was the most urgent necessity for some improvement in the mode of dealing with local Bills. DR. BREWER said, the House was suffering from the inconvenience of arguing two different subjects at the same time and interchangeably. The one was the general proposition that private legis the Minister of the Department was satisfied that the circumstances were exceptional and did not come within the general law, was equivalent to giving the Minister the power of veto; and he did not think that it would be right to place in the hands of a Minister or of the Ministers of the Crown the power of putting a veto on Private Legislation.lation, dealing with matter of a similar He thought, however, that notwithstanding the numerous discussions that had taken place on the subject, the time was not yet ripe for the decision of so large a question, and he would move the further adjournment of the debate. MR. STANSFELD said, he had no objection to vote for the first Resolution proposed by the hon. Member for the West Riding, condemning the existing practice with reference to the passing of local Bills. At present the Local Government Board had no locus standi before Committees with respect to local Bills; but, nevertheless, they had, during the present Session, thought it their duty to examine all such Bills coming before Parliament and had communicated with the Chairman of Committees, and their criticism had been found to be of considerable utility, and to have thrown light on points which had been before obscure. He agreed with his right hon. Friend (Mr. Bouverie) that the subsequent Resolution ought not to be accepted; but the House would not commit itself to that Resolution by adopting the first. What he thought the House ought to do was to make use of the Public Departments of the Government for its own information. He had been considering the matter with the authorities of both Houses, and he was inclined to propose a new Standing Order to the effect that copies of local Bills, when deposited at the Houses of Parliament, should be deposited also with the Local Government Board that the Board should report on the Bills, and its Report should be laid before the Committees. nature to that of public Acts should, as a preliminary step to its introduction, be submitted to that Department of the Government which had the charge of such subject-matter- a proposition worthy serious consideration, undoubtedly, as it might tend to prevent those contradictory or unequal enactments which separate private interests contrived to introduce through the means of private legislation into Acts which affected large masses of the population. The other subject was of a more limited kind, and contemplated the recognition of a title to be given to the Local Government Board to require a copy of every Private Bill, before its introduction into Parliament, to be sent to that Office in order that the Bill should be criticized and revised, and the agreement or disagreement of its provisions with Acts in force might be ascertained beforehand. The advantage of such a course was obvious; but the restriction upon the right of public bodies and private persons to come before Parliament for the promotion of objects they believed of consequence to them, afforded far too serious a subject to be dealt with summarily. The stores of private enterprise would be hardly consonant with such limitation, and he thought the House should pause before conceding the whole of the hon. Gentleman's proposition. MR. HENLEY thought the proposals of the hon. Member for the West Riding went a great deal too far. It wanted to do away with local self-government, and no one could doubt that if it were adopted there would be a great deal of ear-wigging of the Minister. He did SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY recom- not see how any Minister could fairly mended that the very important sugges-judge of the special wants of particular tion of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board should be taken as a sequence to the first Resolution of the hon. Member for the West Riding. The second Resolution he thought should be omitted under any circumstances, and the third required to be very much modified. There Mr. Bouverie places. Any person who looked at foreign countries and saw what few arterial lines of railway they had might easily conclude that if we had been in the hands of a Minister we should be in much the same position, for a Minister would never have admitted that many of the largest railways we had were required by the necessities of the localities. More- | Resolution could be adopted, it was a over, the promoters of a scheme would condition precedent that public legislanever be satisfied with the decision of tion on such matters should be in a the Minister, and would raise the ques- sound, consistent, and rational condition. tions involved in the House. It was He had no experience with regard to better to let people come to Parliament the legislation applicable to towns or to and make out their case as well as they sanitary matters; but he believed it was could, and if they did not make it out, in anything but a satisfactory state. they would gain nothing by their motion. He would support the Motion for the adjournment of the debate. MR. WEGUELIN said, it often happened that Bills of several hundred clauses came before a Committee, which