the amounts paid by those tenants, and he thought there would be the greatest difficulty in reducing the interest. No doubt, however, something might be done, and it was a matter which would continue to receive the earnest attention of the Government. It had been said by some that this was a landlords' Bill, and by others that it was a tenants' Bill. It appeared to him that the great recommendation of the Bill was that it was neither a landlords' Bill nor a tenants' Bill, but that it was a Bill from which both landlords and tenants might derive certain advantages if they availed themselves of it. He wished to point out, what had been already pointed out by the hon. Members for County Londonderry (Mr. Lewis) and for Monaghan (Mr. Findlater), that although this Bill might not be perfect in every part, yet if the House approved the principle the best way to allow the principle to be carried out was to permit the Bill to pass a second reading, and to make such Amendments as were necessary in Committee. A Bill might be killed either by active opposition or by protracted discussion; but he hoped that hon. Members would see in this Bill the germ of an earnest effort to do something for Ireland, and would therefore withdraw their opposition in order that its merits might be tested, and that, therefore, they would permit the Bill to pass. As he had been permitted to say so much, he might, perhaps, add a hope that as the House had now spent a very considerable time in discussing the principle of the measure, and as the Government intended to put down the next stage for an early day, hon. Members would now allow the discussion to cease, and the second reading of the Bill to be taken. MR. SAMUEL SMITH: I wish to congratulate the House on the introduction of this Bill, and I do so as representing a constituency having a large Irish population, in whom I take a very keen interest. The Bill is a generous Bill, and in that respect it is politic, for all legislation dealing with Ireland, in order to be politic, ought to be generous. The Bill, in my opinion, also contains within itself the seeds of something like a final settlement of the Irish difficulty as regards the Land Question. I especially congratulate the House upon the very friendly way in which the Bill has been received by all sections of opinion, and especially by the section which is led by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell). I do not think we can too highly congratulate, both ourselves and the country at large, upon the great change in the tone of Irish opinion in this House. It is a matter for very hearty congratulation that we have at last reached a method of speaking about Irish questions which is a great deal more rational than what has been the custom for many years past. I believe, myself, that if this Bill is heartily accepted by the Members of the Party who follow the lead of the hon. Member for the City of Cork, it will pave the way, at no distant date, for a very wide extension of its terms. It, no doubt, is an experiment; but that experiment may be developed to a very large degree, and may become the means of settling the controversy about the land in Ireland. I wish to say how entirely I approve of the measure, and how heartily, speaking from the Liberal side of the House, I wish it God-speed. I think it is a thoroughly wise measure. It has already produced excellent effects on public opinion, and I join with all who have discussed this subject in hoping and trusting that it will turn out to be a solution of one of the greatestif not the very greatest-of Irish difficulties. MR. BIGGAR said, that if the Bill were intended to be the beginning of the general purchase of their holdings by tenants, it was unreasonable to suppose that the Church Surplus would offer any security for the payment. It might be a valuable security if the purchases were not to exceed £5,000,000; but it would be of no value if the Bill were extended beyond that. He considered the Bill carried out the principles of the National League, therefore he was very anxious that it should succeed; but its success depended not so much upon what was in the Bill as upon its administration. He also thought that what the Government ought to do was to regard the measure as an experiment, a commencement with the question of Land Purchase, and should give the Commissioners instructions that they must, if possible, conduct the business in such a way as to deal with the whole of this £5,000,000 of property within the next three months after the Bill had become law. If the Commissioners waited till the landlords could screw an extravagant price from | regard to the Islands of the Pacific, he their tenants no business would be done. must be allowed to express the opinion He believed that many tenants wished that it would be imprudent to give to to buy their holdings; but they wanted Australia, so long as it remained under to buy as cheap as they could. He the British flag, the power to assume thought that the first transactions ought protection over the Natives of the Islands to take place at the present price, and a of the Pacific. The alienation between beginning might be made by the new this country and Germany took place Commissioners buying properties which with reference to the excessive pretenhad been some time in the Landed sions of Queensland to deal with one of Estates Court. the Pacific Islands. He believed that the Australians would be much better off if they followed the example of the American Colonies, and developed their own territories, and did all that it was possible for them to do in that direction, without seeking foreign possessions, and endeavouring to entangle themselves in foreign complications. Question put, and agreed to. Bill read a second time, and committed for Friday. FEDERAL COUNCIL OF AUSTRALASIA (Secretary Colonel Stanley.