have the experience, the engineering | carrying out the work which the Comstaff, nor, he might be allowed to say, mission would be unable to carry out, the leisure to discharge this new duty. unless a similar staff was created. As He confessed he almost trembled when to the charge brought by the hon. he thought of the calls that would be Member for Monaghan (Mr. Givan), he made upon the care, the mind, the was very much struck by what he said, thought of the Commissioners; but that after the Board had raised technical where there was a body which had an objections abiding strictly by the rules engineering staff and great capacity, laid down, the point had to be made the and which, also, was an authorized body object of another Act of Parliament to under the responsibility of the Ministers enable the thing to be done as tenants of the Crown, he could not help think- desired; and that, at all events, showed ing that the mind of his hon. and learned that it was not the Board of Works or Friend would be satisfied, and that he the Treasury which had to bear the would himself think that the Govern- blame, but it was due to a defect in the ment were right in maintaining the Act of Parliament. position of the Bill as it stood. COLONEL COLTHURST said, the very work that the Board would have to do was the very work it did most successfully, until, unfortunately, some years ago, the system was changed, and drainage was taken from the direction of the Board of Works and handed over to Drainage Boards. Therefore, it seemed to him that the Board of Works was specially qualified for any work in the nature of drainage and the reclamation of waste lands. As to the charge which had been made against the Board, he did not wish to undertake their defence; but he was certain that the accusation made against the Board in relation to the "Bright Clauses was not due to their own action, but the course they took was imposed upon them by the Treasury. There was one thing, however, he would mention in reference to the Board of Works. A Committee, some years ago, recommended the reorganization of the Board and the retirement of the Chairman, and he would appeal to the Government to consider whether that recommendation could be carried out. No doubt, the Chairman was an old and valuable servant; but there was no doubt, also, his ideas were not in harmony with what was expected from the Board, and, surely, he might now be relegated to that retirement he had so well earned. MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY said, he hoped the hon. and learned Member for Dundalk (Mr. C. Russell) would not press his Amendment to a division. It was evident that the Board of Works was best qualified for the work. He was far from saying that the Board did not want improvement. It did; but the Board had the staff and means of Mr. Gladstone. MR. CHARLES RUSSELL said, he would, with the leave of the Committee, withdraw his Amendment. ["No, no!"] MR. A. M. SULLIVAN said, it was remarkable that both the hon. and gallant Member for Cork County (Colonel Colthurst) and the hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy) had said how excellently qualified was the Board of Works for engineering operations such as the reclamation of land in Ireland; but what had that to do with this clause? Would the hon. Members who vindicated the efficiency of the Board of Works for drainage and other improvements look at the clause, and they would find not a word about engineering operations, but a great deal about executing moneylending operations. Now, he had heard a few people confess that the Board had completely discharged its duty in one or two engineering operations, but he had never heard one man say that the Board of Works did anything but obstruct the advance of public money for useful purposes; and he would ask his hon. Friends who pointed out the advantage of handing the administration of this clause to the Board of Works, to remember what it was. The Treasury might authorize the Board to advance from time to time monies for objects they might think expedient, and for which there was sufficient security; therefore, all that the Board would have to do would be to look after the security for the money. If the Government had any idea of making the clause what it purposed to be-merely a matter for the working out of the Act in harmony with the spirit of a great scheme-surely they should not commit a part of the scheme to one supreme authority, and another part to another. Already in | well as the Board of Works. But if it Ireland there was a sufficient number of was to be for the purpose of conducting divided authorities working over the engineering operations, the clause must same ground; in fact, he had often said be altered to give the Board or the Comit was one of the banes of the country. mission, whichever it might be, the power Five distinct bodies over the same of undertaking these operations. That ground-different taxes, different tax was his argument. But he did not think collectors, different officials, different anything was to be gained by trying at secretaries, and different instructions- this part of the clause to make any and now there was going to be an suggestions, or use arguments in conaddition to the evil in this case! If nection with the reclamation of land; and, all that Clause 25 proposed to do was as they would be more in Order at a to advance money to Companies and further stage, he would reserve his relook after the security for the money, marks. he would suggest that the Land Com- MR. HEALY said, he would ask the mission should be the authority, because Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the the Land Commission would, in the dis- Bill would not throw a great deal of charge of other duties, have cognizance work on the Board, and whether it was of the reasons that would justify the re- not a fact that the additional work under commendation of a particular advance. the Relief of Distress Act of last year It was the Land Commission alone that absolutely broke down the Board of would be charged with the knowledge Works? Did not the clerks in the of all the operations taking place under office work day and night, and were the Bill, of the reclamation and value they not absolutely broken down? Furof land, and with a knowledge of the ther, he would like to know, was is not whole working of the Act, where it notorious that when works were undermight be that reclamation was needed taken by landlords under that Act, the to relieve the congestion of