some new arrangement should be come to with regard to persons who had naturalized themselves in that country. It was doubtless very pleasing and very easy to say that, but it was difficult to legislate in such a direction. On the one hand, the naturalborn subjects of this country-including those who were born during the temporary residence here of their parents-who went to the United States, were claimed by us as British-born subjects, who could not throw off their allegiance; while, on the other hand, the United Sates enjoined on such persons, when they chose to become citizens of that country, that they should cease to owe allegiance to their native country. That was not the case here, because the statute 7 & 8 Vict. enacted that when any person became naturalized in this country he should not be asked to abandon his native allegiance, but merely to bear allegiance to the Sovereign during his residence here; and by the tenor of the certificate, if he is absent from this country without permission for more than six months he loses his rights of naturalization, while, at the same time, our laws declared that a natural-born subject could not cast of his allegiance by any means. It was, however, now proposed that we should pass a law by which the British-born subject naturalized in America should become to all intents and purpose an American citizen. He repeated that it was very easy to make that proposal, but before such a law could be passed it would be necessary to look carefully through the statute book, to see what consequences might flow from such legislation affecting the interests in real property in this country, and the rights of those persons who went to America and were there naturalized, and of their children. Another most material question to consider was the subject of repatriation. The hon. Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster) had said that, by the Prussian treaty, it was provided that a Prussian subject who had been naturalized in America, and who then returned to Prussia or the German Confederation without intending to return to America, would be deemed to have renounced his rights to American citizenship. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER: After residence for two years.] He did not, however, understand what were to be the rights of a man who had so returned to the country of his birth, or what was the effect of his temporary expatriation. MR. W. E. FORSTER: Upon his re turn he is treated as an American citizen until the expiration of the two years. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL understood the hon. Gentleman to say that after that time he was no longer to be regarded as an American citizen or to be treated as such. But this was one of those cases in which there was a great deal of difficulty in entering into an arrangement. He could not help thinking that before any treaty or arrangement was made upon this subject, however willing we might be to enter into such an arrangement, the rights of our countrymen who went to America, and were naturalized ought to be fully considered, and the effect that any proposals would have upon some of our laws-the laws of inheritance, for instance, also considered. He did not wish at the present moment to enlarge upon that subject. It should be remembered that our municipal law had been to a great extent copied in the United States, and that a child born in this country, of a citizen of the United States, was claimed to be a citizen of the United States. He was not going to discuss the construction which the hon. Member had put upon the statutes, but it was quite clear that before this matter was determined by treaty or any arrangement was entered into, great care should be taken to see how far the law of this country would be affected, and how far the rights of British citizens would be compromised by interference with the statute law. POSTAL SUBSIDIES.-RESOLUTION. Mr. BAXTER said, he moved that, in the opinion of this House, no Postal Subsidies in the form of a fixed payment, and not dependent on the number of letters and newspapers carried, should be granted where ordinary traffic supports several lines of passenger steamers, as is the case between this country and the United States of America. The only case in which this Motion, if carried, would have a practical effect, would be that of the postal service between this country and the United States, and the only effect would be to prevent those large payments which were made to the Cunard Company, being continued in the future. He did not mean to say a word against that company, which had in times past performed its duties well, and had fairly earned its original subsidy; but what he complained of was that subsidy had subsisted ten or fifteen years too long, and the British taxpayer had consequently paid at least £1,000,000 too much. The the Cunard Company had given rise to existence of the subsidy had also prevented some strange suspicions; and he had seen, the cheapening of the ocean postage, as in an article in a leading American journal, would be seen by the Postmaster General's the assertion that it was evident the recent letter to the Treasury. That letter stated postal arrangement between America and that the postage to America might be re- England ought to have been concluded duced from 1s. to 6d. a letter if the Cunard with the Cunard Company, and not with contract could be terminated, and that that | the Post Office, since the interest of that contract whilst it continued cost the coun- company had been successfully exerted to try £100,000 a year, whereas 6d. a letter prevent notice being given of the intention would be a self-supporting rate. We had of the Government to terminate the arseven powerful competing steam companies, rangements. Referring to a letter by the the vessels of three of which were at least Postmaster General on the subject, he as good as the Cunard's. It appeared to stated that it was full of