotic power. The richest proprietor in Cyprus spoke of him to me as a 'petit Robespierre.'"

M. Charmes also wrote—

"One of the members of the Legislative Council, who had at first been most favourably disposed to the English, who had given them land on which to build Protestant places of worship, and who had always shown himself their most faithful friend, irritated by the proceedings of an administration both revolutionary and violent, said one day to the Governor of the Island in full Council—' Sir, we perceive that you take us for either Zulus or Afghans; but you are mistaken. We are a people whom I have always believed up to the present time to be as civilized as the English. Since you have come among us I perceive that we are still more civilized than they are"

From both public documents and private narratives, there appeared to be on the part of English officials in Cyprus a distrust of the Greek population—a fear of some revolutionary rising which was not at all creditable to an enlightened and civilizing Power like England. Mrs. Scott Stevenson, in her very readable book, entitled Our Home in Cyprus, although favourably disposed to the English occupation, wrote—

"It is doubtless true, and rather a strange coincidence, that both the civil and the military authorities have a decided antipathy to the Greek portion of the population. Even my husband, who never lets prejudices or personal feeling bias his opinion, says the Greeks arc not to be trusted. They dislike us and the Turks equally, are discontented and treacherous, are fond of secret societies, and generally employ craft and deceit to gain their ends."

Again, Colonel Warren, of Limasol, spoke of a class which would welcome his absence, but which in no way benefited the country, and might become a positive source of danger. He continued—

"I allude to the writers of the letter from the President of the Club at Limasol. The so-called club is formed principally of sympathizers with the Greek national movement. This organization would desire to introduce the Greek language; and it was through them, headed by the Greek Consul, that a movement was instituted to encourage a voice for annexation to Greece. This would be a dangerous class if they had a discontented people to leaven with their sedition."

It was a most significant fact that this Commissioner makes it a charge against the Limasol Club that they desired to introduce the Greek language, as though it were not the native language of the Island, spoken by five-sixths of the "inhabitants. Sir Garnet" Wolseley spoke of the "revolutionary aims of this Club," and he connected the Bishop of Citium with Athens, "the hotbed of the revolutionary party." In another despatch, dated April 11, 1879, Sir Garnet Wolseley said—

"The Moslem Cypriotes compare favourably in honesty and sobriety with their Christian compatriots, with whom they live on good terms. I am well aware, however, how easy it would be to stir up an ill-feeling between them, which if not checked might lead to serious and disastrous consequences. It is the undisguised desire of a few agitators to drive every Moslem from the Island by handing over its entire government to the Christians. There would seem to be a longing on the part of these foolish fanatics to punish the present race of Moslem Cypriotes for the offences and cruelties of the Turks centuries ago."

As the result of this official dread of disaffection, two Ordinances had been issued—one giving the High Commissioner power to banish dangerous persons from the Island, and the other prohibiting the sale of land to any but Turkish subjects—which were a perfect disgrace to the English Administration. The fact that Turkish officialism was entirely out of sympathy with the Christian population lay at the root of the most objectionable features of the existing régime. In the first place, the police force, to which he had alluded, consisted of seven English officers, seven interpreters, eight Native officers, and 836 non-commissioned officers and privates. Now, it would naturally be supposed that these 836 men were made up in proportion to the religious opinions of the population. Nothing of the kind. With the exception of some of the officers there was not a single Christian soldier. They were all Turkish Zaptiehs under the English uniform, and with all the qualities that earned such evil notoriety in Asia Minor. In the first instance, a number of Greek Cypriotes were enlisted; but they were soon dismissed from the force. Mrs. Scott Stevenson said—

"The Greeks objected to wearing a white turban round their fez, declaring that it turned them into Turks ! Her husband (the Commandant) had no patience with this and said they might wear it or be dismissed."

The officer of the Zaptiehs at Lefka was the Turkish Mudir, Neim Effendi, whom Mrs. Scott Stevenson said was "quite what we call socially a gentleman, and has travelled a good deal in Europe." The history of this "gentleman," as given by Mrs. Stevenson, was interesting, and furnished a good sample of the Turks employed by the British authorities in responsible positions. She told us that—

"Neim, in his eventful career, had passed through nearly every grade. At one time Governor of a Province, he was dismissed for embezzlement of State funds; at another, sergeant of Zaptiehs; and then, again, promoted to a high appointment through the influence of his friends. He had lived in Constantinople for some time, and finally got sent back to Cyprus as Mudir of Lefka."

If they could fill in all the hidden incidents of that checkered career, they would, no doubt, have a still more striking portrait. It was not surprising that numerous complaints were made of the conduct of these Zaptiehs, who, in many cases, were soi disant brigands commanded by officers of the stamp of Neim Effendi. Last year his hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea stated that cases of flogging had occurred, and that the Zaptiehs had used violence and put on manacles in cases where prisoners ought not to have been treated in such a manner. On a careful examination of the Blue Books, he thought he found substantial evidence of the correctness of his hon. Friend's statements. Of course, the Commissioners stood up for the Zaptiehs, and said they had never flogged anybody by order. No one alleged that they had done so; but, nevertheless, they might have acted with undue harshness on many occasions. In the same discussion last year his hon. Friend referred to the Ordinances respecting forced labour. Attempts had been made to show that this forced labour, instead of being a grievance, was a blessing to the people of Cyprus. The forced labour was paid for at the rate of 1s. a-day; but in many places, according to the testimon3' of Sir Garnet Wolseley himself, labourers were obtaining 1s. 3d. a-day. It was clear that if we paid the necessary wages we could get the labour without forcing it. Mrs. Scott Stevenson, in one of her little tours with her husband, came across a number of men who were engaged in making a road. She said in her book on Cyprus—

"We met gangs at work, men, women, and boys, who were paid ls., 9d., and 6d. a-day each respectively. There are over 1,000 employed on the road, every hatch of 100 having an overseer, who, when they lagged, cried out and threatened their backs with a light whip."

Did not hon. Members feel that they had been dragged into humiliation and disgrace by the administration of a Dependency which we were governing in such a fashion? He thought all the Ordinances required the careful supervision of the Government, although they might not be open to such serious objections as those to which he had drawn special attention. Last year the Government took up a singular position. They justified these Ordinances, because they said none of them could be passed unless they had the sanction of the Legislative Council of Cyprus. It sounded as if there was Constitutional government in the Island. In point of fact, the Legislative Council consisted of the High Commissioner, who was its President, of two English officers appointed by the High Commissioner, of one European, who, at the present time, was an Italian inhabitant of the Island, of one Turk, and one Greek. Therefore, the Constitutional government of Cyprus by a Legislative Council did not represent the people of the country. M. Charmes said that—

"The Ordinances are decided contrary to the opinions of the natives of the country. English military officers, perfect strangers to the language, manners, and ideas of the Cypriotes, have passed many Ordinances which, in the unanimous opinion of the Natives, are in striking contradiction to the interests of the Island. These Ordinances are given in English, they appear in the official bulletin, which is not given publicity, and the public only know them when a process is issued against them which reveals the existence of the Ordinances."

No wonder there should be a jumble in the administration when the Island was governed by Ottoman law, and such British Ordinances as he had described. In an ordinary Court of Law in Cyprus, the Judge presiding was a Turkish Cadi, who did not know English or Greek, and he administered the law among people who did not understand Turkish. The English Government, to assist the Judge, put by his side an English Assessor, who did not know either Turkish or Greek. There was consequently a large number of interpreters, and cases had occurred in which the interpreters had been bribed. He said, therefore, that Greek should be made an official language as well as English or Turkish, and that means should be taken by which the large majority of the inhabitants should obtain justice. He proposed to address Her Majesty to direct the Governor to appoint Cypriote Judges as well as Turkish and English Judges. Then, again, he could not speak highly of the manner in which justice was often administered. It constantly happened that the sentences passed bore no proportion to the guilt of the offenders. Many such cases had been mentioned by M. Charmes in his account of the Island. Of one instance in particular M. Charmes had written as follows: —

"During my stay at Nicosia all the country was moved by a sentence of death pronounced upon a Greek native guilty of having killed a Zaptieh, who had been the first to attack him during a village festival. Against the unanimous protest of the Assessors, the Chief Justice pronounced sentence of death. The scandal was so great, the Consular protests were so unanimous, the complaints addressed to England were so loud, that it was decided to begin the trial again, and this time before the Mussulman Court of Appeal."

