ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

probable date of the withdrawal of this Mission after its purpose, stated to be one of "simple courtesy," shall have been accomplished; and, if any such Correspondence has taken place, whether he will object to add it to the Papers already published, and to lay it upon the Table of the House?

EXCHETHE CHANCELLOR OF THE QUER: Sir, we have no means of obtaining complete information of what takes place at Cabul. But since the Russian Ambassador came back to this country my noble Friend the Secretary of State has seen him, and he has been informed by him that the Russian Envoy has left Afghanistan, and we know from other sources that he has returned to Europe.

INLAND REVENUE

THE CUSTOMS

right hon. Gentleman's Question; but
when the House re-assembled it would
be one of the measures they would have
to bring under its consideration. At
present he could not make any positive
announcement on the subject.

THE WINDWARD ISLANDS-COOLIES

IN GRENADA.-QUESTION.

MR. ERRINGTON asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether it is true, that during the month of September last Mr. Kerr, the Lieutenant Governor of Grenada, was obliged to remove from various estates in that island more than 100 indentured Coolies in consequence of their being in a dying state from want of food and general illusage; whether some of those removed have since died; whether Mr. Denham, the protector of immigrants, has been by direction of the Governor prosecuted for manslaughter; if so, with what result; MR. J. HOLMS asked the Financial whether the 400 Coolies now in Grenada Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the on the estates of the persons who illCommissioners of Customs have sub-treated the others are to be left there; mitted to the Treasury a scheme for the re-organisation of their Department, in accordance with the recommendations made in 1874 by the Playfair Inquiry Commission; and, if so, whether he can promise an early settlement of the question?

DEPARTMENT-RE-ORGANIZATION.
QUESTION.

SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON, in reply, said, that a scheme for the reorganization of the Customs Department had been submitted to the Treasury. That scheme was now under consideration; and, as far as he was informed, there would be no unnecessary delay in settling the question, but the details

were numerous.

PARLIAMENT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC

BUSINESS.-QUESTION.

MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is his intention to make any propositions to the House, founded upon the recommendations of the Select Committee which sat last Session, to consider the best means of facilitating the despatch of Public Business?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, the Government were not prepared to make any proposal during the present short Session with reference to the subject alluded to in the

and, whether, as Coolie immigration can hardly be done away with entirely, he will take steps in order that such abuses shall not recur?

SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH: Sir, it is true that Mr. Kerr felt called upon to remove to hospital more than 100 Coolies from the estates in Grenada on which they had been located. On some estates complaints were made of insufficient food and medical attendance. Proceedings have been taken against the managers. The manager of one estate has been convicted of neglecting to supply the Coolies allotted to him with sufficient food and has been fined £50, and the Coolies from that estate have been allotted to an estate belonging to another in a healthy locality. On person other estates on which no complaints were made the Coolies were found to be in an unsatisfactory state of health, owing partly perhaps to the exceptionally unhealthy season, and partly to the unsatisfactory accommodation provided for them.

Since the removal one or two of the Coolies have died; but the rest are doing well. They will not, however, be allowed to go back to the estates unless satisfactory accommodation has been first provided for them. Measures have been taken for more thorough inspection of estates and for more regular medical

to Parliament, that Her Majesty's Government had no intention of re-opening the question as to the amount of the Award. The question how far the fishermen of Newfoundland exceeded their rights in interfering with United States fishermen was at present under the consideration of the Government.

attendance, and I have reason to believe | in The London Gazette, and since presented that the proprietors of estates are exerting themselves to remedy the state of things complained of. On the occasion of the removal one man who was left behind by the captain of the ship which was sent to remove them died. Proceedings were taken against Mr. Denham in the matter, but he was exonerated from blame. There appears, however, to have been a failure of justice as regards the really culpable parties, which is being inquired into.

MR. W. E. FORSTER asked, whether the 400 Coolies now in Grenada, on the estates of the persons who ill-treated the others, were to be left there; and whether Papers in connection with the subject would be produced?

