Item of £500, for Salary of the Vice Original Question put, and agreed to. not expect to get service there at the same at Taku was, under the circumstances, be price as in Europe. Our countrymen natu- thought, not too much. rally looked to the Envoy for hospitality. As to the weakness of the Chinese Government, with that we had nothing to do. If the Taepings got the upper hand-which they had not done and did not seem likely to do we should recognize them as the de facto Government. With regard to the execution of the treaty of Tien-Tsin there was a Minister from the Court of Pekin accredited to Europe to take that question into consideration. That, therefore, was no reason for diminishing the salary of our Minister in China: £6,000 a year was not an unreasonable sum to pay the person who at the other end of the world was charged with commercial interests involving £60,000,000 or £70,000,000, and which were rapidly increasing. MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, the mission appeared to be altogether one of a very expensive character. He objected to the largeness of the Vote, and still more to its increase year after year. £172,000 was a heavy sum per annum to pay for China. There were abundance of Scotchmen in China seeking situations, and there would be no difficulty in finding men at less salaries than were now paid. MR. LABOUCHERE said, he hoped the hon. and gallant Member would not press his Amendment to a division. The sum proposed was by no means too great for a Minister in China. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. COLONEL SYKES then moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £500, the salary of the Vice Consul at Taku. The place, he said, consisted of a little more than a mud shore and a few huts, and literally contained no house in which an European gentleman could reside. There were three Consuls at Tien-Tsin, and a ViceConsul at Taku. The three former were absent, and the work of the four had to be done by the Vice Consul at Taku. The services of the latter could very well be dispensed with. LORD STANLEY pointed out that Taku was the port of Tien-Tsin, and that the last Returns showed that ninety-two British ships had been cleared and ninety-one entered there. The trade, which was a growing trade, was only just beginning to be developed, and a salary of £500 a year to the person who looked after our interests VOL. CXCIII. [THIRD SERIES.] (2.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £36,314, 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 1869, for the Extraordinary Expenses of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad." MR. ALDERMAN LUSK objected to the payment of sums of money to Noblemen for going to Russia and Austria to invest the Sovereigns of those countries with the Order of the Garter, and moved that the Vote be reduced by £2,500. MR. LABOUCHERE thought the expenses of these official ceremonies were very extravagant. The Persian Boundary Commission, he believed, was in a state of suspended animation as regarded everything but the charge for which it appeared on the Estimates. He observed that a charge of £478 was made for the extraordinary expenses of the mission at Frankfort. There was a large number of Englishmen there, and there were also great commercial interests requiring the attention of the Consul, who received no pay. He thought that the whole system of unpaid Consuls was bad. LORD STANLEY said that it would, no doubt, be more satisfactory to have all Consuls paid; but if the system of paying all Cousuls were introduced, the House must make up its mind to increase the Estimates by something like £100,000. He had been in hopes that they had heard the last of the Persian Boundary Commission, but some delay had arisen within the last year, and he could only say that he trusted it would not again appear on the Estimates. With respect to the investiture of Foreign Sovereigns with the Order of the Garter, he observed that that was an international compliment, and it was the practice of all the great Powers of Europe reciprocally to confer similar compliments. payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869, for the Extraordinary Expenses of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad,' -(Mr. Lusk,) -put, and negatived. Original Question put, and agreed to. (3.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £52,950, 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 1869, for the Salaries and Allowances of Governors, &c., and for other Expenses in certain Colonies." SIR WILLIAM GALLWEY moved that the Chairman report Progress. Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again." -(Sir William Gallwey.) MR. DISRAELI said, he feared that when, after a Morning's Sitting, the House resumed at nine, hon. Members were in danger of supposing that twelve o'clock was midnight, and feeling as if they had been sitting for a long time, whereas they were in fact only commencing the Public Business. He hoped that they might be allowed to proceed. MR. DARBY GRIFFITH: This is a proof of the inconvenience of sitting at two o'clock. SIR WILLIAM GALLWEY: The right hon. Gentleman does not attend here at eleven o'clock and sit on Committee till four. MR. SCLATER-BOOTH: I hope the hon. Baronet will allow these last three Votes of Class V. to be taken. SIR WILLIAM GALLWEY assented. Original Question put, and agreed to. House resumed. Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next; Committee to sit again upon Monday next. BRISTOL WRIT. MR. NEVILLE - GRENVILLE, in his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to rising to move that Mr. Speaker do issue a Citizen to serve in this present Parlia- Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a new Writ for the electing of a Citizen to serve in this present been determined to be void." — (Mr. NevilleParliament for the City of Bristol, in the room of John William Miles, esquire, whose Election has He had no doubt when the matter came to be fully discussed they would find out much more than what appeared on the surface. One of the principal citizens of Bristol, for instance, had assured him that for one case of bribery exposed before the Committee at least another dozen could have been proved, while at the present moment he believed that corruption, intimidation, treating, and bribery were being resorted to almost beyond precedent, under the idea that owing to the short time that the existence of the present Parliament was to be prolonged any examination by a Committee into the proceedings would be out of the question. MR. BASS moved, as an