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."-(Secretary Colonel Stanley.) SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL said, that he was very much inclined to think that the people who called themselves the Colonists were but a very small number of persons at either end of the telegraph wire leading to Australia, and he had seen papers which led him very greatly to doubt if the Australian Colonists really wanted this Bill. If the Australian Colonies saw their way to any complete scheme of federation he wished them God-speed. He knew, however, that New South Wales and New Zealand had both declared their dislike to the Bill and their intention not to accept it; and it was, therefore, very doubtful whether it was worth while for Her Majesty's Government to proceed with the measure. It was for that reason that he had blocked it. Personally, he did not object to the Bill, with one important exception, and he should be glad to see the Australian Colonies and Her Majesty's Government settle the matter between them. But he decidedly objected to that clause in the Bill which enabled the Australasian Colonies to deal with what was called the relations of Australia to the Islands of the Pacific. He did not know what was meant by that expression; but he had very grave doubts whether it was prudent to put such a provision in the Bill. Dealing with the question of New Guinea and the disputes which had occurred with Mr. Biggar MR. BRYCE said, he much regretted that a Bill of that importance should have been brought before the notice of the House on such scanty information, and when hon. Members were in pos session of so little information as to the sentiments of the Colonies themselves. It was true that a certain number of Parliamentary Papers had been presented; but the information which they contained was, he thought, hardly sufficient to enable the House to appreciate the whole bearings of the question, and to understand what were the feelings with which the proposals had been received in the Colonies during the last few months. He thought it would have been valuable to the House if the Colonial Office had prepared a sort of explanatory Memorandum giving a view of the whole matter and a justification of the whole Bill. When the House of Commons was asked to undertake a function so large as that of drawing up a Constitution for communities already great, and which were likely to become infinitely greater in the future, it ought to approach a task of that kind with a due sense of responsibility and on accurate information and knowledge. He thought also there was no evidence to show that this Bill, or draft Constitution, had really been satisfactorily discussed and considered in the Colonies themselves. It appeared to have emanated in the first instance from a small coterie or conclave of Prime Ministers, and the House had nothing to show them that the best minds of our Colonies had been properly brought to bear in the consideration of the subject. The Bill would have come Australasia Bill. 1122 before the House with greater authority was glad to see that the Federal if it had reason to believe that proper Council, under this Bill, had power to pains had been bestowed upon it, and legislate on these subjects, on quaranthat proper efforts had been made to tine, on bills of exchange, and other obtain full publicity and discussion for such matters. As regarded the utility it in the Australian Colonies themselves. of the Federal Legislature, if he might He thought that the circumstances he so call it, for the purpose of introducing had mentioned made the position of the a uniform system of private law, he Imperial Parliament not quite a satis- thought it would be very desirable to factory one in dealing with this mat- increase the size of the Council, for he ter. In considering the character of thought, as at present devised, it was the Bill, and its liability to a certain too small for the adequate discussion of line of criticism, he said it was clear the subjects with which it would have that it was a very scanty, fragmentary, to deal. But in that, as in other reand imperfect sketch of a Federal Con- spects, he looked upon the Bill more as stitution. Looking even at that im- a first sketch than as a complete Conportant clause which provided that any stitution; and he could not help believone Colony could withdraw from the ing that further legislation would be refederation, he said if the House were quired, and that the outline contained in free to debate the subject at length a that measure would have hereafter to be great deal of time might be spent over filled up and developed in various parthe consideration of this clause alone; ticulars. because a federation, which offered to any member of it the right to withdraw as soon as its wishes were not gratified, was