He (Mr. Rylands) had reason to believe that the sentence of death pronounced at the second trial had been again quashed by the Foreign Office for irregularity in the proceedings. It was not too much to say that the administration of the law in Cyprus was characterized by incompetence and excessive severity. There was one more subject to which he must allude—the taxation of the Island. Having undertaken to pay over to the Turks a large sum annually, we were compelled to raise no less than £177,233 from the unfortunate population of the Island in the year 1879–80. This amounted to about £1 per head upon a population who were wretchedly poor, and out of this was paid over 12s. 6d. to the Turkish Government. Nor was it merely that the amount of taxation was excessive. It was rendered the more vexatious by its variety and searching character, interfering with and burthening almost every industry, profession, or occupation, and meeting the unfortunate population at every turn of life. The tithe system was especially condemned by Sir Samuel Baker, who said of it—

"This system is a blight of the gravest character upon the local industry of the inhabitants, and it is a suicidal and unstatesmanlike policy that crushes and extinguishes all enterprize."

He admitted that many of the worst abuses which prevailed under Sir Garnet Wolseley had been removed under General Biddulph, who seemed desirous to administer the affairs of the Island with the greatest possible leniency. Probably some administrative improvements had followed in consequence of the debates originated by his hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea; but the chief defects still remained. The existence of the Ordinances, the fact that Greek was not recognized as the official language, and that the sympathy of the Government was always with the Turkish rather than with the Greek population, were blots on the Administration of the Island. It would be the duty of the new Government to put an end to what had been described as "Turkish rule under British uniform." They must entirely reform the laws and administration. They must get rid of the Turkish Sovereignty —relieve taxation, and develop the industry of the people. By giving freedom and fair play to the Christian Cypriotes, they might hope to awaken them from the stupor of a down-trodden race, and might do something to compensate them for centuries of injury and injus- tice, and to rekindle in them the intellectual spark that characterized a people of noble aspirations. He begged to move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.

in seconding the Motion, said, he was glad to find that there were Members of the Opposition who admitted that the government of Cyprus was not in the satisfactory position it was supposed to be. He had no doubt that the Government was capable of dealing with the question, and that the abuses to which his hon. Friend had called attention would be remedied before the subject came again before the House. Notwithstanding the strenuous denial of the existence of forced labour by the late Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, it was proved that the Cypriotes were compelled to pay 15s. perannum to works of public utility, or to labour to that extent at 1s. a-day. If that was not forced labour he was at a loss to know what was. As to the administration of the law, the vas, majority of the people spoke the Greek language; but the Judges did not understand that tongue, and interpreters were required. It was said by those who had studied the matter that everything depended upon the interpreters. In his opinion, it was necessary to have the law administered by Judges acquainted with the language of the people. At present all the summonses were issued in English, and the persons to whom they were addressed had to pay for the translation of them. They ought, he thought, as they were miserably and pitiably poor, to have that translation supplied to them free of expense. At present the Judges sat listening to the evidence which they did not understand, and smoking their cigarettes and meerschaums, the Cadi amusing himself by hunting for fleas in his waistcoat. He must say that in every case the officials of the Island were endeavouring to do their duty with zeal and self-sacrifice. But he was sorry to say that some of the English Commissioners had been extending their patronage to Turkish brigands. Then the education of the people was lamentably deficient. Sir Samuel Baker spoke of the establishment of schools as the primary necessity of Cyprus. In many villages there was not a single person who could either read or write. From that want of edu- cation sprang some of the worst evils in Cyprus. He hoped the Government would take care to put primary education in the Island in a satisfactory position. He would also like to ask whether it was intended to abolish the military exemption tax. It was a very unpopular tax. He hoped it would be reduced in amount and more fairly assessed. Then he would shortly refer to the Anglo-Turkish Convention. That Convention had, on the 24th of March, 1879, been spoken of in that House as "a wretched Convention;" and, at the same time, the present Prime Minister styled it "an insane Convention." Sir Samuel Baker described it as "foolish," and Mr. Archibald Forbes termed it a "fiasco." On the same night the late Chancellor of the Exchequer said we were occupying the Island for military purposes. That could scarcely be alleged now, as there were but a handful of soldiers in the Island. But the right hon. Baronet on the same occasion had said we were not taking Cyprus as a model farm to be under our own management, and had preferred to rest our claims upon its utility in enabling the Anglo-Turkish Convention to be carried out, which he regarded as the charter of our occupation of the Island. But when he asked whether Turkey had done anything on her part to carry out the Treaty we found she had done nothing. He would refer to Blue Book (Turkey) No. 4, which showed clearly the inability of Turkey to reform the administration of Asia Minor. The evidence therein given by our Ambassador, Sir Henry Layard, who could not be accused of unfriendliness to Turkey, showed the hopelessness of expecting her to reform. The fact was the occupation of Cyprus gave no power to this country to compel Turkey to redeem her pledges. It was an obligation without any corresponding benefit. Turkey having failed to carry out her part of the contract to reform the administration of Asia Minor, we were therefore at liberty to retire from the Convention, or, at least, from that part of it which bound us to defend Turkey against an attack by Russia on her Asiatic dominions, no matter how the contest might have been brought about. Much, however, as he had disapproved of the original acquisition, he thought we ought to retain the Island, even if we withdrew from the Convention, believing that under a just and energetic Administration the resources of the Island would be developed and its resources greatly increased. It would be unjust to hand over Cyprus to Turkish misrule; and its inhabitants ought to be governed as Englishmen, and secured in all the rights and liberties which Englishmen enjoyed. But it would be far better to purchase the Island out and out from Turkey, which would be glad to sell it at a reasonable price. It was not many years since it had been offered for £300,000. He was inclined to think the model farm theory was the best. The price could be defrayed in a few years out of the Revenues of the Island. He certainly thought it would be more economical than the present annual payments made to Turkey, which absorbed the greater part of the Revenue, and left very little for us to carry out the administration of the Island. The people of Cyprus rejoiced when they heard of the accession to power of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian (Mr. Gladstone), believing that it was the opening for them of a new era of prosperity and freedom from oppression. It was in the power, as he believed it was the intention, of the Government to take care that the hopes of a people so strangely brought under our dominion should not be disappointed. They had not only undertaken a great responsibility, but they had also a great opportunity; and it was because he believed that the reforms mentioned in that Resolution would promote the advancement of the Cypriote people and the honour of the country that he had great pleasure in seconding it.