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH said, he thought he had already answered the Question. The Coolies had been removed, though not to the number of 400. The owners and managers of those estates on which they resided had been prosecuted and one had been fined; and the Coolies would not be allowed to return until proper accommodation for them had been provided.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON

MARRIED WOMEN'S

PROPERTY

ACT, 1870-LEGISLATION.

QUESTION.

MR. P. A. TAYLOR asked Mr. Athas been called to a decision lately given torney General, Whether his attention at the Manchester Police Court to the effect that a married woman judicially separated from her husband, and to whom a protection order had been granted, had nevertheless no legal redress against her husband who had taken if such be the state of the Law, he will away her property; and, whether, propose the necessary amendment of The Married Women's Property Act, 1870 ?"

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir JOHN HOLKER), in reply, said, before the Question of the hon. Member appeared on the Paper his attention was not called to the subject. Since Notice of the Question was given he had endeavoured, but without success, to ascertain the nature of the decision. If the hon. Member would furnish him with further particulars, he would be happy to state whether, in his opinion, any amendment of the law

was necessary.

THE FISHERY AWARD.-QUESTION. MR. GOURLEY asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he has received from the United States Government the amount awarded by a majority of the Halifax Commissioners, under Clause 18 of the Treaty of Washington; if so, how he intends disposing of the amount; whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to re-consider the ARTIZANS AND LABOURERS DWELLcircumstances under which the Award was obtained with a view to the reduction of the amount; and, if he is prepared to state how far the fishermen of Newfoundland exceeded their rights in interfering with United States fishermen when fishing and drying their nets on a Sunday?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, that the amount of the Halifax Award-namely, $5,500,000 -was paid by the Government of the United States to Her Majesty's Government on the 21st of November last, and was now being disposed of between Newfoundland and the Dominion of Canada. It would be seen, by the Papers published

[ocr errors]

INGS ACT, 1875 INQUIRY AS TO
OPERATION.-QUESTION.

SIR UGHTRED KAY - SHUTTLEWORTH asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, respecting his statement on July 12th last that the time had come when inquiry should be specially made in reference to the towns in England where an official Report under "The Artizans and Labourers Dwellings Act, 1875," has been made and no action taken upon it, Whether he has taken any steps in such inquiry, and, if so, with what result; and, whether he will lay the Correspondence before Parliament ?

MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, I had done, has infringed the spirit and said, he had corresponded with the Local the letter of the Government of India Government Board on the subject re- Act. ferred to; and if the hon. Baronet would move for that Correspondence, there

would be no objection to its being laid AFGHANISTAN-REPLY OF AMEER TO on the Table.

[blocks in formation]

"That the expenditure of the Revenues of India, both in India and elsewhere, shall be subject to the control of the Secretary of State in Council, and no grant or appropriation of any part of such Revenues, or of any other property coming into the possession of the Secretary of State in Council by virtue of this Act, shall be made without the concurrence of a majority of votes at a meeting of the Council;"

if he will inform the House by what authority the expenditure hitherto incurred in connection with the military expedition against the Ameer of Afghan

istan has been sanctioned ?

MR. E. STANHOPE: Sir, the expenditure was incurred on the authority of the Secretary of State for India. The matter was fully considered in 1869, and the Duke of Argyll, speaking in the House of Lords on behalf of his Government, said—

"It is the opinion of all whom I have consulted, including the Law Officers of the Crown, that under the present Statute it is unquestionably in the power of the Secretary of State for India to order in India any service which may be required. Payment for this service is made in India, and the disallowance of that payment is not competent to the Council, without the sanction of the Secretary of State."[3 Hansard, cxcv. 1074.]

MR. FAWCETT: As I feel that the question is one of very great importance, and as I believe the money has been spent not only in India, but beyond the Frontier of India-["Order!"-I am only desirous of having an opportunity of calling attention to the subject; and I will on an early occasion move a Resolution to the effect that, in the opinion of this House, the Secretary of State, by sanctioning the expenditure which he

ULTIMATUM.-QUESTION.

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE asked Whether a letter from the Ameer Shere the Under Secretary of State for India, Ali has been received by Major Cavagnari; and, if so, whether its contents are known to Her Majesty's Government ?