clearly a federation of the feeblest and most transitory kind. He was content, however, that they should pass the Bill in the form in which the Colonial authorities had asked us to do so, and as a matter of favour to them; but the responsibility for its formation would substantially rest more with them than He looked with more hope with us. to the establishment of closer relations between the Executive authority here and the Colonies than to a federation among the Colonies themselves. The real value of this Constitution seemed to him to lie in the provision which it made for the introduction of uniform legislation among the different Colonies, and particularly for the introduction of a uniform system of legal process and of private law in those matters in which the inhabitants of different Colonies were most likely to come into relation with one another. The experience of the United States, which was the great source of experience in these matters, showed how much advantage there was in having-how much might be lost by not having a uniform system of legislation on certain subjects of common interest. It would be, for instance, of immense advantage for the United States to have a uniform Law of Marriage and Divorce. It was one of the great difficulties which legal reformers had to deal with in America; and he VOL. CCC. [THIRD SERIES.] Question put, and agreed to. (In the Committee.) Clauses 1 to 14, inclusive, agreed to. Clause 15 (Matters subject to legislative authority of Council). MR. BRYCE said, he wished, after the word "copyright," in line 41, to It was true that unless the right hon. have the word "bankruptcy" inserted. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Stanley) would not be of use for him to propose were favourable to this Amendment it it; but he wished to point out that bankothers, it was desirable that there should ruptcy was a subject upon which, of all be uniformity of legislation as between the different States. If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman did not object to this proposal, he would suggest to him that the word "bankruptcy" might be properly included in the clause. Amendment proposed, in page 3, line 41, after the word " copyright," to insert the word "bankruptcy." — (Mr. Bryce.) the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Bryce); but he would venture to ask the hon. Member not to press the Amendment. If the hon. Member would look to Clause 4 he would find that there was power to refer to the Council any matter of general interest, and that, therefore, the subject of the Amendment was already within the scope of the Bill. MR. BRYCE said, he admitted that it was within the scope of the Bill. He thought it desirable, however, to emphasize the particular subject of bankruptcy for the reason he had given; but after the expression of opinion on the part of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, he had no objection, with the permission of the Committee, to withdraw his Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clauses 16 and 17 agreed to. Clause 18 (Power to Her Majesty to disallow Act to which Governor has assented in Her Majesty's name). MR. BRYCE said, he had placed on the Paper an Amendment which was intended to make the clause clearer in respect of acts done between the date of assent and the time of annulment. He apprehended that upon a strict legal construction of the clause a Court of Law would hold that an act done between the date of giving assent and the date of annulment would be protected. Subject to the opinion of the hon. and learned Solicitor General he thought that would be so; but he also thought it would be worth while to make the matter quite clear, so that acts done after assent given by the Colonial Government would be certain of being protected. If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Colonies did not object, he should like to have the words of his Amendment introduced into the clause. Amendment proposed, In page 4, at end, add-"But without prejudice to any act done or right acquired between the date of such assent and the day of such signification of annulment."-(Mr. Bryce.) Question proposed, "That those words be there added." THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Colonel STANLEY) said, he regretted very much to have to ask the hon. Member (Mr. Bryce) not to press this Amendment. He Colonel Stanley thought it would be premature to deal with the question; and he was afraid, if these words were to be put into the Act, that it might lead to the presumption that the rule hitherto existing had been disturbed. He understood that the Amendment might draw a distinction between the custom prevailing in one Colony and the customs prevailing in others. For that reason, and because he thought the Acts in question would be protected by the clause as it stood, he asked the hon. Member not to press the Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clauses 19 to 28, inclusive, agreed to. Clause 29 (Power to determine operation of Act in any Colony). THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Colonel STANLEY) said, he regretted that the Amendment he was about to ask the Committee to assent to was not upon the Notice Paper. He understood that his Predecessor in Office had given a promise that the words after "Council" to the end of the clause should be omitted, and others substituted relating to the repeal of certain Acts. It had been held that it would be distinctly productive of harm if a law, passed by the assent of the Colonies united in Council, should be repealed by a particular Colony, which might be the Colony in respect of which that law was originally passed by the Federal Council. In moving this Amendment, he pointed out that power was taken providing that no assent would be given to any Act which did not contain proper safeguards for all sions of this clause. that might take place under the provi Amendment proposed, In page 6, to omit all the words after "Council to the end of the Clause, in order to insert"unless altered or repealed by the Council."