begged to compliment his hon. Friends for the clearness with which they had placed their case before the House. The Seconder of the Motion had, perhaps, in the latter part of his speech, gone rather wide of the Motion on the Paper; because in the Motion there was no reference to the question of the continual occupation of Cyprus, and no reference to the Convention by which the Island had been partly acquired by this country. He would, therefore, ask his hon. Friend (Mr. H. Samuelson) to excuse him if he dealt only with the first portion of his speech. His hon. Friend had, to some extent, answered himself; because, while he had asked the Government on what ground the occupation of Cyprus was to be continued, in his concluding remarks he had placed before the House reasons which must weigh with any Government in considering whether the occupation must be maintained or not. Turning to the admirable speech of the Mover of the Resolution, there could be no doubt, if they were to go only to the ordinary sources of information, that there had been in the past very considerable tension in our relations with the people of Cyprus. But of late there had been greater harmony between the Governor and the population he ruled; and the present Governor, Sir Robert Biddulph, had displayed a great amount of tact and conciliation in the government of the Island. At the same time, the remarks of his hon. Friend on that subject would, he thought, in the opinion of the majority of the House, have confirmed the justice of the view which was taken by Her Majesty's present Government and which he had recently announced, that Cyprus ought rather to be handed over to the Colonial Office than kept under the Foreign Office. The Foreign Office was not fitted, either by its constitution or by the general nature of the subjects with which it had to deal, to undertake—or, at all events, permanently undertake—the government of such a dependency as Cyprus. He spoke of that Island as a dependency. Unfortunately, the character of our connection with it was altogether anomalous; yet, for the purposes of government, it must be looked upon practically as a dependency. It was true that at first there were matters connected with the occupation of Cyprus which might have made it desirable that it should be placed temporarily under the Foreign Office. But he thought the time had undoubtedly now arrived when, as soon as the pending questions were dealt with, the charge of the Island ought to be taken over by the Colonial Office; and he could not but hope that when it had been transferred to the latter Department many of the difficulties which had previously existed would gradually disappear. Until Cyprus was placed under it, the Foreign Office had no experience with regard to work of that kind; and although those who were connected with that Department were perfectly willing to continue to discharge those duties in relation to Cyprus, if it were the wish of the Government that they should do so, still they would, on the whole, prefer to be relieved of functions that were rather alien to the nature of that Office itself. His hon Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) had referred to certain Ordinances of Cyprus, the first which he had mentioned being one with a very singular title. It was called an Ordinance for securing peace and order; but his hon. Friend had alluded to it as one giving a power of arbitrary exile. It was the opinion expressed in the last Parliament by many Members now on the Ministerial side of the House that this Ordinance was not justified by the circumstances of Cyprus, so far as they knew them, and the present Government retained the opinions which they expressed while in Opposition. He was able to state that the Government had instructed the present Governor of Cyprus at once to take steps for the repeal of that Ordinance, so far as it affected all but a very small class of people. They had also directed him to inquire whether he could not do without it altogether. But, as respected that Ordinance, the Government were only carrying out the resolution which was arrived at by their Predecessors. It was the intention of the late Ministry to get rid of that peace and order Ordinance, so far as Cypriotes were concerned, and to keep it for aliens only. But the present Government had also asked the Governor to report whether it was necessary to retain it even for aliens. But he came next to Ordinances as to which the Government took a wholly I different view from that held by their Predecessors, as far as they could gather from the records. He alluded to the Sale of Land Ordinance and the Forced Labour Ordinance. His hon. Friend had described the first of those Ordinances at some length, and told them it had been summarily condemned by the correspondent of a French newspaper, who went to Cyprus, and who pointed out that the Ordinance, to some extent, conflicted with the Treaty engagements of the Ottoman Porte; at all events, it went counter to modern English and modern Turkish administration. However that might be, this country in 1867 initiated steps at the Ottoman Porte to induce it to allow subjects of all foreign Powers to hold land in the Turkish Empire. The Turkish Government did not make a general law on the subject; but it contracted Treaties with six foreign Powers enabling their subjects to hold land in Turkey. Therefore, by that Ordinance, they were involved in this strange anomaly — that in Cyprus, a portion of the Turkish Empire, the subjects of those six Powers had not a right by law to hold land. Her Majesty's Government thought that anomaly ought to cease, and they had instructed Sir Robert Biddulph completely to repeal that Ordinance. He now came to the Ordinance for forced labour. That Ordinance was modified at the wish of the late Government; hut it was always contended by those on his side of the House who had criticized its details that that modification was not sufficient, and did not really take away the objectionable character of the law. The Correspondence between Lord Salisbury and Sir Garnet Wolseley, which was contained in the Blue Book, showed that Lord Salisbury had felt the difficulty which was raised in Parliament with regard to the matter, and he insisted that the punishment for non-compliance with the demand for forced labour should take the shape of a fine on the village, and not fall on the individual. But there seemed to have been almost insuperable difficulties in working forced labour without some punishment being directed against the individual; and that being so, the modification, made at Lord Salisbury's suggestion, did not carry out his intention. The Ordinance had been to all intents and purposes an Ordinance for forced labour; and the attempt to explain it away as being a mere copy of the Ordinances in some of our Colonies, or of the law requiring the inhabitants of London to clear away the snow in front of their houses, entirely failed. Perhaps 1,000 persons were compelled to work on the roads at less than the ordinary pay for labour. If 1s. per day, to be paid under the Ordinance, was the ordinary rate of wages in Cyprus, then the Forced Labour Ordinance could not be required at all. As a matter of fact, in a large part of the Island it was not put in operation; but the Government thought it was altogether anomalous and indefensible, and they had ordered it to be repealed. His hon. Friend had spoken as to certain other Ordinances. He said he had no doubt that besides these three Ordinances there were other Ordinances as bad. He might ask his hon. Friend to refer to the Ordinances, which he would find in the Library of that House. He thought his hon. Friend would discover that the Ordinances that were really bad had been modified or repealed. There were one or two Ordinances as to which inquiry would be made as to whether they were really necessary in the form in which they had been passed by the Council. Certain complaints had been made with regard to one Ordinance which was a very good one in intention, but which seemed to have worked harshly in practice. He meant the Ordinance with regard to the cutting of trees. It had been said that that Ordinance had been made use of to prevent persons even from pruning fruit trees, and that those who lived on mountains were unable to build even the smallest house, and that that Ordinance ought to be modified in some way. Inquiry would be made as to whether the present provisions were or were not too harsh. He did not think his hon. Friend would find much to complain of in the other Ordinances. He now came to the portion of his hon. Friend's speech in which he spoke with regard to the character of the law and to the administration of law. Some action was taken on that subject by the late Government. Her Majesty's late Advisers did consider a scheme of reform with the view of securing a uniform system of justice to all the inhabitants of the Island. It was the opinion of the Government that it was desirable that the inhabitants of the [Island should take part in all the branches of administration with- out any distinction whatever of race or creed; and the Government would promote all steps by which that could be reached. Of course he spoke with some hesitation on that subject, because, as he had already said, it was their desire to effect a transfer of the Island to the Colonial Office before the month of October. At the same time, he had stated the general view of the Government with regard to the quality of the law and the administration of the law itself. There could be no doubt as to the grave character of the hardship of which his hon. Friend had complained, of forcing a population of which the great majority spoke Greek to make use of the English and the Turkish languages. As a matter of fact, nine-tenths of the inhabitants of the Island spoke Greek. A portion spoke both Greek and Turkish; but some four-fifths could not speak any language but Greek. It was, no doubt, a hardship that those persons should be driven to use interpreters and to pay large sums, far larger than they could properly afford, for a translation of their legal documents into Turkish or English as the case might be. But in connection with this matter it would be necessary when the Colonial Office undertook the charge of Cyprus to consider whether the time had not now come when all the Government officials ought to be able to speak the Greek language. His hon. Friend alluded to the case of the person who was charged with murder and who was tried by two different Courts. The sentence was found to be illegal, and it was by the intervention of the Foreign Office that that person was saved from punishment. As to the tithe system in Cyprus, he know that authorities throughout the East had severely condemned that system. In every part of the Turkish Empire we had British Consuls reporting year after year that one of the worst systems in that Empire was the system of the exaction of tithes. The tithe system led to the destruction of all attempts at improvement in agriculture or horticulture. Cyprus could produce fruit as good as any in the world; but the growth of fruit in Cyprus was checked by the tithe system, because the fruit had to remain on the trees until the collector of tithes arrived to ascertain the value of the crop. The tithe collectors were overworked, they could not possibly be in all places where they were wanted; and, therefore, it commonly happened that fruit rotted on the trees. With regard to the cultivation of the vine, it was greatly hampered by the system of tithe. And, while he was unable to make any definite announcement on the subject, he would say that it would be the duty of the Government to consider that subject very carefully to ascertain what should be done to replace the tithe system by some better system. At the same time he could promise his hon. Friend that they would initiate inquiries into the tithe system even before the Island passed from the Foreign Office to the Colonial Office. He might say to the House that it was not very long since the tithe system had been abolished in the Kingdom of Greece. The Tricoupi Government succeeded in completely abolishing that system throughout Greece. No man could possibly defend the Turkish tithe system. His hon. Friend who seconded the Motion spoke upon the subject of education in Cyprus and the great necessity for our taking steps to promote the system of education there. That, again, was a question of expense, so far as instruction would have to be promoted by public or local funds; and he might point out to his hon. Friend that one of the great grievances alleged by the Cypriote population was the great increase of local taxation in the Island, and the great increase in that taxation had caused much outcry against our rule. Education in Cyprus was mainly supported by emigrants from Cyprus who had become wealthy merchants in various parts of the East. The Government would consider what steps they could take to promote education in Cyprus; but they must be cautious in any steps which might be taken in the matter against bringing additional pressure to bear upon the people. His hon. Friend the Member for Burnley, who made this Motion, concluded his speech with very admirable remarks. He (Sir Charles W. Dilke) could only re-echo those remarks before the House. He hoped that we might be able to govern Cyprus in such a way that it would become a bright spot in the East and a model to the Turks as to the administration they should introduce into certain portions of Asia Minor. He believed that the changes which the Government had announced with regard to the Ordinances would be the first steps in that direction; that under the Colonial Office there would be a better chance of ruling the population in accordance with the feelings and wishes of the majority of the people; and that, in this way, we should ultimately feel that the government of Cyprus was not unworthy of England.