had to pick up its knowledge of the subject from the speeches of counsel and such opportunities of reading the clauses as they might have during the investigation. He thought it would be well to have these Bills submitted to some authority for examination before they were laid before the Committees. MR. BONHAM-CARTER said, the mere introduction of abstract Resolutions of this kind, unaccompanied by practical suggestions, were of very little value-moreover, he thought the Resolution of the hon. Member for the West Riding was already covered by the Resolution of the House to refer the whole business of Private Legislation to the consideration of the Government. Looking to this, he thought the House should not put upon its records a Motion such as the hon. Member for the West Riding had now proposed, and which seemed to some extent to supersede or override a decision to which the House had already come. He thought it would be far better to wait until the Government should lay a complete scheme before them, and the House could then enter into a consideration of the subject in its entirety. Moreover, in a short time they would have to reconsider the Clauses Consolidation Acts, upon which so much of our Private Legislation depended. MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE agreed with his right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board that the Resolution proposed by the hon. Member for the West Riding was a very useful one, and one which it would be well to adopt, for it pointed to the evil which now existed with regard to the unnecessary multiplication of Private Bills on matters which should more properly be the subject of public legislation. Before, however, such a MR. ALDERMAN W. LAWRENCE said, that if the third Resolution of the hon. Member for the West Riding were agreed to, the doors of Parliament would be closed against all municipal and local authorities, who would be unable to bring in any measures which had not received the previous sanction of the Local Government Board of the day. He thought that the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board should be formally brought forward by the Government, and not introduced merely in connection with these Resolutions. He hoped the Motion for adjourning the debate would be agreed to. MR. GOLDNEY also thought that the most sensible course the hon. Member could adopt would be to consent to the adjournment of the debate. MR. F. S. POWELL said, that the discussion had been so satisfactory that he would gladly have withdrawn his Resolution, had not right hon. Members on the Treasury Bench encouraged him to hope the whole subject would be discussed with the assistance of proposals made by the Government during the present Session. Under these circumstances, he thought that he should be acting most wisely in moving the adjournment of the debate. Debate further adjourned till Thursday, 18th July. THE ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONCHARGES OF MANAGEMENT. QUESTION. MR. SALT said, he wished to ask the hon. Baronet the Member for North Devon (Sir Thomas Acland), Whether the sum of £26,926 7s. 7d. charged for Agency (in addition to other items for management, repairs, &c.) in the Rental Accounts of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, contained in the Report of 1872, could not be reduced in future years; and, whether such Agency is paid by salary or by commission? POST OFFICE-POSTAGE TO THE WEST INDIES.-QUESTION. MR. BOWRING (for Mr. REED) asked the Postmaster General, Whether he is prepared to reduce the Rates of Postage between the West India Colonies and this Country? SIR THOMAS ACLAND: The sums | sions of the Act requiring such joint charged for agency and management in assessment. The assessment could be the accounts of the Ecclesiastical Com- furnished upon the sum of the valuamissioners have been frequently the sub- tion under the Metropolitan Valuation ject of public investigation. This matter Act. was examined by Committee of the House of Commons in 1856, 1862, and 1863, and by a Committee of the House of Lords in 1858. It also was the subject of a Report drawn up by a Committee appointed by the Treasury in 1859, and of a Minute and Report prepared by the Estates Committee of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. These documents are to be found in the 16th Report of the Commissioners. They contain a full statement of the scale of remuneration as to its principles and details. They explain that the principal expenses are incident to the transition state of the Church property scattered over 40 counties, and that the nature of the business requires that the Commission should benefit by the wide experience of persons having an independent professional business. Such experience could not be obtained for any salary which the Commissioners could give. The Commissioners have recently, in conjunction with the Treasury, revised their official establishment. They will not lose sight of the importance of effecting every economy in the management of their estates which may be consistent with efficiency. MR. MONSELL, in reply, said, that the cost of the West India packet service, after deducting the amount of revenue received for postage, amounted to £118,000 a-year, and the whole of that sum was paid by the Imperial Treasury. The West India Colonies contributed