Amendment- to have extensively prevailed, regard being "That no Writ be issued for the City of Bristol had to the number of registered electors. until seven days after the evidence taken before The House should bear in mind the fact the Election Committee for that city shall have that Bristol contained 15,000 electors, been in the hands of Members." while the total number of persons proved to have been guilty of corrupt practices was, if he remembered rightly, fortysix. Even supposing that double the number of cases of bribery proved before the Committee had occurred-though this had never been suggested as probable-it would not show that bribery extensively prevailed, for fifty cases out of a constituency of 15,000 were a very different thing from as many cases out of a constituency of 200. As to intimidation, though charged in the Petition, it was distinctly withdrawn by counsel, and it was admitted that Mr. Miles had no complicity in the corrupt practices which had voided his return, while on the other side no imputation was made against his competitor, Mr. Morley. Under these circumstances, he thought the reflections which had been passed on Bristol were unjust, and it should be remembered that that city had for some time been placed in a very anomalous and unfair position. He regretted, however, that this Motion had been proposed, for he thought it would be a bad precedent to press such a Motion before the House was in possession of the evidence. If the House divided upon it he should, as Chairman of the Committee, abstain from voting. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words no Writ be issued for the City of Bristol until seven days after the evidence taken before the Election Committee for that city shall have been in the hands of Members,"-(Mr. Bass,) -instead thereof. Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." MR. DARBY GRIFFITH seconded the Amendment of the hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Bass). He believed that the House ought to take every opportunity in its power of discouraging the bribery and other malpractices which so extensively prevailed at elections. He protested against the notions that the amount of corruption was to be considered with relation to the size of the constituency, and that where one member of a family had been unseated for corruption, another member of the same family should step into the seat and profit by the bribery. MR. ADAM explained that the Motion for the issue of a Writ which he had placed on the Paper had been withdrawn out of deference to a general feeling on that side of the House against such a course being adopted, and he trusted that the Motion would not now be pressed. MR. HOWES said, that as Chairman of the Committee by whom the validity of the late election was decided, he would beg to remind the House that the evidence taken by the Committee had not yet been laid on the table. The Committee had, it was true, reported that bribery did not appear MR. H. BERKELEY said, he concurred in the remarks of the hon. Member for East Norfolk (Mr. Howes). He had always deprecated any transfer of jurisdiction with regard to Election Petitions, and he thought the Committee in the Bristol case had given an illustration of the fairness which characterized the present tribunal. He protested, however, against the Act of Parliament under which Election Petitions were tried, and according to which it was almost impossible to fix any blame upon the candidate. The poorer classes were dealt with readily enough; not so with the classes above them. If the poorer classes bribed and received bribes, where did the money come from? Still he felt convinced that Mr. Miles, and all the family of the Mileses, were incapable of countenancing bribery. He hoped Her Majesty's Government were not making a party move of this question. He thought Her Majesty's Government ought not to countenance the issue of a Writ for Bristol. Nothing could be gained by having a Member in the House for only three weeks. No reason had been given for the Motion, while there were many reasons against it. Great excitement prevailed in the city, and violence such as was only to be found in a Bristol mob-he did not even except the "lambs" of Nottingham. It was therefore impossible to calculate the mischief and disturbance which might ensue if an election were held now. MR. NEWDEGATE said, that while hoping to see Mr. Miles returned on a future occasion, he thought it was unreasonable to expect that he should go through a contest in order to fill the seat for two or three weeks. He should therefore vote for the Amendment. MR. NEVILLE-GRENVILLE said, he was willing, in deference to the opinion of hon. Members, to withdraw his Motion. He denied, however, the existence in Bristol of violence or Saturnalia. Amendment and Motion, by leave, with drawn. House adjourned at a quarter before Two o'clock, till Monday next. HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, July 6, 1868. * * MINUTES.]— PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading Burials (Ireland) (212); Land Writs Regis tration (Scotland) (213); Registration * (218). Second Reading-Medway Regulation Act Continuance (199); Bank of Bombay (196); County General Assessment (Scotland) (190); Courts of Law Fees, &c. (Scotland)* (189). Committee County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction * (108-219); Vagrant Act Amendment (138); Boundary (170). * Report-Army Chaplains (146); Vagrant Act Amendment * (138); Boundary (170); Representation of the People (Scotland) (192220). * Third Reading-Liquidation (181), and passed. Withdrawn-Metropolitan Regulations (149); * Industrial Schools Act (1866) Amendment * (151); Metropolis Local Management Acts Amendment (169). * NOVA SCOTIA-PETITIONS. MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS. LORD CAMPBELL: My Lords, I have two Petitions-one from the Delegates, one from the Inhabitants of Nova Scotia, both for the same object-namely, the with drawal of that colony from the operation of the recent Act on British North America-a withdrawal which would bring it into the same position as Prince Edward's Island and Newfoundland, since these are both attached to Great Britain as before, and able to join Canada whenever it seems good to them. Such is the aim of the Petitioners, but such is not the object of the Motion which I have the honour to submit. It is for inquiry on the spot into the alleged dissatisfaction of the colony, with a view to avert risks which are not distant but immediate; above all, with a view to save Confederation from the blow which threatens