said, that after the speech of the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs he should not proceed with the Amendment of which he had given Notice to the Motion of the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands), his only object in putting that Amendment on the Paper having been to raise the question of transferring the government of Cyprus from the Foreign to the Colonial Office. He viewed that transfer with regret. It was, as it were, a taking possession of the Island at once, which was never contemplated by Treaty; and by acting in this fashion we might be encouraging other countries to pursue a similar course. While fully recognizing the ability with which the Colonial Office administered such of our Dependencies abroad as were now committed to its charge, he could not admit that it had a machinery sufficient for the administration of the Island of Cyprus under the very peculiar tenure by which it was held by this country at the present juncture. Unless the Island was bought out and out by Her Majesty's Government, there must be constant references from the High Commissioner to the Sublime Porte, and to the Consuls in Asia Minor, which could only be properly managed by the agency of the Foreign Office. As far as the relations between the Greeks and Turks resident in the Island were concerned in reference to the administration of justice, he agreed that they ought to be placed on a perfectly equal footing, particularly as far as the languages used in the Courts were concerned. The tithe system was undoubtedly one of the most atrocious ever devised in an European country, and the sooner it was abolished the better; but as reforms were contemplated in Turkey, he thought it would be wise to allow the reforms in Cyprus to go along hand in hand with them, and that under the direction of the Foreign Office.

wished for information as to the amount to be paid to Turkey by ourselves in consideration of possessing the Island. It was, he believed, fixed at £115,000 per annum, this being the amount said to have been derived by Turkey from Cyprus; but they had only the word of the Turk for this, and that was an authority which he, for one, should be very sorry to accept. The population of the Island was not more than about 180,000, and it was an exceedingly poor one. Therefore, if £115,000 a-year was to be drawn from the Island for payment to the Turk on a basis laid down by the Turkish authorities, and not verified by calculation, there was very little money left with which to develop the resources of the Island.

pointed out that the sum fixed upon as that to be paid by England to Turkey in consideration of the cession of Cyprus was fixed after laborious calculations between the Representatives of the two Governments, and they were bound in honour to pay it. He did not feel called upon to enter minutely into all the accusations which had been levelled against the late Administration on account of their acquisition of Cyprus; but he could not let pass a charge against that Government to the effect that such acquisition was an infringement of the public law of Europe. He could not understand the grounds on which such allegation of infringement was based, for all the facts tended to prove the contrary. With regard to the charge against the late Government of keeping the Treaty secret, he would remind those from whom that charge proceeded that almost every instrument of the kind, while negotiations were being carried on, must remain secret; and in this case the Treaty was announced not long after its conclusion. As far as the question of military police in Cyprus was concerned, he could not for a moment admit that either the letter or the spirit of the Constitution had been violated; nor could he see that any breach of international obligations had resulted from carrying out the Turkish law by English administrators. There seemed to be an impression that the Turkish law was a barbarous body of law handed down from ancient times; the fact being that it was based upon the Code Napoleon, and that down to the present the only complaint to be made was that it had been badly administered. He could not J see how the object which the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs desiderated could be attained if Cyprus was to be peopled with English officials. The hon. Member had spoken of the advantages which would accrue if a larger measure of self-government were given to the Cypriote population. Such a system could only be carried out, not by the introduction of foreigners, however experienced in administrative duties, but by continuing the original administration of the Turks and improving it—not by making constant breaks between the old and a new order of things. The hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) mentioned three Ordinances which he wanted at once to be repealed. The first was that relating to forced labour, the next that relating to arbitrary exile, and the third that which prohibited the sale of land to foreigners. He had an initial criticism to make on the hon. Member's Motion, and it was this—that the description which he gave of the Ordinances in question gave rise to erroneous opinions as to what they were. The first was described as an Ordinance for the establishment of forced labour. A more accurate description of it would be this—that it afforded means for carrying out for the benefit of the community public works which in this country would be carried out solely by means of rates, but which in a poor country like Cyprus could be more conveniently constructed out of an alternative contribution of labour or of money. There was no forced labour where there was not actual physical compulsion, and there was no physical compulsion to work in Cyprus. The inhabitants had the choice of contributing to that which was for the common benefit either in labour or in money. Then, as to the Ordinance prohibiting the sale of land to foreigners, including, of course, Greeks or Englishmen, to say that it was an Ordinance to prevent such sales of land was a pure phantom of the hon. Gentleman's imagination. That accusation had been constantly made in the House and in the country. It might as well be said that people in this country were forbidden to marry. It was true that before marriage could take place certain formalities had to be gone through, and it was precisely so in respect to the sale of land to foreigners in Cyprus. Permission to sell must be asked for; but it could not be said that the asking of permission to sell was a prohibition of the sale; and, so far as he could learn, such permission had never once been denied. Then, as to the power which was described as one of arbitrary banishment. Hon. Gentlemen seemed to forgot the checks by which its abuse would be prevented. Before any person could be banished under this Ordinance the Council had to be consulted. The Secretary of State had to be immediately informed; and if justice could be obtained neither from the Council nor the Secretary of State, there was always in the last resort a watchful Parliamentary Opposition. He, therefore, denied that the Ordinance allowed or sanctioned arbitrary banishment. There had been, in fact, no arbitrary exile of any individual; and he understood that the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs considered that some such power as now existed should be continued to the Governor of the Island to prevent intrigue and agitation which would be prejudicial to our rule and to the interests of the inhabitants. The hon. Baronet said he was not prepared to take away that power; and, perhaps, he said so having considered the question of Cyprus with more information than he possessed when in Opposition, and more impartiality. The hon. Member who introduced the subject desired to see an elective Government introduced into the Island as soon as possible. He was far from saying that the time might not come when such a step could be taken with safety; but he would point out that difficulties were in the way which any Government must keep carefully in view. The countries where elective institutions were established with most advantage were not countries in which the population were divided as they were in Cyprus. There were two religions and two races in the Island, and the differences which now divided them must gradually be abolished if they hoped eventually to introduce elective institutions there with any degree of success. The first result of doing so now would be to send the Turks and the Greeks into two hostile camps, and all the evils of Party government would be aggravated by the still greater evils arising from differences of race and creed. He was quite aware that hon. Gentlemen oppo- site had a profound belief in such institutions. They wished to establish them in Afghanistan, and, he believed, in South Africa; but he hoped they would not be carried away by their love of any particular form of government into prematurely introducing into Cyprus a system which he was certain would not conduce to the peace or prosperity of the Island, or, in the long run, advance the cause of freedom.

also wished to know how the amount paid annually to the Turkish Government in reference to Cyprus had been arrived at? The hon. Gentleman who had just sat down stated that we were bound in honour to pay in respect of Cyprus the large sum of money which had been mentioned to the Turkish Government. What did that payment amount to? It was equal to 15s. per head for each man, woman, and child in the Island, and would have to be paid in addition to all local and general taxation. A sum of 15s. per head would be equal to £20,000,000 in this country; and when they considered the differences of earnings and wealth here and in Cyprus, the amount would be something like £50,000,000 or £60,000,000 levied in this country each year. If they were bound in honour so to fleece these miserable people, then they were, indeed, placed in a very melancholy position. In his opinion, the Government were bound in honour to see that the poor people of the Island were relieved from that heavy burden.