population Inspector of the Board of Works went and where not. If, then, the clause had down and certified for the work being not any purpose but to see that the done, when in fact it was not done, and money had full security, then the Land it was popularly believed, and indeed Commission was the proper authority. in some cases known, that the money This was really so large a subject that it supplied on account of the work supwas quite impossible, utterly impossible, posed to done was spent in buying to discuss it now; and, therefore, since it heifers-the gentleman sent down by the was obvious that several hon. Members Board of Works certifying for the work wished to speak, he might as well say after dining and wining with the landwhat he had to say and not divide it lords? Was it to a body so universally between to-night and Monday, and he distrusted in Ireland that the carrying would, therefore, ask the attention of out of important provisions in the Bill the Committee to one of the reasons why was to be intrusted? The late Conserhe thought the Government should give vative Government a few years ago prothe Commission the authority over the mised to have the Board represented in reclamation of waste lands in Ireland. the House, but it was never carried out. He would like to know whether some It used to be the custom, whenever comeffort could not be made by the Governments were made on the Board of Works ment to extend this clause to the taking in of foreshores THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. and learned Member is going considerably beyond the Amendment. MR. A. M. SULLIVAN said, he must have failed to convey his meaning with sufficient clearness. The Committee were discussing whether the Board of Works or the Land Commission should have charge of Clause 25, and his argument was that if this was only to be a money lending operation, his contention was that the Land Commission could do that as in the House, for the Irish official to say "It's none of my child ;" and to state that he was not responsible for the mismanagement, nor would the Secretary to the Treasury acknowledge he had any responsibility. Certainly, if the Board of Works were intrusted with the authority proposed, it would take away any confidence as to the working of the Act. MR. W. E. FORSTER, said, it was quite true that the Boards of Works was not under the control of the Lord Lieutenant or the Chief Secretary; it was under the Treasury, and his noble Friend the Secretary to the Treasury had acknowledged the responsibility. But a question had been asked as to the action of the Board of Works during the distress of last year, and he really must say that, so far as his knowledge went, and what he heard of their action, and especially speaking from his contact with the Board from his official connection with the Local Government Board, he thought that the conduct and management of the Board during the great pressure of the time of distress was such that no fault could be found with it. True, the clerks were hard worked, and so they were in the office of the Local Government Board and other offices under the great pressure; but he confessed his own opinion of the Board of Works was raised considerably by the manner in which they got through the necessities of the distress. The hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy) alluded to particular charges of which, of course, he (Mr. Forster) knew nothing, and he did not think it was fair to bring forward such charges as acknowledged facts, when he did not suppose any Member of the Committee had heard of them before. MR. PARNELL said, the Committee could not decide on this important question, on which the whole of the clause depended and upon which Amendments hereafter would hinge, at such a late hour, and he would therefore suggest that it would be reasonable for the Government to assent to a Motion to report Progress and to adjourn the discussion to Monday. The Board of Works was introduced into the Bill now for the first time, and the effect was important. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."(Mr. Parnell.) and especially he would refer to Clause 36 and the Emigration Clauses; and whether it was intended to proceed with the other clauses having reference to the duties of the Court? MR. W. E. FORSTER said, the question should have been put to his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister; but, to the best of his (Mr. Forster's) knowledge, there was no intention of making any other alteration beyond the postponement of Clause 34. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE asked whether the Emigration Clauses would be proceeded with ? MR. W. E. FORSTER: Yes; certainly. MR. GIBSON said, the Committee was getting on quickly, and would very soon reach the clauses dealing with the constitution of the Court and the functions of the Land Commission, upon which he understood the Prime Minister was going to make a statement on Monday. It seemed to him that the Government Amendments would not appear on the Notice Paper till Tuesday, and hon. Members, if not satisfied with the Government Amendments, would have to put in manuscript Amendments, and this would be a little hard upon the Committee. What he wished to ask was, that the Government would make known their proposals and give hon. Members full opportunity of considering them. MR. W. E. FORSTER asked, did the right hon. and learned Gentleman mean that the Amendments were not expected till Tuesday? MR. GIBSON said, they were not on the Paper now, and, unless given in within the next 10 minutes, would not appear till Tuesday. MR. A. M. SULLIVAN asked, would they appear on Monday morning? MR. W. E. FORSTER: No. MR. A. M. SULLIVAN said, then, in' that case, the Committee would not see them till Tuesday. LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL asked, would the Government undertake not to discuss them until after they could be seen on the Paper? SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE said, he wished to know whether the Government intended to make any other alteration of procedure in respect to the Bill besides those announced by the Prime Minister at the beginning of the evening? He had stated that when the Committee arrived at Clause 34, he would move that it be postponed; and he (Sir Stafford Northcote) desired to know whether it was the intention to proceed MR. W. E. FORSTER said, the Goin regular order with the other clauses-vernment would do their best to put Mr. W. E. Forster MR. A. J. BALFOUR