its existence. Having last Session taken an humble part in supporting the demand of Nova Scotia for a respite until their General Election had occurred, I have been asked to bring the subject forward. Delays have taken place for which I am not in any way responsible. However trying to myself, they have this compensation-that we have still the freedom to deliberate upon the affairs of Nova Scotia; that it is not too late to guard against an error which might have been beyond the power of recalling. My Lords, amidst many circumstances of a nature to depress anyone who brings this question under the notice of the House, there is one at least of hope and of encouragement. It is that no one is committed against the line of action I am going to recommend. The despatch of the noble Duke the Secre tary for the Colonies contains arguments against the Repeal of the Act on British North America, but none against inquiry. Neither the late Government nor the present, nor the noble Earl who introduced the Act, nor the noble Marquess who used to govern Nova Scotia, in the debates of last year advanced the startling proposition, that if discontent arose in any part of British North America which had been confederated, it should not be an ob ject of inquiry by Great Britain. It is clear that where Confederation leads to discontent, its partizans are rather bound by self-respect to court inquiry than resist it. Even if some weeks ago the Government concurred in a Vote of the House of Commons to withhold it, the aspect of the subject is now still graver than it was; and the well-known fact that such a Vote has aggravated the bitter feelings which existed in the colony, releases them from any obligation to demand its weak, subservient, and impolitic renewal of your Lordships. My Lords, it will greatly shorten the task I have before me, and thus diminish the fatigue which might arise from it, to place before the House the real issue in debate, and disengage it from the false issues which are too frequently confounded with it. Indeed, were this effectually done, my duty would be over; for if the proper issue is acknowledged, there can hardly remain a doubt as to the answer which it merits. My Lords, I therefore anxiously maintain that the issue is not as to whether British North America ought to be confederated. I am ready to concede anything which noble Lords desire upon the subject. It may be a sagacious policy to lay materials for balancing excessive power on the other side of the Atlantic. Such instances as the Achæan League, the Swiss Cantons, the United Provinces of Holland, the great Republic of America, may show that, against considerable risks, a federated system can defend itself. As an exit to the difficulties which for some time hung over Canada, within certain limits, no doubt, Confederation is entitled to applause. And if the object of our statesmanship is to pave the way for independence in British North America, Confederation very likely will accelerate it. But let not this House be ensnared into a debate upon a question which is not now before them. So, too, with regard to the preliminary circumstances by which Nova Scotia was included in the measure. How far their people have been steady in their objects how far their politicians have been uniform in language-are points just now entirely irrelevant. Let it be granted, if you will, that, in the face of a petition from 30,000 men for reference to the opinion of the colony, the Bill was not precipitately carried. Your Lordships have not met to-day to explore the wisdom of the scheme, or to investigate its origin, or criticize its authors, but to consider how to meet an actual emergency. Does the existing discontent of Nova Scotia require conciliatory treatment-not from justice, but from prudence? If it does, what treatment would be adequate is the only point which comes under the legitimate attention of your Lordships. It will be incumbent upon me to give proofs of the existing discontent, and to place on a firm ground the necessity of meeting it at present; but it is better first perhaps to answer the question which must occur to every noble Lord-namely, what is the exact danger to be associated with it? The answer to that question is too easythe discontent points to separation, not from Canada, but from the Empire. Supposing that coercion was endorsed by public feeling in Great Britain-supposing it was not actually prohibited in the United States it would be certain to cause a flame of sympathy with the insurgents. New Brunswick, adjoining Nova Scotia, would be most likely drawn into the current. Maine is conterminous with the greater portion of New Brunswick. Irregular support might very quickly pass over the boundary. The Government of Washington, however much it is esteemed abroad, at home is far from being omnipotent. With the best intentions, they may soon become an object of remonstrance. Remonstrance between Cabinets may end in war, and must in further alienation. War with the United States on many grounds is deprecated by Great Britain, but more especially on this one, that, unlike other wars, in whatever manner it results, it can never raise our influence among the countries which surround us. But if Nova Scotia is abandoned Halifax is lost. On its value as a maritime and military post it would be presumptuous on my part to venture an opinion. But on this vital point I have felt bound to refer to one of the most interesting documents colonial literature furnishes-the Report of the Select Committee on the Defence of the Colonies, appointed by the House of Commons in 1861, and for which the world is indebted to the labours of Mr. Arthur Mills. Before that Committee, the most distinguished men, political and military, united in a chorus on the necessity of retaining Halifax; and to that chorus I may give to the noble Earl who generally sits on the crossBenches (Earl Grey) what may seem in his case the unaccustomed office of a Leader. Earl Grey, in his evidence, assigned Halifax to the same category as Malta and Gibralta, a place important to our naval power, because fleets could be re-fitted there. The Duke of Newcastle, who a short time before had travelled in America, regarded it as valuable in the light of a military post, but still more in the light of a naval station, inasmuch as it is one of the finest, if not the finest, harbour in the world. Mr. Herman Merivale, whose name has been so long familiar to the public as a great Colonial authority, referred to Halifax as a stronghold for the protection of our commerce, and used that remarkable expression, that he deemed it |