inaccuracies, and him (Mr. Baxter) that people were very contained whole paragraphs pleading the much in the habit of sending their letters cause of the Cunard Company with as to America by the Cunard line, because much spirit as if the noble Duke (the they thought it was the fastest and the Duke of Montrose) had been a shareholder most regular; but that, he contended, was in the company. He called attention to a great mistake. The Cunard Company the subject, because he felt that unless had been recently employing vessels fifteen some limit was put to the granting of suband eighteen years old, and even lately sidies there would be no end to the dewere using vessels which had not been mands on the public purse. He urged the built for the mail service. Two companies Gevernment to accede to his Resolution, had tendered to take letters at 1s. an oz., which would assimilate our practice in this and the Cunard Company did not tender. respect to that which prevailed in America. They knew they had friends in the Post It would have the effect of putting an end Office, and although they did not tender to solicitations for special grants of the they continued fitting out their ships with public money, and would strengthen the sorting rooms for the postal service. They hands of Government in the matter of postal were not mistaken; the Chancellor of the contracts in all time to come. Exchequer found himself in a difficulty, and the Company obtained £80,000 for this year only. His (Mr. Baxter's) object was simply to urge the policy of not extending this arrangement. He did not MR. AYRTON seconded the Amendment, urging the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take the matter seriously into consideration, and give the assurance asked for by the hon. Member for Montrose. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the "in the opinion of this House, no Postal Subsidies in the form of a fixed payment, and not dependent on the number of letters and newspapers carried, should be granted where ordinary traffic supports several lines of passenger steamers, as is the case between this Country and the United States of America,"—(Mr. Baxter,) instead thereof. Question proposed, That the words. proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." wish to find fault with the conduct of the Government so far as the present year was concerned. He fully admitted the difficulty in which the right hon. Gentle-end of the Question, in order to add the words man the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been placed; but he trusted the policy of not entering into such arrangements in the future would be recognized. He believed that the terms agreed to by the Post Office were not advantageous for the public ser vice. The vessels would keep time if they got no mails at all; and if the Government had been firm they would have obtained a mail three or four times a week merely for the freight of the mail bags. He found MR. SCLATER-BOOTH had no comthat whilst the two Southampton complaint to make of the mode in which the panies and the Inman line were bound to keep time, there was no such condition in the Cunard contract. The Cunard got £80,000, and if the price of coals rose £40,000 more, making £120,000, whilst the other companies would have done the work for £35,000. The disposition which had been so frequently shown to forward hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) had introduced this subject; indeed, he was willing to admit that the hands of the Government were strengthened by its discussion in the House of Commons. The Select Committee on Postal Contracts had stated as their opinion that large subsidies might be dispensed with in future, and it might be said that they had been already | be arranged, which would be no more than dispensed with in the case now under con- a company would actually receive under a sideration, because the subsidy which had Free Trade system, although in one sense been promised to the Cunard Company for a subsidy, it would not be such a subsidy the current year was very small as compared as that to which the Committee on Postal with former subsidies, and from the Esti- Contracts had very properly objected. He mates made it did not appear to be much therefore contended that the country was in excess of the postal charges of other already reaping the advantage of that syssteam lines. Putting that aside, he re- tem. All that he deprecated was that the minded the hon. Member that the Commit House should pass a Resolution which would tee expressed an opinion that, in all such render it impossible for the Government, cases, very much must of necessity be left which had now the experience of those to the discretion of the Government. Re- systems working side by side, to take admarks of that kind occurred throughout the vantage of that experience, and might in whole of their Report, in which they stated them future years render it impracticable for that they shrank from tying the hands of to make even a more beneficial arrangement the Government by passing express resolu- than that recommended by the Committee. tions on the matter. He would urge the hon. The present system had been in operation Member for Montrose to be satisfied with only two months and a half, and that was having stated his views. He assured him too soon for any statement as to results; not only that views similar to those he had but the anticipated increase in the amount of expressed had been taken into considera- correspondence so far was beginning to be tion in the past, but that due weight would realized, and in the course of a short time be given to them in the future. He went it might very possibly turn out that the further, and said that the intention of the payments to the Messrs. Cunard would not Government and Post Office authorities, as be so great as what would be received the correspondence he had referred to for the sea postage of the letters. That clearly proved, was to put