hoped that they would not be discussed until they had appeared for a day in print, so that they could be seen with other Amendments. them on as early as possible; but they | for that evening; but he would confer could not undertake to postpone the pro- with those who were interested in the ceedings for a day. matter with regard to the course they would take as regarded it. MR. GORST said, he thought they had been waiting at least a month; and he did not see how it would be possible to discuss the constitution of the Court until the Amendments of the Government and of other responsible, and irresponsible Members were before the Committee. MR. HENEAGE urged the Government to put their Amendments on the Paper as soon as possible, and said that he had had an Amendment on the Paper for nearly two months, for doing away with all reference to County Courts, and he should be in a difficult position if the Government only produced their Amendments on the day when the clause came up. Question put, and agreed to. Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next. LONDON CITY (PAROCHIAL CHARITIES) BILL.-[BILL 13.] (Mr. Bryce, Mr. Pell, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Walter James, Mr. Davey.) SECOND READING. [ADJOURNED DEBATE.] Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment on Second Reading [25th May], and which Amendment was, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months.". (Mr. R. N. Fowler.) Question again proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question." Debate resumed. MR. W. H. SMITH appealed to the hon. Member for the City of London (Mr. R. N. Fowler) to withdraw his opposition to the second reading, believing the Bill would be of great service to the City of London. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS said, that having appointed the Commission to inquire into the subject dealt with by the Bill, he thought it would be a great mistake not to read the Bill the second time, and he implored the hon. Member to take off his opposition. MR. R. N. FOWLER said, he had not been aware that the Bill was down Debate further adjourned till Monday next. REMOVAL TERMS (SCOTLAND) BILL. (Mr. James Stewart, Dr. Cameron, Mr. Patrick, Mr, Mackintosh.) [BILL 8.] COMMITTEE. Order for Committee read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."-(Mr. James Stewart.) MR. ORR-EWING moved the ad journment of the debate on the ground that the Bill ought not to be discussed at so late an hour. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. Orr-Ewing.) MR. DONALD CAMERON observed that the Bill appeared to have entered upon a new phase. As long as the Bill stood in the form proposed by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. James Stewart) he saw no harm in it; but when the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. Orr-Ewing) put down his Notice, a great many of his (Mr. Cameron's) constituents objected to it. If, as was reported, the Government accepted the Amendment of the hon. Member for Dumbarton, the intention of the original Bill would be reversed. In that case, he must oppose the Bill; but he hoped the Government would announce what their intention was one way or the other. MR. A. J. BALFOUR hoped the debate would be adjourned, for this was a Bill interfering with local customs all over Scotland, and it would be impossible to get through a debate on such a measure in less than an hour and a-half or two hours. After the House had been working at high pressure all day and every day on the Land Law (Ireland) Bill, it was impossible to expect Members to discuss measures like this in a sober and clear spirit. MR. GORST also objected to discussing the Bill at that late hour. Question put, and agreed to. Debate adjourned till Monday next. THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, since your Lordships last met the House has been deprived of one of its greatest ornaments and one of its most distinguished and honoured Members. I have some difficulty in endeavouring to do justice to my own sense of the loss which this House has sustained, because I lived on terms of close intimacy for not less, I think, than 40 years with the eminent man who, now in an honoured old age, has been taken from us--and personal affection makes me sensible of the difficulty of doing justice, in the few words which I shall address to your Lordships, to his admirable qualities-at the same time, I am most desirous not to fail in expressing, in some measure at all events, the feeling which I think all your Lordships must have on the subject of his loss. My Lords, Lord Hatherley was a man who, I believe, from his earliest years lived a life of as much consistency and diligence in doing his duty in every private relation, and in every grade of the professional and public stations which he was called upon to fill-I think he had as much purity and simplicity of character, as much thorough conscientiousness, as much energy and sound judgment as, taking into account the infirmity of man, any of us could hope to attain. From that intimate knowledge which I had of him, and which, as I have said, lasted for 40 years, I may even go further. There are not a few men of whom one would say that, as far as one may presume to judge from public and outward signs of character, they may be looked upon as examples to be held up for imitation by other men; but of him I would presume even to say that I am sure that judgment cannot be mistaken. Most men, looking back to their earliest life, must be sensible of many faults and errors, known to themselves if not known to others. Certainly, his modesty never would have permitted him to claim to be more free from faults and errors than other men; and yet I do verily believe that such as he appeared outwardly to others he was from his earliest years inwardly in himself. A man of the most remarkable gentleness and sweetness of character, and at the same time of firmness and decision which never quailed or failed before the performance of any duty, and which enabled him, in all the different posts he was called upon to fill, to discharge their duties to the admiration of all who were able to observe his career. He was as little ambitious of personal distinction as any man so distinguished whom I have ever known. It might be truly said of him that he was not one of those "who stoop, or lie in wait "For wealth, for honours, or for wordly state; but was one “Whom they must follow; on whose head must fall, "Like showers of manna, if they come at all." |