a main road; and the county authority, if of opinion that there is probable cause for the application, shall cause the road to be inspected, and, if satisfied that it ought to be a main road, shall make a Provisional Order accordingly; a copy of the order so made shall be forthwith deposited at the office of the clerk of the peace of the county, and shall beopen to the inspection of per sons interested at all reasonable hours; and the order so made shall not be of any validity unless and until it is confirmed by a further order of the county authority made within a period of not more than six months after the making of the Provisional Order. (Power to reduce main road to status of ordinary highway.) "If it appears to a county authority that any road within their county, within the period between the thirty-first day of December one thousand eight hundred and seventy and the date of the passing of this Act ceased to be a turnpike road, ought not to become a main road in pursuance of this Act, such authority shall, before the first day of January one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, make an application to the Local Government Board for a Provisional Order declaring that such road ought not to become a main road. "Subject as aforesaid, where it appears to a county authority that any road within their county, which has become a main road in pursuance of this Act, ought to cease to be a main road and become an ordinary highway, such authority may apply to the Local Government Board for a Provisional Order declaring that such road has ceased to be a main road and become an ordinary highway. tion payable by them under the Act towards the expenses of the maintenance of main roads by such highway authority for the year in which such default occurs. (Highway district situate in more than one county.) than one county the provisions of this Act with "Where a highway district is situate in more respect to the expenses of the maintenance of main roads shall apply as if the portion of such district situate in each county were a separate highway district in that county." Clauses agreed to, and added to the Bill. Bill reported; to be printed, as amended [Bill 214]; re-committed for Friday next, at Two of the clock. INCLOSURE PROVISIONAL ORDER SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Sir Matthew Ridley.) SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, two Inclosure Bills were brought before the House last night, when one of them was passed a stage, though not without there had been no opposition to it before much remonstrance, on the ground that the Select Committee. He understood, however, that this Orford Bill was ob "The Local Government Board, if of opinion that there is probable cause for an application under this section, shall cause the road to be inspected, and if satisfied that it ought to cease to be a main road and become an ordinary high-jected to by a Committee upstairs. The way shall make an order accordingly, to be con firmed as hereinafter mentioned. "All expenses incurred in or incidental to the making or confirmation of any order under this section shall be defrayed by the county authority applying for such order. (Turnpike road in several counties.) "Where a turnpike road subject to one trust extends into divers counties, such road, for the purposes of this Act, shall be treated as a separate turnpike road in each county through which it passes. evidence taken before the Committee had not been printed and circulated; and, in these circumstances, whatever the Standing Order of the House of Lords might be, he thought it would be impossible to go on with the Bill at present. He, therefore, moved the adjournment of the debate. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." (Accounts of expenses of maintenance of main(Sir Charles W. Dilke.) roads.) "Every highway authority shall keep, in such form as may be directed by the county authority, a separate account of the expenses of the maintenance of the main roads within their area, and shall forward copies thereof to the county authority at such time or times in every year as may be required by the county authority, and the accounts so kept shall be subject to such audit as the county authority may direct. "If any highway authority makes default in complying with the provisions of this section, or with any directions given in pursuance thereof by the county authority, the county authority may withhold all or any part of the contribuMr. Sclater-Booth SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY hoped the hon. Baronet would not press his Motion. In consequence of the Standing Order of the House of Lords, there would be a difficulty in passing the Bill this Session if the second reading were not now agreed to. He would give an undertaking that the evidence adduced before the Select Committee should be printed and placed in the hands of hon. Members before the next stage of the Bill was taken. MR. SHAW LEFEVRE thought it was rather unsatisfactory that the House should be called upon to proceed at once with a Bill of this kind in consequence of a Standing Order of the House of Lords. MR. ASSHETON CROSS said, the circumstances of the evidence not having yet been printed was not owing to any fault on the part of the promoters. The simple fact was that the printer of the House had not been able to get through the work. He had, however, received a letter from Mr. Hansard, who undertook that the evidence should be in the hands of hon. Members on Wednesday morning. He entirely agreed that, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer observed last night, the Rules made "elsewhere" were extremely harsh, not only to this House, but to the public at large. Indeed, the Government would exert their influence in order to bring about a revision of those Rules. In this particular case, however, he thought no hardship would be inflicted on the opponents of the Bill if the second reading were now passed. given them. It would be a great advantage that this commonable land should be inclosed. MR. DILLWYN objected to the second reading, on the ground that the reasons for the passing of the Bill had not been stated to the House. MR. HARDCASTLE remarked, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the Bill, that the Standing Orders of the House of Lords interfered very much with the Business of the House. The Manchester Waterworks Bill, for instance, had been thrown out on the ground that the Notices should have been served last November of Amendments which, in fact, were not proposed by the promoters of the Bill at all, but were forced upon them by a Committee of this House sitting in May. MR. RAIKES said, that it was essential for the transaction of Parliamentary Business that some day should be fixed, after which Private Bills would not be proceeded with, otherwise the other House would have a number of Bills sent up so late in the Session that it would be impossible to deal with them