Sir, a considerable part of the able speeches of my hon. Friends the Mover and Seconder referred to the past, and expressed the opinions which they entertained on the past policy with respect to Cyprus. I do not intend to follow them in any portions of that discussion, and the only points I shall make will be in reference to what has fallen from the hon. Member for Hertford (Mr. A. Balfour). While I may say that I have often listened to him in this House with pleasure, I do not think that on this occasion there was a single word of that speech with which I was able to agree. But the regret with which I am filled on that account is somewhat mitigated by a reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff), with whom I differ as to the Department in this country under which Cyprus should be administered, but who I was glad to hear raising his voice, as I am bound to say he has done on several occasions before, in favour of highly liberal measures with reference to the populations of the Levant. I am compelled to enter a summary protest against the doctrines laid down by the hon. Member for Hertford, lest it should be supposed for a moment that I acquiesce in them. I will not argue them. It is not necessary to do so. It is no part of our duty, charged as we are with other obligations, to go back on this question. But I must say that I entirely differ from his observations to the effect that the Convention by which Cyprus was acquired is public law; that the secrecy in which the Convention was negotiated was analogous to the secrecy or privacy which up to a certain extent commonly obtains in diplomatic arrangements; that the French Code is to be taken as forming the general basis of the law of Cyprus; that we were compelled to administer the Island either by Turkish or English officials, as if no such thing as Cypriote Christians or Cypriote Greeks existed; and that my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) misdescribed the Ordinances to which his Resolution refers. The point on which he came nearest was the Ordinance with respect to land, and there he drew an ingenious comparison between the case of the purchase of land in Cyprus and the contraction of marriage in this country. He said that as no person can contract marriage in this country without leave, so no person could purchase land in Cyprus, except Turkish or English subjects, without leave. But a good deal depends on the means you have of obtaining possession. I believe that if a person wants to be married in this country, and asks permission, he could compel those who give the permission, or go through the form of giving it, to give that permission. If they refuse, I take it that the Courts of Law could compel that permission to be given. Is that the case in Cyprus? Is there any process by which the foreigner could compel the Commissioner to permit him to purchase land? My hon. Friend (Mr. A. Balfour) says that in no case has the permission been refused. Can he tell us in how many cases it has been applied for? I am not aware that he can say that it was ever applied for. On that subject his information does not seem to be copious. He is safe in saying it has never been refused if it has never been applied for. But the comparison with marriage in England will not hold. The parallel would hold if we had a marriage law like this—"That from and after the passing of this ordinance no person other than a subject of the Porte or of Great Britain shall be permitted to marry," with a further section saying—"Provided that it shall be lawful for the Queen, under her hand and seal, to allow, under such conditions as she may think fit, such marriage to take place." Yet that is the form of this Ordinance with respect to the purchase of land in Cyprus. There is no title to ask permission; but power is given to the supreme authority authorizing the thing to be done. It is not necessary to go fully into the question of Ordinances; they are, for all practical purposes, defunct. With regard to the instructions for which the Mover of the Motion asks, undoubtedly the introduction of elective institutions into Cyprus is a matter requiring some time and consideration. No precipitate steps can be taken. At the same time, it is to be borne in mind that an election is a thing not unknown even in Turkish institutions. It is not effective. It does not generate that sense of the value of liberty, or those habits of mind connected with liberty, which are well known to us in the West. At the same time, there is a basis in the fact that the practice of elections is to some extent familiar in Turkey, and it would be wrong in a British Government if it did not endeavour to turn to account the first commencement, those initial elements of a good system, which we find, to a certain extent, ready to our hands; and I am glad to find that the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff), who has been labouring in the East among a population not altogether remote in civilization from the Cypriotes, has given his voice distinctly in favour of what may be called institutions partaking of the principle of freedom in Cyprus. The question of the payment to Turkey was hardly contemplated in the Notice of Motion, and I do not know that it can be made the subject of beneficial discussion. We found certain facts before us. The payments which have been made formed, primâ facie, a rule for us; but I am bound to say that I think that when the British and Turkish Governments had to consider together the nature and amount of this payment they met upon very unequal terms. It was very easy for the Turkish Government to make out an extremely favourable account of the receipts to be had from the Island; very difficult for the British Government to check that amount or reduce it to its true proportions. The whole mode of the chaotic finances of Turkey made it easy for the Turks, under cover of the darkness, to set up an extravagant claim; and it may be that, without any fault on the part of the late Government, Turkey is receiving far more than she actually netted from the Island when it was under her own dominion; but I do not see that it is open to us to alter that so long as the system of annual payment is continued. Nothing could be worse than to attempt to escape the spirit of the Convention in regard to pecuniary matters. I wish to say one word on my own behalf. I am reported to have stated that this Convention was an instrument which we could not withdraw from. I believe that what I actually stated was that it was an instrument with respect to the matter of which we are not so free as we were before it was concluded. I did not say anything about withdrawing from it. I do not wish to point to a particular issue; but I merely intended to convey the idea that we must regard it as an abridgment of the freedom which, but for that, we should have enjoyed. The Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has gone over with great care and clearness the whole of the points embraced in the Motion, and I cannot too distinctly give my adhesion to all that fell from him. He avoided most justly all that may be called controversial matter, and I wish to follow his example, and to rest content with his statement, as I hope my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) will rest content. But I wish to express my difference with the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff), with regard to the transfer of the administration of the government of Cyprus from the Foreign to the Colonial Office. The hon. Member referred to the case of the Ionian Islands as supplying us with a warning against this transfer. He appeared to think that the case of the Ionian Islands would have been better if the administration had remained under the Foreign Office. Upon that I observe that the case, primâ facie, of the administration of the Ionian Islands by the Foreign Department was very much stronger than the case with regard to Cyprus. The case of the Ionian Islands was that by the public law of Europe those Islands continued to constitute a separate Sovereign Independent State. They were so declared. It was a different position from that of Cyprus, where we appear as feudatories or vassals of the Sultan. But Cyprus never has in recent times occupied the position of a Sovereign and independent State. I wish to say, therefore, that the opinion of the Government of that day as to the incapacity of the Foreign Office for administration of this hind was very strong, and although the national basis of the Seven Islands—the Septinsular Republic—was separate, it was thought that its affairs would be better administered under the Colonial Department. The question as to which of the two Departments is the fittest really turns very much on a prior or independent question—namely, what is our main business in Cyprus? I will not speak of the ideas with which the acquisition or occupation of Cyprus was undertaken, but of the ideas which undoubtedly we have applied. In our view, our main business in Cyprus is the good government of the people of Cyprus. It is to study their welfare, and not only to study their welfare through the medium of that rare phenomena, a benevolent despotism, but, so far as may be prudent, in connection with the introduction of institutions of self-government. In the Colonial Office the Minister who had charge has had continually to handle and guide the relations with free government, and it has been his business continually for the last 40 or 50 years to promote the foundation and development of free institutions in different Dependencies of the Crown. Therefore, from the nature of the employment, the Colonial Office has been in close and congenial connection with every part of the business that should employ Great Britain in respect to the Island of Cyprus. I own that I am of opinion—not from any blame to those holding office in the Foreign Department, but from the characteristics of the Department upon which I have just touched—I am of opinion that had the late Government placed Cyprus under the Colonial De- partment, much greater progress would have been made through the aptitude of that Department towards the establishment of a thoroughly satisfactory system of government in the Island. I have no doubt that the British officers there have acted honourably and conscientiously; but undoubtedly their ideas and opinions have, in some cases, been exceedingly foreign to the Constitution and predilections of this country; and I think that these are opinions and ideas that could not for a moment have lived in the atmosphere of the Colonial Office. It was by that atmosphere that the Ionian Islands were gradually brought forward to such development that, even if they had continued their connection with this country, they would have enjoyed in almost every important particular the advantages of self-government; and when they obtained what, perhaps, they would call their emancipation of this country, it was not with a view to the removal of grievances, but to give expression to their laudable and natural feelings of nationality. The prevalent use of English as the judicial language of the country, the obligation imposed upon the people of Cyprus to make their pleas in the English language, to employ interpreters, and to bear the expense of those interpreters—this had been the case under the Foreign Office; but under the Colonial Office it would have been different. They would at once have followed the case of the Ionian Islands. What was done in that case? The administration of justice was conducted in the Greek language. There are two or three Judges of Appeal who are Englishmen; but they are conversant with the Greek language, and, as Judges of the people, of course stand on an entirely different footing from that occupied by the Judges of the ordinary tribunals of the country. The hon. Member for Portsmouth referred to the case of Austria and Novi Bazar, and said that that case was analogous to our possession of Cyprus; but I never heard that Austria attempted to administer Herzegovina and Bosnia through the medium of her Foreign Office. I am not speaking of this as a charge against the late Government. I do understand the great difficulties raised by the capitulations in the Island of Cyprus, and the immediate handling of questions of that kind is congenial to the purposes and habits of the Foreign Office; but with regard to these capitulations, whether we administer through the Foreign Office or through the Colonial Office, it is mainly on the forbearance of foreign Governments we must depend rather than on any means which the ingenuity of our lawyers may supply in profound argument adequate to the solution of the different cases that may arise. When my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) spoke with some disparagement of the advantages of the Profession, he was received with expressions which I think it better to avoid. There is no benefit in reviving old disputes. I would respectfully recommend to hon. Gentlemen on the other side the careful perusal of a most admirable volume on this subject by Sir Samuel Baker. It contains a great deal of information. The testimony of Sir Samuel Baker respecting Cyprus might be received by hon. Gentlemen opposite as that of a friendly witness. There is another authority whom I may recommend them to consult — Admiral Sir Fanshawe Martin — who is always straightforward and speaks with great gravity and candour. These are witnesses of the highest order, to whom the friends of the original occupation of Cyprus may listen without fear that they are going to do injustice to the views they are accustomed to take. I trust my hon. Friend will be satisfied with the discussion which has taken place and withdraw his Motion. We have hitherto lost no time in considering this matter. I do not know that it will be in our power to be equally expeditious in the various steps that remain to be gone through. It is far from my wish to insinuate that we could do anything the late Government would not have done, or more than they would have done. I trust what will be done will be in the same direction and with the same end. At any rate, we are able to approach the subject without prejudice. We have no expectations that would divert us from, our primary duty to the country of considering how best we can discharge our obligations to the inhabitants of Cyprus. And, on the other hand, whatever doubt there may be as to the Anglo-Turkish Convention in its inception, we cannot treat it as non-existent, or measure our ideas of its force by the degree of approval which it met with among its promoters. It will be our duty to examine carefully every step we take in a matter which, though on a small theatre, is very complicated, hopeful of good results; but, if disappointed, still I trust my hon. Friend and the House will believe that we are perfectly in earnest in the motives which impel us to that course, and that we have a sound and true conception of the nature of the principles on which we should act.