nothing whatever towards the expense of the subsidy. The contract with the Royal Mail Company would not be concluded until December, 1874, and until then it would be impossible to make any change in regard to postage. IRELAND-LIGHTHOUSES FOR LOUGH SWILLY-QUESTION. MR. CONOLLY asked the President of the Board of Trade, If he would state to the House what information he has received from the Board of Irish Lights, as to the necessity for erecting one or more Lighthouses on the coast of WAYS AND MEANS-INHABITED HOUSE and, whether he is willing to take the Lough Swilly, in the county of Donegal ; DUTY. QUESTION. MR. W. H. SMITH asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether each hereditament separately numbered, described, and valued in the Valuation List, as finally determined by the Assessment Committee under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act of 1869, should, if such hereditament be chargeable to the Inhabited House Duty, be assessed separately for such Duty, in conformity with such Valuation List, and in pursuance of section 45, sub-section 2, of such Act? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: No, Sir. I think the conclusion does not necessarily follow, when the House Duty Act requires that the assessment should be made jointly. The fact that the valuation must be separately made under the Metropolitan Valuation Act does not interfere with the provi subject into his early consideration? MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE, in reply, said, that the Board of Trade had received no application on the subject; but the Department had had the subject under their own consideration for some time, and they were in communication with the Trinity House upon the matter. They hoped to be prepared upon an application in the statutory manner from the Irish Lights Board to erect a lighthouse upon Dunree Head, Lough Swilly, and they were now with that object in communication with the Irish Lights Board. MR. CONOLLY gave Notice that he would move for certain Correspondence on the subject. MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE said, he should have thought that his answer would have rendered such a Motion unnecessary. CRIMINAL LAW-CONVICT LABOUR. Member for Limerick; but until he (The O'Donoghue) really knew what course the hon. and learned Member COLONEL BERESFORD asked the intended taking, he was unwilling to Secretary of State for the Home Depart-withdraw the Notice which stood on the QUESTION. ment, If he is aware that mats are being made at Millbank Prison from plaited coir yarn prepared by steam machinery in Wakefield Jail, and that such mats are made by contract with the governor of that jail for Mr. Goodacre, till recently the London agent of the said Wakefield Jail ? MR. BRUCE, in reply, said, the mats were furnished, not by contract, but from time to time according to the wants of the department. He was not aware that Mr. Goodacre was connected with Wakefield Prison; but, even if he were, he did not think that circumstance would justify the department in refusing to deal with him as with any other person. IRELAND-GALWAY ELECTION INQUIRY -MR. JUSTICE KEOGH. QUESTION. MR. MITCHELL HENRY said, he wished to ask the hon. Member for Tralee (The O'Donoghue), whose Motion stands for Thursday, Whether he is not of opinion that the case of Mr. Justice Keogh ought not to be discussed in the House before the evidence taken in the Galway Election Petition case has been printed; and, if he will not postpone his Motion until the opinion of the House has been taken on the proposition of the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), who has given Notice that he will move that Mr. Justice Keogh ought to be removed from the Bench for his alleged misconduct ? THE O'DONOGHUE begged to assure the hon. Gentleman that the only object he had in view was that there should be the fullest possible discussion of the Galway Judgment at the earliest possible moment. If the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt) was really anxious to have a discussion-he said "really," because some doubt seemed to be thrown upon his intention by the Notice of Motion given by the hon. and learned Member for Taunton (Mr. James)-but if the hon. and learned Member for Limerick was really anxious, then for his part he was quite willing that the discussion should be taken on the Motion of the hon. and learned Paper in his name. MR. MITCHELL HENRY: Then I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, on the part of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt), who has communicated with me, whether the Government will give a day for the discussion of the Motion? MR. GLADSTONE said, he could only repeat what he had stated on a former occasion-that he did not think he could with propriety ask the House to put aside important public business to discuss a matter which seemed to him to be not yet quite ripe for discussion, inasmuch as the means of forming a judgment on the points in dispute were not as yet in the hands of Members, the evidence not being in print. COLONEL WILSON PATTEN asked, whether there would be many more portions of the evidence besides the two already published? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. DowSE) was informed that only one part more remained to be published. He was informed that it was somewhat larger than the previous parts; but the printer hoped that by the end of next week the whole of the evidence would be published. Afterwards VISCOUNT CRICHTON asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If his attention has been drawn to three Notices on the Order Book of this House, equivalent in their terms and construction to votes of censure upon Mr. Justice Keogh; whether, considering that that learned Judge is shortly about to go on Cireuit, he does not think that public confidence in the administration of justice in Ireland will be seriously impaired by reason of such impending votes of censure being allowed to remain on the Notice Paper unchallenged in any way by Her Majesty's Government; and, whether he will place upon the Table on behalf of the Government any amendments to said Notices, or make any declaration with the view of relieving the judicial bench on the North-West Circuit from the stigma which might otherwise be thought to attach to it? MR. GLADSTONE: It appears to me that the Question of the noble Viscount proceeds on a misapprehension. I am not prepared to admit that the appearance of a Notice on the Paper has the great importance the noble Viscount attaches to it. He thinks that the public confidence in the administration of justice in Ireland will be seriously impaired by Votes of Censure being allowed to remain on the Notice Paper unchallenged by Her Majesty's Government. Sir, it is not for Her Majesty's Government to challenge the free exercise of the discretion of hon. Members in giving Notices on subjects on which they intend to raise a discussion until the time arrives when it is fit for the Government to announce the course they intend to take with respect to such Notices. I do not think it would be becoming in the Government-who have themselves, through their Law Officers, judicial functions to perform in respect to the very great question involved, of the prosecution of individuals arising out of this case-to indicate the course they may pursue until they have had ample opportunity for considering the entire case; but it is quite a mistake to suppose that the appearance of such Notices indicates more than the personal opinion of the Member giving them, or in any way determines the question of confidence or want of confidence in the administration of justice in Ireland. I quite appreciate the anxiety of the noble Viscount with respect to the state of feeling in Ireland on this matter. That is a subject of great importance, to which I hope we are fully alive -namely, the duty of considering everything that relates to the safety of Her Majesty's subjects in Ireland, and especially of one of Her Majesty's subjects bearing the commission of Her Majesty and representing Her Majesty in the high office of justice. For that purpose for securing due respect to the law and punishing those who infringe it-every attention has been and is being given by my right hon. and learned Friend near me (the Attorney General for Ireland), and by the Government of Ireland. Probably it is within the knowledge of the noble Viscount that already steps have been taken for the apprehension and punishment of various persons connected with this case. I am quite certain, when the subject is fully before the House, they will take such a course as may be best calculated to strengthen the administration of justice in Ireland, and the confidence of the people in that administration; and the Government will, as soon as they have access to the whole of the evidence, which they only can have when it is prepared for laying on the Table of the House, state the course they intend to pursue with reference to it. METROPOLIS-HYDE PARK-GUARDS DRILL.-QUESTION. MR. ROBERTSON asked the Chief Commissioner of Works, What reply he has received from His Royal Highness the Ranger of Hyde Park to a request made by the ladies and gentlemen who ride in the Park early in the morning, that there may be no firing by the Regiments of Guards from half-past 8 to 10 o'clock, as it not only disturbs their enjoyment of the Park, but might lead to serious accidents? MR. AYRTON, in reply, said, that His Royal Highness the Ranger of Hyde Park had given to this request-as to every request respecting the enjoyment of the Park by the public- the most careful consideration; but the question was by no means free from difficulty, for it was frequently found that when arrangements were made for the convenience of one section of the public, extreme inconvenience was inflicted on another section. Therefore, the balance of convenience and inconvenience had always to be considered. As the House was aware, the Royal Guards were required to reside in the neighbourhood of Hyde Park, and for their efficiency it was necessary that they should parade and drill in that Park. It was part of their drill to fire blank cartridge, and the question to decide was at what time would that part of the drill be performed with the least inconvenience to those who frequented the Park? To go through the whole day-it had been suggested that 6 o'clock in the morning would be a convenient hour; but if those gentlemen and ladies who went to the Park at 8 o'clock in the morning were now inconvenienced by volleys from the Guards, what would be the condition of others who, residing near the Park, might be sleeping in their beds at 6 o'clock? The number of those asleep |