MR. STEPHEN CAVE said, that all the parts of the new map should be published together as nearly at the same time as possible, or people would hesitate before buying it from not knowing which were the recent, and which the new portions. He suggested that it would be advantageous and economical to reinforce the sappers and miners now engaged in the survey by the necessary number of civilians competent to perform it. difficulties of making those corrections | expenditure for the last 10 or 15 years, and the magnitude of the task which would be perfectly useless. they would impose. It appeared to him (Mr. Ayrton) to be much better for them to bring the present enterprize to a conclusion before they embarked in any other. His noble Friend (Viscount Bury) asked whether they were going to reproduce a 1-inch map for the supersession of the existing map. In reply, he (Mr. Ayrton) would tell him that that was a serious undertaking, but it was under the attention of the Government. He had every wish to proceed with the survey as rapidly as possible, but it could only be accelerated in proportion to the amount of money voted towards the work from year to year. LORD ELCHO said, he must still ask what course it was intended to take with regard to those counties in ScotlandFifeshire, Mid Lothian, and East Lothian -which had been referred to, the survey of which, on the cadastral scale, had not yet been completed? MR. AYRTON said, that all the counties which came within the description given would come within the survey on that scale, but he could not say when the work would be done. That must be left very much to the discretion of the director of the survey, who was the best judge of the matter. Those counties, however, which were mineral or commercial, would have a preference over purely agricultural ones. LORD ELCHO said, he wished to have a more distinct answer. What the counties of Scotland wished to know was, when the proper time for surveying them would come? Were their surveys to be stopped until the whole of England had been surveyed? VISCOUNT BURY said, he did not think his noble Friend had a right to raise a cry of injustice to Scotland, when the whole of the agricultural parts of Scotland had been surveyed on a 25 and 6-inch scale, but some of the counties of England had not been surveyed on any scale. It was a necessity for England map. The to have at least a 1-inch Mr. Ayrton COLONEL BARTTELOT urged the importance of expediting the publication of the survey. It was essential not only for private but for strategic purposes, scarcely a road being laid down correctly in the old survey. MR. AYRTON said, he should be happy to answer any specific question which the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) would put to him, but he could not tell him the exact time when the survey of the Scottish counties he referred to would be taken in hand. To his noble Friend (Viscount Bury) he would say that until the Treasury had come to a decision as to reducing the 25-inch map to a 1-inch map, he could not say anything further on that point. As to employing civilians, upwards of 1,000 were already employed, the military force being comparatively small. Vote agreed to. (17.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £26,130, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1873, for constructing certain Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade." MR. DAVIES moved to reduce the Vote by £700, the amount of the salary paid to a consulting engineer at Holyhead. There being an engineer emtended it was unnecessary to have a conployed on the works at £500, he consulting engineer. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £25,430, be granted defray the Charge which will come in course of to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1873, for constructing certain Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade."—(Mr. Davies.) MR. WHITWELL asked for an explanation of the charge for Dover Har bour. The Vote required was £4,000, and the charges were stated at £2,200. MR. BAXTER said, he was happy to be able to inform the Committee that the works at Holyhead were so far complete that the charge would disappear from the Estimates in a year or two. In fact, he expected that by that time the whole Vote would disappear. The charge for harbours, in fact, had been reduced from £67,000 to £35,000 by the abandonment of the Alderney works, a decision that had received the general approval of Parliament. With regard to Dover, a very large portion of the cost of maintenance and salaries was paid for by the railway companies. In the course of the year that expenditure would also be got rid of. The receipts at Dover were estimated at £1,000 per annum, and at Holyhead £1,500 per annum, and he believed those amounts would be found adequate for the maintenance of the two harbours. MR. MUNTZ congratulated the Committee on the probability that these Votes would so soon disappear from the Estimates. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury had omitted to answer the question put to him relative to the consulting engineer at Holyhead, and unless the Committee divided upon the question, he was afraid they would find the charge in next year's Estimates. MR. BAXTER reminded the Committee that the works at Holyhead were very important, and that they would be finished this year, so that the consulting engineer would disappear. MR. CANDLISH recommended the withdrawal of the Amendment, after the satisfying statement of the Secretary to the Treasury. He was glad to observe in the Vote an item of £360 for maintaining a light on the Island of Alderney, and would congratulate the shipping interest on the fact of this Vote being the precursor of the intention of the nation to relieve the shipping interest of about one-third of a million they had annually to pay for the maintenance of lights around our coast. MR. GOLDNEY wished to know whether the consulting engineer at Holyhead would be continued after the completion of the works? Dover harbour had been constructed in an efficient manner without the aid of a consulting engineer. MR. BAXTER said, he would undertake that before next year the whole Vote should be revised, and he hoped it would not appear again, at all events, not in this form and to this extent. LORD ELCHO said, it should not be forgotten that the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Candlish), who had hailed with so much pleasure the Vote of £360 in the Estimates for the maintenance of a light at Alderney, and who looked upon it as the precursor of a charge of £360,000 being placed on the nation, was a great economist and a Member for a seaport town. It was, therefore, necessary that the Committee should be informed whether it was a permanent or a temporary charge. COLONEL BARTTELOT asked for an explanation of the charge of £100 for St. Catherine, Jersey. MR. BAXTER said, it was a charge for the maintenance of a light about which there was some dispute between the Treasury and the Board of Trade as to what fund it should be charged on. The light at Alderney had been left on the Estimate in consequence of the hurried manner in which the works there were closed. MR. STEPHEN CAVE said, it would be as well that the Committee should be informed in what state Alderney harbour had been left, because he had been informed it was in a dangerous state, and that the danger was likely to be increased every year. Was the light wanted to warn shipping of danger, or was it placed there as an ordinary light to guide ships safely into the harbour? MR. BAXTER said, the House had unanimously declined to vote the money which had been reported to be requisite, and the Government, therefore, did not press the Vote. The harbour was now, he believed, in a dangerous state; but it had never been otherwise, and in his opinion no money which could in reason be spent upon it would make it safe. He hoped no attempt would be made to reverse the decision of last year. MR. DAVIES said, that under the circumstances he would not divide the Committee upon his Amendment. MR. MUNTZ said, he felt convinced that unless the Committee divided the whole thing would be forgotten, and the sum would appear next year in the Estimates as usual. PARLIAMENTARY AND MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS BILL. MR. PEEL said, there was every reason to believe that before the close of the financial year these works would be completed, and that no further charge would have to be made on the Estimates for construction. MR. GOLDNEY asked whether, when the works were completed, the consulting engineers would be retained? MR. BAXTER: Certainly not. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Original Question put, and agreed to. (18.) £250, to complete the sum for Portland Harbour. MR. GOLDNEY wished to know to what Department it belonged? He always understood it belonged to the Army. MR. BAXTER said, it had been entirely handed over to the Navy. Vote agreed to. (19.) £6,250, to complete the sum for the Fire Brigade (Metropolis). (20.) £26,433, to complete the sum for Rates for Government Property. (21.) £2,250, to complete the sum for the Wellington Monument. MR. J. GOLDSMID wanted to be informed when this memorial would be completed? He had been told that the certificates of Mr. Hunt and Captain Galton as to the progress of the work were not altogether satisfactory. MR. BAXTER thought it would be finished within a reasonable time. LORDS' AMENDMENTS. Lords' Amendments further considered. Amendments, from Amendments in 13, line 38, agreed to. page 13, line 23, to Amendment in page Several Amendments disagreed to, and two consequential Amendments made to the Bill. Page 19, line 36, at end of Clause 33, add ("and shall continue in force till the thirty-first day of December one thousand eight hundred and eighty, and no longer, unless Parliament shall otherwise determine; and on the said day the Acts in the fourth, fifth, and sixth schedules shall be thereupon revived; provided that such revival shall not affect any act done, any rights acquired, any liability or penalty incurred, or any proceeding pending under this Act, but such proceeding shall be carried on as if this Act had continued in force"), the next Amendment, being read a second time. MR. W. E. FORSTER, in moving that the House disagree from the Lords' Amendment which would have the effect of making this Bill merely temporary in its character, said, that having considered the measure so carefully, having entered upon the matter with so much deliberation, and having discussed every provision of the Bill with so much minuteness, they could hardly condemn a future Parliament to repeat the same MR. HERMON suggested the post-process over again. ponement of the Vote till inquiries were made upon this point. MR. J. GOLDSMID said, that seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he now hoped the right hon. Gentleman could give the House and the country some information on the subject. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER replied that he could give no information beyond that which he had supplied to the House on a recent occasion. Vote agreed to. Resolutions to be reported To-morrow, at Two of the clock; Committee to sit again upon Wednesday. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth disagree with The Lords in the said Amendment."(Mr. William Edward Forster.) MR. BERESFORD HOPE said, he must appeal to the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government to retain the Amendment. The argument, from the unusual nature of the proposition, broke down. The right hon. Gentleman, at the instance of the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Dickinson), had recently given a temporary character to the Bishop's Resignation Continuance Act, thus affording a valuable precedent in this case. But a precedent still more direct was afforded by the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, one in pari materia with the present measure, which would expire this year if not renewed. Those who, like the right | said in one of his speeches-"Let hon. hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford, not merely admired, but passionately loved the Ballot, must wish for an opportunity of enabling those who now opposed the measure to be able hereafter publicly to avow their error, and to do penance in white sheets hereafter, if the Ballot hobby proved a success; while those, on the other hand, who opposed the Ballot, were equally anxious that an opportunity should be reserved, if need be, for coming back hereafter to the old English method of election. He should, therefore, divide the House upon the question. Gentlemen, if they wish, go to the country with the cry of Up with the Lords and down with the Commons,' and I, for one, have no fear for the result." MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK said, he had just been charged with making the Ballot Bill what it was, and so far as it was a good Bill he admitted the charge. He would observe that the hon. Member (Sir Wilfrid Lawson) was one of those who wished to inflict pains and penalties and imprisonment on anyone who did not vote as they liked. Why, the hon. Member himself was an ultraLiberal upon every question but the land question, and he had very good reason for that exception. SIR WILFRID LAWSON: Will the hon. Gentleman mention what he means ? MR CAVENDISH BENTINCK: The land question. SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I wish to know what vote of mine upon the land question he refers to? BENTINCK : MR. CAVENDISH Upon the Ballot question he has always been in favour of pains and penalties. SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I repeat my question. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Whitehaven (Mr. C. Bentinck) appears to be addressing merely a portion of the House; he must address himself to the Chair. SIR WILFRID LAWSON said, there was an old Conservative maxim about the danger of taking your machinery to pieces too often; and he had heard no argument to convince him that the machinery of the Ballot ought to be taken to pieces at the end of eight years. That Act would either do good or do harm. If it worked well, why should it be put an end to? If it did harm, it would be easy to introduce a Bill to repeal it without waiting for this period of eight years. They had had several interminable debates on the subject, and many of them would not be there probably in 1880. It would therefore be cruel to provide for their successors the trouble which they had themselves gone through. Last year the House of Lords threw out the Ballot Bill on the plea MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK, in that they had not time to discuss it; but continuation, said, that when he was in so acting they did themselves injus- interrupted, it was natural that he should tice, for this year they were able to dis- reply to the interruption; but he would cuss the present Bill in about seven now address himself to the Chair to the hours. Let not hon. Members be de- question raised by his hon. Friend beluded about the matter; let them show hind him (Mr. Beresford Hope). The respect for themselves, and give to the experiment now proposed to be made people the precious gift of freedom of was a novel one, and should be treated representation. They might lose the as such. What was the course of the Bill altogether; but it would not be long Government upon the Education question before another Bill, purged of the im- in 1870? At the last moment the right perfections which the hon. Member for hon. Gentleman at the head of the Whitehaven (Mr. C. Bentinck) had la- Government, who was a new convert to boured so hard to introduce into the the principle of the Ballot, determined present Bill, would be passed. If the to have the Ballot introduced