properly. He was not prepared to say, however, that the day which had been fixed by the other House was necessarily the best. MR. DODSON said, the Secretary of State had just remarked that the Rule of the House of Lords was mischievous in regard to the public. He begged the House to take note of that ex- MR. RYLANDS opposed the second pression. The Rule was introduced into reading, on the ground that if they were the other House on the 4th of February to advance the Bill a stage they might and adopted on the 5th; but the Go-be taking a line which, if they had the vernment then offered no opposition to evidence before them, they would not it. After the statement of the right have taken. hon. Gentleman, it might be hoped that the Government would use their influence to get the Rule rescinded. If it were not rescinded, the Government ought to introduce their Bills early in the Session, so that this House might have ample opportunity for discussing them. SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT said, he agreed with much that had been said by the right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken, and he had no doubt that the Home Secretary would see that the restriction imposed by the other House would be removed. It should be borne in mind, however, it was not common but commonable land that this Bill dealt with, and there was great difference between the two. By the liberality of an individual, a large recreation ground had been set out for the benefit of the public, and more than an equivalent would be THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that the right hon. Member for Chester (Mr. Dodson) had seized upon a phrase of his right hon. Friend and made it the topic for a severe attack upon the Government. But, in these matters, it must be borne in mind that the Standing Orders were made in conformity with the usual practice of both Houses, and upon the authority of those Gentlemen who took the lead in the regulation of Private Business, and that the attention of the Government was not attracted to alterations of this kind until some circumstances forced it upon their notice. He could only say, as he said last night, the Government were very desirous to bring about an accommodation between the Rules and Orders of the other House of Parliament and the proceedings of the House of Commons so as to avoid such difficulties as they to throw any impediment in the way of the Bill, if they only knew what the Bill was; but the question was, were they to proceed with a Bill about which they were not informed? If the Government consented to the adjournment of the debate, no harm would be done to anybody. Question put. The House divided:-Ayes 48; Noes 69: Majority 21.—(Div. List, No. 170.) Bill be now read a second time." Question again proposed, "That the now found themselves confronted with. | he (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) could But, as the Chairman of Committees had not see why they were bound to pay any pointed out, it was necessary to have deference to such a Rule. No one wished certain days fixed, after which Business was not to be taken, and the question was whether or not the days were conveniently fixed. It was difficult to say à priori; but after what they had seen to-day it might be that the day fixed by the House of Lords, the 18th of June, was too early. At all events, it was a matter for consultation between the authorities of the two Houses, in order to see whether some modifications might not be introduced. He promised last night, and he promised again, that in concert with the authorities of the House, the Government would endeavour to see whether some modifications might not be made so as to give effect to the Rule with the least inconvenience to the Busi-objected to the House being driven into ness of the House. They had always to choose between difficulties, and they were very much in the position of the man who had to put five horses into four stalls. With reference to the Bill, he understood that the Report of the proceedings and the evidence would be. delivered at the Vote Office for circulation on Wednesday. He did not think that any harm would be done if the Bill were read a second time. MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN rose to defend his right hon. Friend the Member for Chester from the attack made on him by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Chancellor of the Exchequer complained that his right hon. Friend had taken advantage of a phrase used by the Home Secretary. But when the right hon. Gentleman stigmatized this Rule as a mischievous one, his right hon. Friend was quite justified in what he had said. If a young and enthusiastic Member of the House used such expressions in the heat of debate, no one would take much notice of it; but when a responsible Minister of the Crown deliberately branded a Rule of the other House of Parliament as a mischievous Rule, it was a little too much to speak of such an expression as a mere "phrase," which meant nothing. He would also remark, that when they were asked to pass a Bill only because the House of Lords had made a Rule that they would receive no Bill after a certain date, it should be remembered that they, the House of Commons, had made no similar Rule as regarded the other House, and The Chancellor of the Exchequer MR. E. JENKINS moved the adjournment of the House. He strongly a corner, and forced to accept the second reading of the Bill without the opportunity of reading the evidence given before the Committee. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."(Mr. Edward Jenkins.) THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not persevere in this Motion. Whether they approved or disapproved the Rule which had been established in "another place," they must all recognize the fact of its existence, and must remember that this matter involved the convenience of many parties, and might lead to considerable expense. It might be more convenient to be in possession of the evidence before the second reading; but if they read the Bill a second time now, and did not part with the control over it till the next stage, they might still either amend or reject it if necessary. SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, there was no reason why the House should have been driven into a corner like this, for the scheme was prepared before the meeting of Parliament. He understood that, according to precedent, the present Bill would be withdrawn, and a new Bill introduced in the House of Lords. MR. DODSON said, he did not think there was any necessity for the House to be driven into a corner in regard to the Bill, nor did he altogether assent to the doctrine laid down by the Chancellor of MR. E. JENKINS said, he should not press his Motion as to debtors undergoing imprisonment, because the Home Secretary, having had the Correspondence laid before him, had modified the rules of which complaint had been made. He had to