-(Colonel Stanley.) Amendment agreed to. Preamble. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he had tion of the Bill; but he might be allowed no wish to delay the further considerato remark that this was a very tentative measure. He was not sure, however, that it would be less likely to succeed on that account. He thought he should be expressing the general feeling of the Committee by expressing regret that the circumstances in which the former Bill most important of the Australasian Co- was introduced had given some excuse lonies New South Wales and New for the introduction of the words, inasZealand-were not included in the Bill, much as there was a very eminent because he thought that nothing like a Scotchman thoroughly versed in and complete federation policy could be ob- able to manage Scotch affairs, and more tained without those two Colonies giving popular in Scotland than any other-he their adhesion to it. He thought, how- meant the Earl of Rosebery-who had ever, that their union with the Colonies the misfortune to be a Member of the could not be injured or damaged by the House of Lords; therefore, he said that confederation of the Colonies amongst the circumstances were peculiar. But if themselves, and that the tentative way the new Secretary were to be a Member in which the Bill had been passed would of the House of Lords the arrangemeut conduce to all the Colonies joining in would be attended with the utmost inthe movement hereafter, which would convenience. Let hon. Members imagine be lasting, and for the good of the what the state of things would be if the whole. Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, instead of being a Member of that House in which he was present Preamble agreed to. Bill reported; as amended, to be con- every day to answer Questions, were a sidered To-morrow. SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND BILL [Lords.]--[BILL 242.] (Secretary Sir R. Assheton Cross.) COMMITTEE. [Progress 3rd August.] Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) Clause 3 (Secretary may sit in Parliament). SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL said, the Amendment he rose to move, although verbal, was one of considerable importance. It had been admitted, in a former discussion on the Bill, that the words "if not a Member of the House of Lords" were merely permissive, though if they meant anything at all they pointed to the new Secretary being a Member of the House of Lords; but if they meant nothing, then he said that they might as well be omitted. He accepted the declaration which the hon. Member for Buteshire (Mr. Dalrymple) made on going into Committee, that it was not intended to allocate this Office either to the House of Lords or to the House of Commons. Therefore, he might assume that the words were not intended to imply that this officer should be a Member of the House of Lords; but, at the same time, the putting in of the words pointed to the probability of his being sometimes a Member of the other House of Parliament, and therefore he thought they were dangerous, and ought to be omitted from the Bill. He admitted that the Member of the House of Lords. Why, Irish Members would not be able to get their Questions answered; and he said that if they were to constitute a Secretary for Scotland, Scotch Members would want to get at him every day and have their Questions answered. It seemed to him only reasonable, then, that the new officer should be a Member of that House, and not of the House of Lords, so that he might always be present to give information upon the various subjects connected with Scotland. Again, all the present Ministers who sat in the House of Lords had Secretaries in the House of Commons; but in this Bill there was no provision for anything of the kind. There was a provision for a certain staff of secretaries and clerks, but there was no provision for any one of them having a seat in that House; and, therefore, if the new officer were to be a Member of the other House of Parliament he would be utterly unrepresented in the House of Commons. Then to say that the Lord Advocate could give answers with regard to a Department not his own would be humiliating to the Lord Advocate, who, in that case, would not express his own opinions, but be merely the mouthpiece of another person, with whom he had no official connection. Having shown the great inconvenience that would arise from the Secretary for Scotland being a Member of the House of Lords, he wanted to make the Bill state clearly one way or the other what was intended; and, therefore, bearing in |