said, he had no wish to prolong the discussion; but he could not allow it to close without saying a few words. The House, he thought, had no reason to regret this debate. He had nothing to complain of in the general tone adopted by the Members of the Government. He felt they had done what was wise and right in avoiding as far as possible any discussion of controverted questions as to the motives and objects of the occupation of Cyprus. They had done well in abstaining from discussions which must have been prolonged, and might have been inconvenient upon the general subject of the Anglo-Turkish Convention. He felt that the discussion, as originated by the hon. Members who brought it forward, and as continued by the Government, had been one of a practical character, having reference to the duties which the Government of this country owed to the population of Cyprus in the circumstances in which we now stood. Whether hon. Members were disposed to criticize, or to acquiesce in, the conduct of the late Government with regard to the commencement of our relations with Cyprus was a question which they need not now enter upon; it had been touched upon only very slightly. But the object which he had in rising was to say a very few words as to the difference between the position in which the Government now stood in relation to Cyprus, and the position in which the late Government stood in the beginning with regard to it, because in that position would be found an explanation of many points in which the policy of the present differed from that of the late Government. He would refer especially by way of illustration to the question of the Department under which the administration of Cyprus should be placed. He admitted there was great force in much that had fallen from the Prime Minister and the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs as to the advantages which the Colonial Office afforded over the Foreign Office for the administration of the British Dependencies, and that it might be found convenient and desirable at an early date to transfer the administration of Cyprus from one Department to the other. But the circumstances of the time when we became connected with Cyprus, and the peculiarity of our relations with it, rendered it absolutely necessary, for some time at all events, that the Foreign Office should be the Department principally charged with the affairs of the Island. The relations which had to be established were certainly of a very novel character. A great deal had to be arranged by the intervention of our Ambassador at the Porte. It was necessary that there should be harmony between our relations with Cyprus and our relations with the Porte through our Ambassador; and it would have been highly inconvenient that the matter should have been partly in the hands of the Colonial and partly in the hands of the Foreign Office. And then there were questions with foreign Powers which might easily have arisen, and were likely to have arisen, if in the beginning the administration of Cyprus had been handed over to a Department the very name of which would have implied a different relation from what the Government were then endeavouring to establish. It must not, therefore, be thought that he was expressing any opinion adverse to the transfer if it could properly be made. There was another point also on which a great deal could be said, and to which a similar remark applied. A great deal had been made of the Ordinance which prohibited the purchase of land. No doubt, in an ordinary state of things, such an Ordinance would be of a character not very easy to defend. But they must remember that at the time the Ordinance was passed we had not an ordinary state of things to deal with. It had been pointed out— and no persons were more conscious of it than Her Majesty's late Government— that an agreement had been entered into by which a certain annual payment was to be made by them to the Porte, which would be a very heavy tax on the resources of the Island. They had to pay out of the Revenues of the Island a sum absorbing much the largest portion of it. They had, at the same time, to endeavour to introduce improvements into the administration; and he need not say that the introduction of improvements into the administration of a Turkish Province at once involved considerable additional expense. They were unable any longer to tolerate a system of extortion which enabled business to be carried on with small salaries to the officials. They were obliged to pay higher salaries, and in many other ways to incur additional expense, without, at the same time, putting additional burdens on the population. In these circumstances, they had to look to their resources. There was one very obvious resource. A large portion of the Island consisted of waste lands, which were good for nothing, but which, by a proper system of management, might be made conducive to the advantage of the population, and from which, at the same time, some of the necessary revenue might be raised for the Porte. But at that time the novelty of our entering into Cyprus caused a great deal of excitement in very different quarters, and there seemed to be every probability that a large number of adventurers might come into the country, purchase large tracts of land for a mere nominal price, making fortunes for themselves in that way, and materially impeding, by the claims they would set up, works which the Government would have to do. In order, therefore, to prevent any inconvenient proceedings of that kind, the Ordinance was made to meet the circumstances of the case. The Ordinance was, no doubt, inconvenient, and somewhat peculiar, and he only mentioned it as illustrative of the different position of Her Majesty's Government now from that in which the late Government found themselves. In fact, the position of the present Government reminded him of the young lady who was going to learn music, and when she was told that the first six lessons would be very difficult, she said—"Let us begin, then, at the seventh." The Government were now beginning at the seventh lesson; and many of the difficulties which the late Government experienced were no longer in their way. The Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had pointed out that in some respects Her Majesty's Government were only giving effect to the intentions of their Predecessors. Though not familiar with all that was done in the Department, yet he knew the general spirit in which it was administered. He knew the desire of his noble Friend lately at the head of the Foreign Office to introduce as soon as possible into Cyprus those improvements which would make it what it ought to be—a model of administration for the Turkish Provinces. The Seconder of the Motion (Mr. II. Samuelson) twitted him with saying that that was the object we ought to set before us. Well, he always said it was an object we ought to set before us—to administer the Island in such a way that the Turkish Government might have a model they might copy. He said it was not the object with which we took the Island; but, having to administer the Island, it was an object we ought to have before us. If we had such an object, we must take care that our system did not differ so widely from the system in other parts of Turkey as to give the Porte the opportunity of saying—"Oh, your system is so widely different from that which prevails in other parts of our dominions that we cannot follow it." He believed in taking up the laws of the Turkish Empire, which were not in themselves bad, but were good in spirit; and, endeavouring to administer them in an honest and judicious manner, we should be doing good to the population of that Empire. He did not now desire to enter into any controversy, which, however, if invited, he would not shrink from. But he thought hon. Gentlemen had exercised a wise discretion in limiting the question to the best way of fulfilling obligations which, whether wisely or unwisely contracted, it was not necessary now to discuss.

said, that after the satisfactory statements of the Prime Minister and the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs he would ask permission to withdraw his Motion.

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to abolish the congé d'élire, and to make provision for the appointment of Archbishops and Bishops direct by Her Majesty's Letters Patent under the Great Seal. He sought, in short, to abolish a mere form which was a mockery, tending to bring religion and religious usages into ridicule. The Bill was introduced in what he considered the best and truest interests of the Church; and he maintained that the conge d'élire had been condemned by the almost unanimous voice both of the laity and the clergy of this country as a mockery, a delusion, and a snare. The Dean and Chapter were compelled, under the penalties of prœmunire, to elect the person named in the Letters Missive. It was a mockery to call that an election. In the reign of Edward VI. Bishoprics were made donative direct from the Crown. That was now the case with the Bishoprics of St. Alban's, Truro, and Liverpool. The responsibility of those appointments rested, as it ought to rest, with the Ministry of the day. They, and not the Deans and Chapters, were rightly intrusted with the important duty of selecting fit persons to fill the episcopal office. In Ireland, Bishoprics were made donative in the reign of Elizabeth, and so continued till the Disestablishment of the Irish Church. The confirmation of Bishops at Bow Church had more than once led to great scandal, when opposers were called upon to ap- pear and make their objections, and, when they did so, were declared contumacious for not appearing. In 1848 there was a discussion on this subject in the House of Lords with reference to the appointment of Bishop Hampden. Lord Chief Justice Denman said that it would be a great improvement in the law if Bishops were appointed directly by the Crown. The present mode of election was unhesitatingly condemned by two of the most respected Members of the Episcopal Bench— Bishop Thirlwail and Bishop Phillpotts. The object of this Bill was to give effect to that suggestion. The time had arrived when it was absolutely necessary that some change should be made in this matter. On a former occasion when he introduced a similar Bill, the hon. Member for Oxford University (Mr. J. G. Talbot) moved an Amendment to render the congé d'élire a reality, which it was not at present; but the present Secretary of State for the Home Department had pointed out in a former debate that that was to attack one of the fundamental principles of the Reformation. This Bill followed the lines of his former measures on this subject; he brought it forward in the best interests of religion and the Church, and he hoped the House would give it a second reading.