an end to subsi- was still an open question. But let it be dizing lines of steamers, and to establish remembered that the payment was made free trade in the carriage of letters. Re- for this year, and this year only; and the ferring to another point, he said that no Post Office authorities in dealing with the doubt it would be a very desirable thing to question for the future would have the adhave daily postal communication with the vantge not only of experience, but also of United States; but it would be apparent to competition. He would say, in conclusion, every one that a daily despatch would be that he hoped the hon. Member would not of very little use unless it could be insured think it necessary to divide the House on that the letters would arrive in the order the present occasion. in which they had been sent: The Government had recently received tenders with a view to obtain four mails a week between this country and America; but one of the tenders was, on the face of it, useless, because the letters which the person making the tender proposed to set out with on a Thursday would not arrive in the United States until after the letters which had been despatched on Friday. There was no use in trying to rest our postal arrangements on principles of Free Trade, unless we had some hold over the companies, and were able to put terms upon them, and make arrangements for the delivery as well as the starting of the mails. That was one of the difficulties which was found very serious by the Government when they endeavoured to carry out the recommendations of the Committee on Postal Contracts, which they have been, and still were, very desirous of giving effect to. At the same time, if a fixed payment could MR. DUNLOP said, that as Chairman of the Committee on the Postal Service, he was very far from being satisfied with the statement of the Secretary of the Treasury respecting the mode of carrying out their recommendation. Nothing was more clear to the Committee than that the payment of the postage rate for letters was quite ample remuneration for the carriage. There was no necessity whatever for a subsidy, the service might be very well done without any. He hoped they would have some more decided assurance that an end would be put to the system of extravagance and favouritism which the Committee condemned. MR. STANSFELD said, he hoped that a more distinct assurance would be given by the Government with regard to future contracts. The Secretary to the Treasury met the statement of the Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) very fairly as far as he went, but he had told the House to the determination of Messrs. Cunard not day mail upon the terms proposed. In a rangement that might be based on those condi nothing specific about the terms of the contract that would have to be entered to tender for the conveyance of the Saturinto at the expiration of the present year, nor did he seem to appreciate the views advanced by the Member for Montrose, which were of great weight, and had been the views of the Treasury and the Post Office for the last ten or eleven years. It was only by the accident of delay that the Post Office found themselves in the position with reference to Messrs. Cunard and Co. that they now occupied. In November, 1857, the Duke of Argyll, who was Postmaster General, proposed to the Treasury to carry out this principle; but in 1858 there was a change of Government, and the Cunard contract was renewed for a period of ten years, which had just ex-show that the terms proposed by Messrs. pired. In 1866 Lord Stanley of Alderley, then Postmaster General, in conjunction with his hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers), then Secretary to the Treasury, agreed to adopt the policy now propounded by the Member for Montrose; and, in a letter dated the 8th of February, the noble Lord expressed the opinion that, if the contract had been allowed to terminate, it was highly probable that instead of an annual loss to the country of £100,000, tenders would have been received from parties willing to carry the mails between this country and New York for the amount of the sea postage, and went on to say "I entertain a hope that if this service be now advertised the tenders for it will show that so large a reduction may be made in its cost as not only to render the service self-supporting, but to make it practicable considerably to reduce the rate of postage to the United States." The Treasury agreed to give notice to terminate the contract, but, on the 26th of April, Lord Stanley of Alderley again wrote, referring to the new postal convention with the United States, and stating that the proposed reduction from 1s. to 6d. per half ounce, which had been approved of by the United States Government would be delayed till the contract with Messrs. Cunard had terminated, owing to the loss which would otherwise fall upon this country. The noble Duke who was now at the head of the Post Office, in July, 1867, after an interval of more than twelve months adopted, the view of his predecessors, and issued conditions of contract upon the basis of their proposals, which also received the assent of the Treasury. But three months afterwards, and within two months of the termination of the contract, the Postmaster General found himself in difficulties, owing Cunard and Co. for a fixed subsidy, would, practically speaking, be a contract as profitable to the public as the payment of them by the ocean postage. But that calculation was based on the hypothesis that the United States would continue to pay the ocean postage on their letters homeward. On the 26th of November the Postmaster General discovered that the United States had been able to make a better bargain than that, and to have the homeward mails and letters carried for less than the ocean postage. The Postmaster General found that this profitable arrangement to the United States would result in a loss to this country of £15,000. He appealed to the good feeling of Cunard and Co., and opened negotiations with them for the purpose of entering into a new contract, beginning by the payment of £75,000 a year-which it was believed would at once be met by the ocean postage and that it should gradually increase at the rate of 5 per cent until it should amount to £122,000; and it was arranged that it should be a ten years' contract. But, fortunately, the Chancellor of the Exchequer came to the aid of the public and of the Post Office authorities. He put himself in personal communication with Messrs. Cunard, and made a better bargain, by which they arranged to carry the mails for £80,000 for one year, and one year only. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would, perhaps, afford them a clear explanation of the policy they intended to carry out in connection with this new contract entered into with Cunard and Co. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have some difficulty in showing that the terms which Messrs. Cunard originally preferred so much to ocean postage that they declined to tender if ocean postage | spondence to America, and they saw no terms alone were offered, now that the way out of the difficulty, except by making Postmaster General had fallen back upon them, were both economical and advantageous to the public. He found no fault with the Cunard Company, whose business it was to make the best terms they could for themselves; he was prepared to admit that having placed the Post Office in a difficulty they had behaved handsomely. In accepting the contract on the 3rd of December, Messrs. Cunard wrote an arrangement with Messrs. Cunard. According to the calculation of the Post Office the sum eventually agreed to be given exceeded by only £1,500 the sea postage they were likely to earn, and it could not, therefore, be contended that, in making this arrangement, the Government were continuing the system of large subsidies condemned by the Committee_on Packet and Telegraph Contracts. "That they had agreed to the exceptional terms the Motion of the hon. Member went far adopted to meet the exigencies of the public ser- beyond the question of the American convice, and to relieve the Government from a diffi-tract; for it would apply to any case that culty which had arisen owing to the American Post Office not having accepted the arrangements might arise where there might be a great proposed by the Government for the carriage of amount of British correspondence to be the homeward mails, and which had prevented carried, and might fetter seriously the the Government from completing their agree. hands of the Government in certain eximent for a more permanent service." gencies. The Select Committee, in their But The Government ought not to have al-report, said it would be impossible to lay lowed the company to assume such a position as that, and its concession to them might be prejudicial to the public in subsequent negotiations. down any positive rules. A Royal Commission had recommended the adoption of certain positive limitations; but these failed to obtain the concurrence of successive THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE- Governments. The Select Committee said QUER did not think there was any real they had reason to believe that the opinions difference of opinion between the Govern- of the Commissioners themselves had been ment and the hon. Gentleman who brought modified by experience, and they felt that forward the Motion. The point taken by the very much must be left to the discretion of Secretary to the Treasury was that it was the Government, to act as they thought best undesirable, by the general Resolution pro- under the circumstances of each case. It posed, to fetter the Government under all would be a great mistake not to follow contingencies that might happen. It was that advice, and he urged the House to a mistake to suppose that sea postage was abstain from laying down such definite not a subsidy. A subsidy might be given rules as might fetter the Government to in the shape of sea postage or an equivalent the prejudice of the public service. The to sea postage, or it might be in the shape object of the Government was to secure for of a sum much exceeding the amount the public a regular, speedy, and efficient that the sea postage would come to. The postal service, but if it so happened that hon. Gentleman who brought forward the this could not be obtained upon ordinary Motion, and those who supported him, principles at a particular moment, were the must admit that, in the arrangement made Government to be precluded from making this year, the Government had given up special arrangements, with a view of obentirely the notion of granting subsidies taining for the public such accommodation beyond what the sea postage would come as was actually required? In making last to. He acknowledged that the arrange-year the arrangement for which he was ment was faulty, because it was wrong responsible, he had shown no favour for that the companies carrying mails to America should be under different terms with the Government; and it was only under the circumstance of the moment that this contract was entered into for one year. The Government was in a position of considerable difficulty at the time, because there was no offer made by any company to carry the Saturday mails, by which the mercantile community of the metropolis had been in the habit for many years of sending the greater part of their correVOL. CXC. [THIRD SERIES.] one company or another; but was animated with the single desire to secure for the public on the best terms that which they stood in need of. But he had been told by the Post Office officials that, during the short time this arrangement had been in operation, not one steamer of the company receiving the fixed payment had been caught up by a steamer starting subsequently; but in the case of other companies carrying mails this had frequently happened. Under these circum 3 T |