thank the right hon. Gentleman for the readiness and promptness with which he had dealt with the matter, simply brought to his notice by a Question in that House. There was still some complaint that the wives of debtors were searched, and often partially undressed, before entering their husband's cells, and with this he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would deal. MR. ASSHETON CROSS said, he was ready to admit that the position of debtors, while prisoners under the provisions of the Prisons Act of last Session, was somewhat anomalous. He thoroughly sympathized with the poor men who were imprisoned, because they were, in reality, unable to pay their debts. While in prison, they had to be maintained formerly by the county, and now by the State, their wives and families passing in the meantime into the workhouse, to be maintained out of the rates, so that society would actually gain by at once paying off their debts. But, having had much experience of prisons, he knew that there were many debtors imprisoned who were able to pay, but refused to do so. His view was that no one should be imprisoned except for crime; but a great many debtors, who were able to dis charge their liabilities, chose to be kept in prison at the public expense rather than part with their money. Such men were acting with fraud, and ought to be punished for it. In one case, the Visiting Justices of a gaol had most successfully dealt with such persons by a timely increase of prison discipline, from which the debtors were glad to escape by paying their debts. He could not recommend the abolition of imprisonment for debt, but thought that the Attorney General might make some addition to the Act of 1877, which would meet cases such as those he had mentioned. "that, as Perak matters seem to be all regulated by the governor of Singapore, it would be announce the annexation of the country, and better and more straightforward at once to not to keep up a state of things which is farcical and far from creditable;' and, whether, looking to the fact that on the 1st June, 1876, Lord Carnarvon expressly declared that— in the name of the Sultan (a measure very little "government of the country by British officers removed from annexation) could not be allowed," he will lay upon the Table further Papers showing, for the information of the House, the policy, instructions, and authority under which the proceedings of British Residents in Perak are now regulated; and in what respects the present condition of Perak differs from that of an annexed province, and the functions of the residents there from those proposed for the Commissioners appointed by Sir William Jervois, but, subsequently, set aside by Lord Carnarvon ? SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL wished also to ask a Question in regard to the payment of the Indian troops employed in the Perak Expedition. It was acknowledged that the extra expenses caused by the removal of those troops would have to be charged either to the colony or the mother country; but he would like to know, Whether the Government intended to move an Estimate not only for the extraordinary charges of the Expedition, but also for the ordinary pay and allowances of the soldiers during the period they were employed beyond the Indian territory? If not, it would be a clear case of the Indian Treasury being charged with the expenses of the troops while on foreign service. SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH said, that if the hon. Baronet the Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell) had given Notice of his Question with reference to the payment of the Indian troops, he should have been able to give him a definite answer. He might, however, say that the financial control of the House would ultimately be complete over any expenditure on account of the Indian troops in question, though there had been considerable delay, owing to the difficulty of settling the accounts between the different parties concerned. No doubt, pending that settlement, there had been a charge of £40,000 upon the revenues of India. He did not understand the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke) to raise the general question of Perak or the history of the war, but rather to ask a Question with regard to the relations between the British Resident at Perak and the Native Rulers. A greater responsibility, of course, attached to Residents than that of merely advising Native rulers, and that responsibility had been clearly pointed out by his noble Predecessor. In Perak the position was one of some little difficulty, but the duties attending it seemed to have been performed successfully. assessed at the rate of 48. in the pound on the yearly value of lands, tenements, and hereditaments throughout Great Britain. The lands throughout this country, as the House was aware, were all originally held on certain tenures from the Crown, and the idea of actual property in land was an idea which had only sprung up comparatively recently. The primary idea of landholding was a trust and enjoyment of certain benefits on condition of performing that trust. The landowner held lands on condition of supplying men and arms for the Public Service for the defence of the country. The original signification and purport of what was now called the land tax was to provide for the Military Estimates of the Kingdom by various forms of knight service. By the Restoration Parliament, however, all the old knight tenures and military burdens upon land were swept away. After the Restoration the relief of land from taxation laid the foundation of the whole of that system of taxing commodities which rose to such an enormous height during the 18th and a portion of the 19th centuries. When the Revolution resulted in setting William and Mary upon the Throne in the year 1692, there was a new arrangement. The landed gentry were somewhat at a discount at that period. They generally espoused the cause of the exiled Sovereigns, and owing to the pressing necessities of the new Government, recourse was at once had to the historical methods of raising taxes, and thus a land tax to the amount of 4s. in the pound was imposed. Under the Act of William and Mary the yearly value was returned at £2,000,000, in round numbers; more than 100 years afterwards, in 1798, when another change took place, notwithstanding the immense increase in the value of land, the Return was principally the same as it was in 1690. The landed gentry were still largely actuated by feelings of loyalty to the exiled house, and were probably objects of greater suspicion than Irish tenantrighters of the present day. Sir Robert Walpole, therefore, thought it necessary to instil feelings of loyalty by a system very nearly tantamount to bribery. Under the powers granted by the Act of George III., about half of the land tax existing at the end of the last century had been redeemed, and he admitted that that fact threw some difficulty in the way |