in the absence of the hon. and gallant Member for South Essex (Colonel Makins), who had given Notice of an Amendment, rose to move that the Bill be read a second time that day three months. The noble Lord said there was a great similarity between the arguments used by the author of the Bill and those employed by Mr. Brad-laugh on another occasion. The hon. Member for Gloucester wished to abolish the congé d'élire, and Mr. Bradlaugh wished to abolish the Parliamentary Oath, on the ground that they were mockeries. The hon. Member could hardly like to see himself in the same rank with Mr. Bradlaugh. He was extremely sceptical of statements put forward by hon. Gentlemen opposite in the interest of the Church of England. He claimed the right at least to be sceptical whether hon. Members opposite, in sup- porting such a Bill, really had the interests of the Church of England at heart. This ancient form and practice connected with the appointment of Bishops by the Crown must be of some utility, or it would have been abolished before, when they had Liberal Governments with little Whig tendencies about them. The House ought not to be in a hurry to abolish these forms merely on such plausible grounds as had been urged in the plausible speech to which they had just listened. It would bo desirable that Her Majesty's Government should express their views on the subject. Perhaps it was a question like the Public Worship Act, as to the repeal of which he understood the Government had not made up their minds. Her Majesty's present Ministers boasted of having the cordial support of the clergy, and it would be interesting to know whether they were in favour of abolishing a form which the majority of the clergy wished to uphold. He moved that the Bill be read a second time that day three months.

said, that on this occasion, though, probably, not on any other during his Parliamentary career, he should be found voting in the same Lobby with the noble Lord, because the form attacked was a relic of the struggles of the English people to secure the appointment of Bishops who should represent the national interest as against that of the Papacy; for the Bishops who were appointed in the time of Edward VI., and the Irish Bishops who were appointed in the last century, both without going through the form of the congé d'élire, were by no means model Bishops. It was true it was a form; but forms often enshrined great historical principles. This form should be retained in view of a time to come when the English Church would be free of all relations with the State, and then that which was now an empty form might become a solid reality. He, at least, should be sorry to see it got rid of. Deference to public opinion on the part of the clergy should be one of the means of checking among them disaffection to the laws of the land; and if the discipline of the clergy were in the hands of the Bishops, as that of the Bar was in the hands of the Benchers, public opinion would be strong enough to prevent any injustice being done. He hoped some day the whole Acts by which the clergy were governed would be swept away. In his opinion, the most unlucky thing to the Church was that benefices should have been treated as freeholds. 80 long as the Bishops were simply nominated by the Crown without respect or consideration whatever for the feelings of the clergy so long would there be disaffection among the clergy. He should certainly vote against the Motion.

said, that the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Monk) had a little strayed from his province in dealing with so important a matter. The hon. Member had not told the House that he had taken the opinion of the responsible Advisers of the Crown on what he proposed to do; and yet, if there was any question on which the opinion of the responsible Ministers of the Crown should be taken, it was one which affected, as this did, the relations between Church and State. He might be mistaken; but he thought it was worthy of note that neither of the two Ministers who were specially responsible in matters of this kind — the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for the Homo Department — should be in his place. Nor did he believe that their absence could be construed as giving a support to the Bill. From what he recollected of the opinions of the Prime Minister, he should be very much surprised if the right hon. Gentleman were not to give a very strong opposition to the Motion. He believed the Prime Minister agreed with the hon. Member for South-wark (Mr. Thorold Rogers) that ancient forms had to him a great value, because they often enshrined great principles. If ever such a melancholy time came when the English Church would be freed, as the hon. Member for Southwark called it, from all connection with the State, then he should be glad to see such an ancient form preserved. He objected to the Bill, in the first place, because it was brought forward by a private Mem- ber without the sanction of the Ministers of the Crown.

My hon. Friend forgets that I stated my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary expressed a decided opinion in favour of this measure.

observed, that that was at a time when the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not hold his present position; but what they wanted to know was, what was the opinion of the Home Secretary? The hon. Member for Gloucester, in introducing the Bill, relied very much on the St. Albans Act, the Truro Act, and the Bishoprics Act of 1878. It was true that with respect to these new Bishoprics no congé d'élire issued, because there was no Dean and Chapter to whom to issue it; but it was remarkable that provision was made for the revival of the congé d'élire in the future, after the foundation of the Dean and Chapter, for he found in Section 6 of the Bishoprics Act these words—

"From and after the foundation of such Dean and Chapter a vacancy in that Bishopric shall be filled in the same manner as a vacancy in any other Bishopric in England founded in the reign of any of Her Majesty's predecessors."

Therefore, the form which the hon. Member would repeal was recognized by the Act. Now, had a case been made out for so sweeping a change? He admitted that the present position was not satisfactory. That must be admitted by anyone having friendly feelings towards the Church of England. It could not be satisfactory to any friend of the Church that a form intended to be solemn should have something approaching to what might be called a mockery about it. But his way of treating such a matter was not the same as that of the hon. Member for Gloucester. The hon. Member for Gloucester, when he found what he called a "mockery," would do away with it. His idea, on the contrary, was to improve and amend it. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Home Secretary had once told him that his attempt to revive the true congé d'élire was opposed to one of the cardinal settlements of the Reformation. But the improvement he would suggest was in some such form as this. The Crown might issue the congé d'élire to the Dean and Chapter, and the Dean and Chapter, if they felt any objections, might state them; and he believed in nine eases out of ten such objections would be respectfully listened to by the responsible Advisers of the Crown. Even what the hon. Gentleman regarded as a mockery had a very good effect. It was useful that some of the most respected clergy might at least have the power to protest against what they regarded as an improper nomination. The hon. Gentleman had referred to the case of Dr. Hampden. It was true that the nomination in that case had not been withdrawn. Dr. Hampden became Bishop of Hereford; but no such appointment was made again. For the reasons he had given, because this Bill was brought forward without the advice of the Ministers of the Crown, because the form was at present not without its value, and might in future have a very great value, he could not assent to the Motion.

said, that the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. J. G. Talbot) was right in pointing out that in the new Bishoprics lately created—St. Albans, Truro, and Liverpool — there was a re-assertion, and, therefore, a reaffirmation, of the principle embodied in the Protest. He need hardly remind the House of the process which was pursued on these occasions. The hon. Gentleman said that the condition of affairs was not satisfactory. In one sense he confessed it was not satisfactory, and that was that a most solemn form was made use of by the Dean and Chapter in the election of the Bishop, which, at the time they made it, he was going to say, they must know to be a farce. The question under discussion was a part of a large and important subject, and as it interfered with the Prerogative of the Crown it was hardly competent to a private Member to bring it forward. It extended further than could be thought of at that moment—it was a part of the question of Church and State—and it should be taken up by the Government if dealt with at all. He must strongly deprecate hasty legislation on the question; and he could not, therefore, support the Bill of the hon. Gentleman.

