be a person practically engaged in farm-upon and manage his own property, and ing land in the division of the county in to aid in those thousand ways in which which the land was situated. The arbi- a resident landlord could, the moral and trator was to fix the rent of the farm physical well-being of the community in and to do so without reference to the which he was interested? Would not rent being paid for it at the time by the such a measure discourage him absotenant; and it was gravely argued that lutely and entirely from expending any the decision was likely to be a fair one of his own money on a property of which as between the parties. But if by chance he was no longer master? So far as the the landlord should object to his rent rest of Ireland was concerned, apart being dealt with in that way, then the from the existing tenantry, he ventured tenant was at liberty to appeal to a jury. to say it would be the worst Bill that He (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) ventured could be passed. It provided that where to think that no description of such an farms existed of more than 60 acres, appeal could be more true than that they might be divided, and let to subwhich had been so wittily and courage- tenants. But it might be said that the ously given by the hon. Member for landlord could, if he chose, object to Roscommon (the O'Conor Don), when such a proceeding. Why should he obhe said it was like asking farmers to ject, when he was deprived of all interest submit the price of their fat heifers to in his property? Would not the result a jury of butchers. The jury would be of this be a return to the old exploded selected from the special and common system under which the great majority jury lists of the county in which the of the land of the country would come farm was situated. He had endeavoured into the occupation of a class of middleto ascertain how the juries at the last men who would sub-divide their farms, Spring Assizes, in some purely agricul- the population would be increased as in tural counties, were composed, and he the earlier part of the century, and you found that in the county of Clare the would have, in the end, such a lamentcommon jury panel consisted of 137 able conclusion as the Famine of 1847. farmers and 29 persons of other classes; Or, on the other hand, if such sub-diviand the special jury panel of 40 farmers sion did not take place, by giving to the and 8 of other classes. In the county existing occupiers the monopoly this Bill of Limerick the special jury panel in- would confer on them they would debar cluded 33 farmers out of a total of 48, all other classes from all chance of beand the common jury 137 out of a total coming occupiers of land, a position of 141; while in Cork County the common which agricultural labourers and indusjury consisted of 164 farmers and 73 trious men of all pursuits were persons of other classes; and the special desirous of obtaining. He could see no jury of 30 farmers and 18 persons of other reason which would justify the House in classes. The jury, then, would be a jury assenting to such a proposal. Ireland of farmers, and could be nothing else, was in a condition of progressive imand by their decision the future rent to be provement-the comfort and wealth and paid by a farmer residing in their locality contentment of the tenantry were increaswas to be fixed. The decision was to be ing in spite of this agitation, and he subject to the determination of the trusted the House would not, at this Chairman of the county that it was rea-period of the history of the country, sonable, but if he should think it was not, which, he should like to know, would soonest tire of the discussionthe jury or the Chairman? In point of fact, the Bill-or this portion of it-based. would take from the landlords and put into the pockets of the existing tenants that reversion of the landlord's property which had hitherto been considered as a principal portion of a landlord's rights. And how would it affect the improvement of land in Ireland to place the landlord in the position of a rent-charger, and to deprive him of all inducement to reside afford any countenance to a measure which appeared to ignore those principles of right and justice on which alone the prosperity of a people could be MR. LAW said, he had wished to state to the House the reasons why he and those with whom he acted, whilst regarding the first and second parts of the Bill as suggesting Amendments of the Irish Land Act, some of which at least were entitled to favourable consideration, with the view of better carrying out the main provisions of that measure; yet, on the other hand, believed that no sufficient | grounds had been or could be shown for such a total departure from its principles as was proposed by the third and admittedly most important part of the Bill. As, however, the few minutes then remaining would be quite insufficient for the purpose, he begged to move the adjournment of the debate. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. Law.) MR. DISRAELI said, that under the circumstances referred to by the right hon. and learned Gentleman he thought it but fair that the debate should be adjourned. MR. BUTT hoped that the earliest possible day would be fixed for the renewal of the debate. MR. SULLIVAN also strongly entreated and pressed the Government to grant a day for the resumption of the debate. MR. BUTT proposed that the debate should be adjourned till Monday next. MR. DISRAELI: We have already fixed Monday for the Budget, and it can hardly be suggested that we should displace the discussion of the Budget for that of a question which, after all, is one of abstract policy-a question of great interest, no doubt, but one in reference to which no reason can be shown why we should disturb in its favour the existing arrangements as to the public Business. I have no doubt the hon. and learned Gentleman will be able to obtain a day by the usual means and resources at the disposal of all hon. Members, for the continuation of this discussion, which will be equally fresh even if it is not renewed for a month. MR. BUTT said, he only suggested Monday in order that on that day a future day might be fixed for renewing the discussion. Motion agreed to. Debate adjourned till Monday next. And the House having gone through the Unopposed Business on the Paper House adjourned at ten minutes before Six o'clock. regular way. EARL GRANVILLE said, it would be more convenient, and in the end save time, if the noble Marquess would defer the Committee until to-morrow, and then take the Committee on the Bill in the He was aware that it was now proposed to go into the Committee pro formá, for the purpose of inserting the Amendments of which the noble Marquess had given Notice; but, as he proposed to go into the actual work of discussing the Bill in Committee to-morrow, he did not see what was gained by inserting the Amendments in the Bill only 24 hours in advance of the substantive discussion of the measure. If the House went into Committee on the Bill to-night the Amendments inserted would greatly alter its character, and some of his noble Friends would not know what course to take when the Bill came to be discussed in Committee to morrow. THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, that, although he was disposed to accede to the suggestion of the noble Earl he feared there would be some inconvenience in agreeing to it. The course which he had followed of inserting the Amendments at once was sanctioned by long usage. He had 70 Amendments, and if they were moved from the Chair, that of itself would occupy at least an hour. When the Bill was re-committed with the Amendments inserted, every noble Lord would have an opportunity of objecting to those he disapproved, and could move that they be struck out of the Bill; instead of moving that they be not inserted. It was not reasonable that they should depart from the ordinary course, especially as by doing so no greater facility would be afforded to Mr. Law THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY pointed out that if the Amendments were inserted that night, the Bill could not be reprinted and circulated to-morrow in time to enable noble Lords to consider the Amendments and to give Notice of their objections, if any, to them. noble Lords to consider the Amend- | case, it appears to me that on an occaments. sion like the present it would add grace to the proceeding if we could ensure unanimity, and I trust the Bill will be accepted by an unanimous vote. The Bill is by no means long. Its object is contained in one clause. The purport of the Bill is to enable Her Majesty by Proclamation under the Great Seal to assume a title in addition to those which she now bears, and to connect that title with Her Indian dominions. The Preamble contains this recital— THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON said, he gave Notice of the course which his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury) proposed to take in reference to the Bill. If the course suggested by the noble Earl opposite should be sanctioned, noble Lords would still be unable to give Notice of their objections, so that they would be in precisely the same position if the Amendments were inserted in the reprint of the Bill as they were now while they were printed on separate pieces of paper. EARL GRANVILLE asked what precedent there was for the present course of proceeding in respect to such an important Bill? THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that Notice was given on Monday last of these Amendments, and they had been printed and circulated and were in the hands of noble Lords; therefore time had been given for considering them, and for giving Notice of objections. He contended that the course which had been pursued would be very much more convenient than to have separate sheets of Amendments. House in Committee accordingly; Bill reported, without Amendment; Amendments made; Bill re-committed for To-morrow; and to be printed, as amended. (No. 45.) ROYAL TITLES BILL-(No. 41.) (The Lord President.) SECOND READING. "And whereas by the Act for the better Go vernment of India, passed in the Session of the twenty-first and twenty-second years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chapter one hundred and six, it was enacted that the government of India, theretofore vested in the East India Company in trust for Her Majesty, should become vested in Her Majesty, and that India should thenceforth be governed by and in the name of Her Majesty, and it is expedient that there should be a recognition of the transfer of government so made by means of an addition to be made to the style and titles of Her Majesty." My Lords, you have now before you a statement from the Bill itself of all it purposes to do. During the progress of the measure in the other House of Parliament, it was urged that it would be for the convenience of the Legislature that the Government should state the title which they would advise Her Majesty to assume in the event of the passing of the Bill. In compliance with that request, it was stated by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons that in the event of the Bill passing Her Majesty would, on the advice of Her Ministers, assume the title of " of India." Therefore, to put it shortly, Empress practically the Bill is to enable Her Majesty to assume the title of Empress of India. At the time of the transfer of the government of India from the East India Company to Her Majesty, I believe there is no doubt whatever that the Order of the Day for the Second assumption of a title by Her Majesty in Reading, read. THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON: My Lords, in asking your Lordships to give a second reading to the Royal Titles Bill, I do so in the confident hope that it will meet with your unanimous approval. I am the more justified in this hope, because I see that as to the second reading no Notice of any Amendment has been placed on your Lordships' Paper. As this is the connection with her Indian dominions would have been acquiesced in and agreed to by Parliament and the country; but the state of India at the time did not permit of such a course being taken. While the embers of the Mutiny were still smouldering, and while considerable excitement in connection with that rebellion still existed throughout that vast continent, it would scarcely have been expedient to take the step now proposed. It was thought that the transfer of the people of India. You may call this "sentiment" if you like, but your Lordships will see the importance which Lord Palmerston attached to it. He said "I believe there can be no doubt that, so far as the impression on the minds of the people of India is concerned, the name of the Sovereign of a great Empire like this must be far more respected, far more calculated to produce moral and political impressions, than the name of a Company of Merchants, however respectable and able they may be. We have to deal in that country with Princes, some ruling independently and some in a state of modified dependence upon us, and with feudal Chiefs proud of their position, cherishing traditionary recollections of a wide Empire, and of great Sovereigns to whom their ancestors owed allegiance."-[3 Hansard cxlviii. 1283.1 should be effected in as quiet a manner | liberty of quoting some remarks made by as possible, in order that no possible him in 1858 on the impression which the reason could be afforded on our part for transfer was likely to make on the minds a continuance of that excitement. Since, then, however, nearly 20 years have passed, and the peace and prosperity which have prevailed throughout India generally during that period have taught the Princes, Chiefs, and people to appreciate the authority of Her Majesty. Those who have watched-and I think there are few people in this country who have not watched-the progress of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales through that Empire, must have observed with satisfaction that the loyalty and attachment towards Her Majesty and her family are not confined to her subjects in this country, but extend to her distant dominions in the East. Every one in this country is familiar with the urbanity and courtesy which have made His Royal Highness so popular in this country-and these have had the same effect in India. We find that from North to South, and from East to West, the Native Princes have vied with each other in the splendour of their recep; tions, therein manifesting their loyal feelings towards the Prince of Wales and, through him, towards Her Majesty. I am happy to think, therefore, that no more fitting opportunity than the present could be found for enabling Her Majesty to mark more distinctly her sovereignty of the Empire of India than this, and that no measure could more tend to cement the union between this country and that vast dominion, or to gratify the feelings of the Princes and Chiefs of that part of the world. I should have thought, moreover, that any measure such as this, which would at the same time gratify the people of India by bringing them into more direct communication with the Supreme Power that has existed over India since 1858, would have specially recommended itself to the Imperial Par My Lords, I think the relations between this country and India could hardly be expressed in happier or more concise terms than those. We must not in this case lose sight of the character of the of the feudatory position now occupied people with whom we have to deal, nor by the Native Princes of that people. In a Report on The Material Progress of a India in 1868-9 I find this extract from despatch written by Lord Canning "The last vestiges of the Royal House of Delhi, from which, for our own convenience, we have long been content to accept a vicarious authority, have been swept away. The last pretenders to the representation of the Peishwa has disappeared. The Crown of England stands forth the unquestioned ruler and paramount Power in all India, and is for the first time brought face to face with its feudatories. There is a reality in the Suzerainty of the Sovereign of England which has never existed before, and which is not only felt, but eagerly acknowledged by the Chiefs." I think that in that passage of Lord Can- liament. I believe that what this Bill will enable Her Majesty to do is of that "Written at the conclusion of the great Mucharacter, and therefore I feel much tiny, this despatch of Lord Canning's clearly exconfidence in asking for it the hearty plained the change which that momentous event had brought about, and resolved the approval of your Lordships. My Lords, question of the position of the feudatory Chiefs the late Lord Palmerston, who, I imagine, of India, who had hitherto acknowledged the no one in this House would think of nominal sovereignty of the Emperor of the speaking of in terms other than those Moguls or of the Mahratta Peishwa. Their alof respect, was a man who might be re-legiance was, in fact, thenceforth transferred to garded as an authority on a subject of this kind. I will therefore take the The Duke of Richmond and Gordon the Queen of England; and the same despatch decreed, what Hindoo law had never absolutely ordained, that adoption to a Raj should always convey to the Oriental mind the position she holds towards them. It may be said, "What's in a name?" In reply I urge that when you are dealing with such people and Princes as those of India, there is a great deal in a name, and the name of Empress does convey to their be recognized by the paramount Power subject to the two conditions of loyalty to the Crown and fidelity to all engagement to the British Government. The sunnud or patent confirming this decree was issued on March 11, 1862, and a similar patent was given to Mahomedan Princes. To 153 feudatories is this right of adoption guaranteed. Leaving out Mysore, which, during the Maharajah's minority, is administered by the British Government, and Berar, which is admin-minds the position which Her Majesty istered for the Nizam, these nobles govern a po- justly and legitimately holds in India pulation and area larger than those of France more than any other title she could asand Belgium. Their troops far outnumber our sume. But it has been said that the title Sepoy army, their ordnance is equal in number "Empress" is not only un-English, but to ours, their wealth is enormous, and their revenues are personal. From 44 millions of is a title repugnant to the feelings of the people, covering 579,277 square miles, they draw a people of England. As to its being rerevenue of 12 millions sterling every year, irres- pugnant to the feelings of the country, pective of the very large incomes of the there are modes of arriving at those feelnobles who are in their turn feudatory to them. The twelve wealthiest Princes alone enjoy an emings, with which modes your Lordships annual revenue of seven millions sterling, derived are familiar. There are two to which from 26 millions of people. Of these twelve, we may always have recourse. If there the Nizam of Hyderabad has an income of be in question any matter which engages £2,150,000, and the Maharajah Scindiah one of the attention of the country, or of the two £1,110,910, and remainder drawing incomes varying from £240,000 to £600,000." Houses of Parliament, or even of one branch of the Legislature, we are accustomed to find Petitions on that question presented to this and the other House of Parliament. But it is a very remarkable fact that until lately no Petitions for or against the proposal of the Go House of Parliament. Now, having regard to the importance of the Bill, that circumstance is not a little remarkable. I believe that up to a certain time no Petition whatever was presented on the subject, although it was alluded to in the Speech from the Throne at the opening of Parliament. I am aware that at a certain stage of the progress of the Bill in the other House of Parliament a Petition against the measure was presented in that House; but that Petition was not numerously signed. It emanated from some reverend gentleman, who con Those, my Lords, are the Princes over whom, since 1858, Her Majesty has exercised paramount sway. It was for these, and for other reasons that Her Majesty's Government thought this a fitting and opportune time for Her Ma-vernment have been presented to either jesty to bring herself into more direct connection with Her vast Empire. If, then, it is fitting that Her Majesty should assume a title in connection with India, it behoves us to consider what is the title which would properly indicate the paramount position of Her Majesty in relation with those Princes. I suppose I need not consider the suggestions as to "Supreme Ruler' and "Lady Paramount" which have emanated from several persons. It appears to me that the choice lies between "Queen" and "Empress;" I think it must be narrowed to that. Assuming that there is to be a distinctive title given to Her Ma-sidered that the country, or he himself, jesty in connection with her sovereignty would be aggrieved if the Queen took of India, which would-Queen or Em- the new title. Whether other Petitions press-be the more applicable to the po- were presented afterwards to the other sition? My Lords, I venture to think House I do not know, but if so they must that the title of Empress implies more have been very few; and I must say that directly the sovereignty which Her Ma- on a question like this it has scarcely ever jesty exercises over the Native Chiefs, happened that so few Petitions have and I do not think the title of Queen been presented. It is perfectly true does imply that kind of sovereignty. I that this evening Petitions on the subthink that the title of Empress does cor-ject have been presented to your Lordrectly indicate the connection between Her Majesty as the Supreme Head, and the various Native Princes who make up in the aggregate our Indian Empire; and that to describe her as Queen would not ships' House by my noble Friend opposite (Earl Granville), and that there was such a bundle of them that he was unable, with all his well-known assiduity, to get through the task of reading the |