MR. E. STANHOPE: Sir, the following telegram will, I think, explain all the circumstances as to the receipt of the Ameer's answer:

"From Viceroy, Dec. 5, 1878.

“Cavagnari reports arrival at Dakka on 30th November of a subordinate officer of Ameer's, with letter in reply to ultimatum. Messenger had reached Basawal 22nd, and there heard of Ali Musjid defeat and returned to Cabul. Letter is dated 19th, but is believed to have been re-written at Cabul after news of Ali Musjid. Summary of contents follow in cipher." We do not know when its contents became known to the Indian Government; but the summary was received in England on the night of December 5, and was not seen by any Member of the Cabinet until Friday, December 6. The statement in The Daily News, to the contrary effect, is a simple fabrication. The summary of contents was not published, because the full text was expected. That arrived yesterday, and was at once published in every quarter.

CRIMINAL LAW-CASE OF JOHN

NOLAN.-QUESTION.

MR. MITCHELL HENRY wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department the Question of which he had given him private Notice, What course he proposes to pursue in reference to the case of John Nolan, a lad of 18 years of age, who died in the House of Correction, and whose death the Coroner's Jury found to be accelerated by the repeated and excessive punishment of bread and water diet, which was ordered by the Governor and sanctioned by the Surgeon; and, whether he will be good enough to procure a Copy of the Depositions and lay them on the Table of the House, together with any Correspondence that has taken place between Sir

W. H. Wyatt, the Chairman of the Visiting Justices of Middlesex, and himself, on the working of the new Prisons Act, or any other of the metropolitan

ORDER OF THE DAY.

18001

or city magistrates on the same sub- THE ADDRESS IN ANSWER TO THE ject ?

MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, said, the hon. Gentleman's Question was a painful matter, and one which affected the character of two officers of the very highest standing, one of them being a medical gentleman who had been in two prisons during a large number of years. He found the circumstances were very bad indeed; and he had therefore written to the President of the College of Physicians to ask him to name some gentleman who would assist him by going with another officer to make the strictest inquiry on the subject. The President had most handsomely stated he would be glad to undertake the inquiries himself. He (Mr. Assheton Cross) had accordingly ordered Dr. Guy, who was on the Commission for Public Prisons, and the President of the Royal College of Physicians, and any other gentleman they should agree on, to make the strictest inquiry. Until, therefore, he received their Report, he did not think it would be right to press the subject any further. He had, however, already taken action in the matter, by ordering that the recommendation of the Jury should be carried out as to having one physician attached to each prison, instead of one for the two, as had been the case for a great number of years. He was ready to produce the Papers if the hon. Member for Galway would confer with him as to the form in which they should

be laid on the Table.

very

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

QUEEN'S SPEECH.

ADDRESS REPORTED. AMENDMENT

(MR. WHITBREAD).

Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [6th December], "That the said Address be now read a second time."

Question again proposed.

Debate resumed.

MR. WHITBREAD, in rising to move the Amendment of which he had given Notice, said: Sir, it was not my desire to have moved the Motion of which I gave Notice upon this occasion. I should much have preferred if it had stood as a Resolution by itself. I had no desire to break in upon the practice

I think a very good one-which has prevailed in recent years of allowing the Address to pass without any Amendment being proposed. I was anxious, for another reason, to have moved my Resolution independently; because I did not desire that hon. Members opposite should suppose that my Motion was moved as an Amendment to any Vote for Supplies for our Army now engaged in Afghanistan. What I wish to obtain is the decision of the House upon the subject, as disclosed in the Papers which have been laid upon the Table. My Motion refers to the past conduct of Her Majesty's Government; and I do not wish that it should be mixed up with questions of the present or of the future. I am well aware of the vast interests which are touched by those who speak of the affairs of our Indian Empire; but I do not believe that any harm can arise from arguments directed solely to considerations of strict and impartial justice. I do not wish to be led away into saying anything upon the various questions that surround the one which I wish to bring under the notice of the House. I do not intend to say more than a single word upon the war which is now going on, and that is, as I have already said in another place, that it seems to me to be unnecessary and unjust. But, although I should not advise the stoppage of Supplies, I think that [First Night.]