wished to thank the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department for the temperate speech which he had delivered, and which had removed this question above the heated atmosphere in which ecclesiastical questions were gene- rally discussed. Did the hon. Member who introduced this Bill expect to carry the olive-branch in his mouth to their distracted Church? The hon. Gentleman had striven throughout his career to be a liberal Churchman; for, though devoted to the Church, he was very devoted indeed to Liberal progress. He asked him what was there progressive in the obliteration of the last form of constitutional election in the appointment of the chief pastors of the Church? The Bill of the hon. Member would really make Bishops appointed much in the same way as Poor Law Inspectors. If it had been proposed to give more reality and life to the congé d'élire —to make it, with a few modifications, a real review of the Minister's choice—he would have done a far better thing. Personally, he (Mr. Beresford Hope) approved of the selection vesting in the Prime Minister. The real merit of Ministerial patronage was that it gave to a competent person a power of choosing the best man with a wide scope; but this power ought not to be. If a means were devised by which a mistaken nomination might be refused, that would be a most excellent reformation. But any such reform as that would be made for ever impossible by the Bill of his hon. Friend. Once they made Bishops the mere nominees of the Crown, and they made election for ever impossible in any sense. The existing methods had always been observed, except in the few troubled years of Edward VI. All the Sees, whether of older date, or of the times of Henry VIII., William IV., and Victoria, were now under the same regime, and even in the six new Sees the same principle was prospectively recognized, so that it would apply whenever Deans and Chapters were created for those Sees; and future Bishops of Truro and Liverpool would be elected in the usual manner. He was not an advocate of the supercession of the present safeguards; and, on these grounds, he trusted that his hon. Friend would be satisfied with the discussion of his scheme and would withdraw the Bill.

said, that the Bill before the House was not one to which the Government had given any especial attention, as they had already too much on their hands. But it involved very numerous, weighty, and delicate con- siderations. He gave credit to the hon. Member who had moved the second reading of the Bill for his motives. In the minds of many the present form of electing Bishops was thought to cause scandal, and the hon. Member desired to remove that scandal and effect a practical improvement in the Church. He was not prepared to say that no improvement could be effected in ecclesiastical law in this matter, though he had no plan to propose with reference to that great matter of the form of election of Bishops. There was great force in what had been said by his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. A. Peel), and his advice to the House deserved great consideration. This appeared a small matter; but it was a portion of a very large subject which had proved its greatness by the place it had occupied in the most critical periods of our history. There was nothing that lay nearer the root of the constitution of the Church established in this Realm than the manner in which its Bishops were appointed. He was bound, in fairness and honesty, to express the opinion that, while he gladly gave assent to what had been urged by the promoter of the Bill, it was not to be denied that the existence of a certain moral check—for it was no more than a moral check—upon the Prerogative of the Crown worked well rather than ill, apart altogether from the form in which that check was exercised. He thought this might be proved by history. There was one remarkable instance in the experience of the Established Church of Ireland which afforded an illustration of the operation of this principle. In the time, he thought, of Sir Robert Walpole, the Minister of the day wanted to appoint a certain Dr. Rundle to a Bishopric; but on account of doctrines which that gentleman held, his nomination to an English Bishopric was opposed in the Chapter to which it was proposed to send him. What did Sir Robert Walpole do? He abandoned his intention of appointing him to a Bishopric in England, and transferred him to Ireland, where there was no necessity for the congé d'élire, and where, consequently, he could exercise his choice with greater freedom than he could show on this side of the water. Another illustration might be found nearer to our own time, and it was in a case in which he was himself con- cerned. He need not scruple to mention the name of the distinguished individual immediately concerned, for he believed whatever prejudice formerly existed against that distinguished individual had been completely dissipated since he was raised to the Episcopal Bench. He spoke of Dr. Temple, the Bishop of Exeter. When he (Mr. Gladstone) thought it his duty to recommend Dr. Temple to the Crown for this appointment, and Her Majesty was pleased to give effect to the recommendation, there was considerable excitement in the country on account of the accidental association of the name of certain works of Dr. Temple with other works which, rightly or wrongly, had given rise to a great deal of alarm. On that ground there was a disposition to object very strongly to the appointment. The matter was discussed amongst the gentlemen forming the Chapter of Exeter. It was rather a large Chapter, and wholly undistinguished by any colour of party, as far as opinions in the Church were concerned, and the leading members of that Chapter advised their brethren to this effect — that if there had been good and canonical grounds of objection to the doctrines of Dr. Temple, it would have been their duty to decline to elect; but there were no such grounds, and, consequently, they would do wisely in forbearing to give way to the popular outcry, and in electing that distinguished gentleman. He was elected, duly consecrated, and no more faithful, diligent, learned, or beloved Bishop had ever filled the See. Having come in contact with that institution, he (Mr. Gladstone) was by no means prepared to say that, from partial information or error, a Minister might make an appointment to which this moral obstacle might not be set up with very beneficial effect. It would tend to secure care in the selections, and its importance could not be overstated. He could not also refrain from reflecting that election and representation were one of the oldest institutions of the Christian Church. There was no greater error than to think that the Constitution of the Church, as derived from early times, was founded on an autocracy. It was, indeed, the boast of ecclesiastical historians that it was this ecclesiastical election and representation which first suggested the idea of representative political assemblies. Whe- ther that were so or not, he knew that this principle of election was widely practised amongst Christians of all denominations. Their Nonconformist brethren, most justly and wisely, attached vital importance to it. If they took the ease of the Church of Scotland, they found that, notwithstanding the existence of Establishment, great scope was allowed, and additional scope had lately been given to this principle of election. He admitted that in the present case it had a very partial application. The old principle was election by the Church and assent by the laity. This was the sole relic of that system. If the time came and proper opportunity arose, he would rather endeavour to inquire whether they should not try to substitute for it some improved form, rather than sweep away that which was a witness of what was in itself good, and enshrined some remnants of an institution of the past. Considering how this matter was associated with one of the most high and delicate Prerogatives of the Crown—namely, the government of the Church—he thought it must be admitted that this subject was one which could hardly be touched with advantage except after full consideration by the Executive Government, and upon the responsibility of the Executive Government. He respectfully expressed the opinion that while it was an advantage that attention should have been drawn to the subject, in the hope that upon suitable opportunity some improved method of procedure might be happily suggested, yet, at the present moment, he doubted whether good would attend the prosecution of this measure, and he recommended that it should not be proceeded with.

who agreed almost entirely with everything that the Prime Minister had said, opposed the Bill, because its tendency was subversive of Church and State. There could be no doubt that in case of a conflict between a Chapter and the Crown the former must be overruled; but, nevertheless, it was important that the Church should have as potent a voice as possible in the election of her Bishops. He could conceive a Chapter facing the penalties even of a prœmunire rather than vote against their conscience for a nominee of the Crown of whom they disapproved. He had put down a Notice of Motion for rejecting the Bill; but after what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman he did not think it necessary to detain the House at any length.

said, that although the Prime Minister regarded the institution of the congé d'élire as involving a mere moral check, yet there had been wishes expressed on the other side that it might grow into a real and legal cheek. Against this last idea he distinctly objected, holding that so long as the Church of England remained established, it was necessary, as a safeguard against the dangers that might result from the wealth and position of the clergy, to have the authority of the State firmly maintained. But if this institution was to remain a germ, and never develop into a reality, then it would become nothing better than a solemn farce, for it was not the case that it gave any protection to the Church for the exclusion of a nominated Bishop, for, besides the penalties of prœmunire, resistance became useless, and, in case of refusal to elect, Letters Patent would issue as if there had been no opposition at all. Hon. Members who were so sensitive to the high tone and character of the Church should oppose a ceremonial which was only a mockery. Strong feeling had been excited lately—and he would not say unnaturally—against what was construed as the obtrusive parade of a disposition to make a farce of a solemn ceremony. But he would ask those hon. Members whether the accompaniment of this act of election with a solemn religious ceremony, while the Dean and Chapter knew they had no choice in the matter, but could only register the wishes of the Prime Minister, was not equally unreal and insincere—whether they who had shown themselves so sensitive on one point were not making themselves equally guilty of a similar desecration of a solemn ceremony on another point? He hoped the hon. Member would find support to induce him to divide, when he should certainly vote with him.

felt no embarrassment in stating the views he held as a Nonconformist. On the one hand it was asked, could the form be maintained which had been denounced by some as a mockery, and others as a delusion? and, on the other hand, it had been said some Churchmen wished to maintain the form, in the hope that at some day it might be clothed with substance and reality, that at some future time there might be an actual, a real representation of the Church in the appointment of her chief pastors. But from what had been done in the case of the Irish Church, it would seem that it was vain to hope that the Church would have a representative and independent voice so long as the present relations continued with the State. As a Nonconformist, he felt he should be meeting the views of both sides if he supported the Bill of the hon. Member to get rid of a sham, and assisted those who looked forward to the times when there should be real and actual representation of the Church. He avowed the best of all feelings towards the spiritual institutions of the Church; but he should vote for the removal of a sham and empty form, and he was satisfied that in the minds of all Nonconformists and Presbyterians the only marvel was that it should have been tolerated so long.

felt it would be his duty to take the sense of the House upon the Motion for the second reading of the Bill.