into that House of Lords prevented the passing Bill not as a compulsory, but as a perof the Bill, he, for one, had confidence missive Ballot. The right hon. Gentlein the Government, and believed that man (Mr. W. E. Forster) complied with they would stand to their guns and ap- that determination, but how? peal to the country. Never since the posed that the Ballot should be not comReform Bill of 1832 could the Govern-pulsory, but permissive. The right hon. ment go to the country with so just and Gentleman maintained that it would be righteous a cause- -in fact, the Prime quite sufficient that a man might vote Minister might say as Sir James Graham in secret if he thought fit, He pro MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he must | wisdom may think proper to inflict. The correct the hon. Gentleman upon a ques- hon. Member says that the Education tion of fact; the Ballot upon the Educa- Ballot is permissive, and he is so position Bill was introduced for the metro- tive of that, that I am disposed to bepolis, and it was not permissive, but lieve that my right hon. Friend knows compulsory. nothing of the matter, that he never read the Education Bill, that he had no concern in framing it, and that if he ever read it he must have read it backwards, or with the paper turned upside down. I make these reservations, for without them I should scarcely dare to comment on what the hon. Member has said. I will not speak of it according to my recollection. The hon. Member says that no one can tell what opinion I may hold next year, and that therefore my recollection of last year cannot be worth much. I am the mere being of to-day. I cannot tell what I may do in the future, and how can I know anything of the past? Still, I will say that the Education Ballot was compulsory, not permissive; and the reason it was made temporary was that we found the Ballot to prevail in the metropolis, and open voting in the country, and we objected to recognizing the arrangement either for open or for secret voting until we had settled the question of the Parliamentary Ballot. MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK begged the right hon. Gentleman's pardon, and he would read his words if he had an opportunity, but he had not them by him at that moment. On the 14th and 21st July, 1870, the right hon. Gentleman argued against the hon. Baronet (Sir Charles Dilke) that it should not be a compulsory Ballot. ["No, no!"] He maintained that the right hon. Gentleman did do so; and the Ballot under the Education Act was at that moment a permissive Ballot. That being so, how could the right hon. Gentleman resist the Amendment of the Lords? Why should not the same principle be introduced into that Bill as was introduced into the Education Act by the right hon. Gentleman at the last moment? It was desirable that that Bill should not be permanent, as the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government changed his opinions so suddenly. Having done it, why should he not change it again? They could not tell what his opinion might be eight years or one year hence. No man was more changeable in his opinions than the present Prime Minister. Upon those grounds he should support the view of his hon. Friend (Mr. Beresford Hope). MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, the hon. Member who has just sat down must recollect that those who meet him in debate do not meet him on equal terms. He never makes any mistakes; he is not subject to any human infirmity; he knows what a man can deny, and what not; and when he asserts that my right hon. Friend cannot deny a certain statement, and when my right hon. Friend does deny it, the hon. Member continues with unabated confidence to assert that my right hon. Friend had not denied it. The hon. Member's means of acquiring knowledge are derived from higher sources than are available to us-sources of which we know nothing, and to which we have no access. We must approach him as infirm mortals, and any humble suggestions we make must be submitted to his infallible judgment. If he disapprove, we must submit to whatever chastisement he in the plenitude of his We did not wish to prejudge the great question of the Parliamentary Ballot. We meant to make the Parliamentary Ballot compulsory, and that that should become the model. The hon. Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Beresford Hope) is more amenable to reason and argument, for he has founded himself on the fact that I agreed, in deference to the representations of my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Dickinson), that the Bishops Resignation Bill should be a temporary, not a permanent, measure. Why was that done? It was done on this very ground-that the details had never been submitted to the prolonged consideration of this House, and it was admitted that they might require to be further modified. Therefore it was made a temporary Act. Will my hon. Friend, of all men, be the man to say that the details of the Ballot Act have not been submitted to prolonged consideration? We spent half the Session of 1871 on the Ballot Bill. We have spent half the Session of 1872 on the Ballot Bill. The wisdom of "another place" has undone in minutes that which it took us months to create; and not unnaturally with re |