in the moment of success we might do | That was the policy which was prothat which we could not do if we were nounced by Lord Lawrence's Governto suffer a reverse; and I maintain that ment, and it was the policy which was directly we have obtained a substantial followed in the time of Lord Mayo and success, we should be justified in doing Lord Northbrook-what they desired our best to terminate the war. I would to see was a strong, just, and merciful further express a hope that any demands Government established in Afghanistan, which may be made by the Indian Go- which should be an independent State, vernment upon Shere Ali should be as and friendly to the English Government. little humiliating as possible; and I can- I should like, in the next place, to read not help thinking that the course of the an extract from a private letter of Lord debates will show that, at all events, such Mayo, which was written not long after grave errors have been committed that the Umballa Durbar, which showed it is our strict and bounden duty to come that Lord Mayo's views were the same down somewhat in the conditions which as those enunciated in the despatch of some might deem it necessary to im- Lord Lawrence's Government. The expose, and from the arrogant position we tract is taken from Hunter's Life of have assumed. Now, in the first place, Lord Mayo, and it appears in page 271 I must ask the House to consider what of that work. It is as follows::has been the policy of previous Governments in relation to this question. The first extract in the Papers which have been laid before us to which I would ask the attention of the House will be found in page 44 of the Afghanistan Papers. It is an extract from a despatch of the 4th of January, 1869, from the Government of Lord Lawrence to the India Office at home. They set forth in paragraph 5 the policy which they recommend. They say—

"We venture to sum up the policy which is recommended or supported, in various languages and by various arguments in our Minutes, somewhat as follows:-We object to any active interference in the affairs of Afghanistan by the deputation of a high British officer with or without a contingent, or by the forcible or amicable occupation of any post or tract in that country beyond our own Frontier, inasmuch as we think such a measure would, under present

circumstances, engender irritation, defiance, and hatred in the minds of the Afghans, without in the least strengthening our power either for attack or defence. We think it impolitic and unwise to decrease any of the difficulties which would be entailed on Russia, if that Power seriously thought of invading India, as we should certainly decrease them if we left our own Frontier, and met her half way in a diflicult country, and, possibly, in the midst of a hostile or exasperated population. We foresee no limits to the expenditure which such a move might require, and we protest against the necessity of having to impose additional taxation on the people of India, who are unwilling, as it is, to bear such pressure for measures which they can both understand and appreciate. And we think that the objects which we have at heart, in common with all interested in India, may be attained by an attitude of readiness and firmness on our Frontier, and by giving all our care and expending all our resources for the attainment of practical and sound ends over which we can exercise an effective and immediate control."

"Surround India with strong, friendly, and independent States, who will have more interest in keeping well with us than with any other Power, and we are safe. The Central Asia question is only a bugbear if prudence be observed, and will have no reality for many

years to come."

In another letter he said—

"Our influence has been considerably strength. ened both in our own territories and also in the States of Central Asia by the Umballa meeting, and if we can only persuade people that our policy is non-intervention and peace, that England is at this moment the only non-aggressive Power in Asia, we should stand on a pinnacle of power that we have never enjoyed before." That was Lord Mayo's opinion, as expressed in a private letter. At page 93 of the Afghanistan Papers will be found paragraph 4 of the despatch of the Government of India to the Duke of Argyll, dated the 1st of July, 1869, which is as follows:

down in Your Grace's despatch, i. e., ' that it is "We entirely agree with the principles laid for the interest of our Indian Empire that there should be a strong and settled govern. ment in Afghanistan, such as may promote commerce with us and protect the people of the discretion of the Indian Government should be country from the evils of civil war; that the kept absolutely free as to the occasions on which such assistance should be given or withheld;' that further, we should abstain from exercising

any interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan,' and give no pledge which would lead the Ameer to believe that we should ever countenance or support a notoriously cruel and oppressive Government."

It will be remembered that, shortly after
Lord Mayo became Viceroy, at the wish
of Shere Ali a Conference was held at
Umballa, the result of which was stated

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »