whose work we are now discussing. When I heard that such powers were to be given, and that no principle was to be laid down for their guidance, I confess I thought with dismay that one of the few authorized documents we possess, to which anyone could appeal for the definitions of what fair rent is, was a document which is full of wild revolutionary principles based upon mere gossip and indigested evidence, such as this I hold in my hand. It is of the first importance that your Lordships should thoroughly understand the character and value of the document, and not only understand it, but express your opinion upon it in terms so unmistakeable that no Court may hereafter be asked to rely on it, or appeal to it as an authority. EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I do not rise to satisfy the complaint of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) by entering into a debate in which he seems to think it a matter of reproach that the Government have not joined. The Government have deliberately abstained from taking part in this debate. I think it would have been felt to be most inconvenient that we should join to explain the conduct of the Commission in accepting that document as they did, except by the assumption that they were driven on by the irresistible force of a pre-possession, and that they, unconsciously to themselves, were acting as if their mission was to establish a certain principle, and to make certain recommendations for the guidance of the Government. This, however, is not merely a question of the two points raised by the noble Earl (the Earl of Bessborough) that evening. It is not a question merely of the trustworthiness or the untrustworthiness of the Commission. It involves matters far more important than that. The recommendations of the Commission go much farther. They give utterance to the most extravagant doctrines. They say, for example, that it is necessary at once to negative the idea that a fair rent means what in England would be considered a fair rent. In other words, they mean to say that what is a full and fair rent in England is not to be taken from the Irish tenant; that what in England means a fair rent is a rack-rent in Ireland; and that that fraction, whatever it is-one-third, or any other proportion-which makes the difference between the fair rent in Eng-in it, having a great measure on the land, and what the Irish tenant would give must be taken from the landlord and handed over to the tenant. Before such doctrines as those-and the Report is full of them-were given to the public they ought to have been supported by some evidence collected more carefully and with more circumspection and discretion than were shown by this Commission. We are told-we know not how correctly-that it is the project of the Government to hand over to some unknown Commission-known, I presume, to themselves-the settling of the income of every landlord and every tenant of every county in Ireland; and that they are to be charged with that duty without the indication of any principle by which they should be guided. If it should ever be the law of the land that such vast powers should be intrusted to any two or three individuals, at all events it becomes a matter of the first importance that the persons intrasted with such powers should not decide on the Report of, or on the principles laid down by, a Commission which entered on its task in the spirit, and performed it in the manner, which has actuated the Commission The Marquess of Salisbury subject before the other House of Par- The noble Mar Duke of Richmond) was-"If it did not bear the interpretation I have put upon it, what on earth do the noble Duke and his Colleagues mean?" That the noble Marquess entirely refrained from telling The Report says that the improvements are generally the work of the tenants, who are liable to have their rents arbitrarily raised in consequence of the increased value given to the holdings by the expenditure of their own capital and labour, and that "the desire for legislative interference against the arbitrary increase of rent does not seem unnatural;" and the Report adds "We are inclined to think that by the majority of landowners, legislation, if properly framed to accomplish that end, would not be objected to." It is obvious that this Report was framed with the greatest possible caution. It is not a full and comprehensive Report, with recommendations on every point; but the Commissioners having inserted such a sentence as that, I am utterly at a loss to understand what it means, except that which is expressed by the interpretation put upon it by my noble Friend. I have only to protest against the raising now of a debate on the Land Bill; and I must say that I thought the language of the noble Marquess was most exaggerated and unfair to the noble Earl (the Earl of Bessborough) and his Colleagues, and I deeply regret the tone the noble Marquess has adopted, for it is not encouraging as regards the spirit with which he is prepared to receive a legislative measure which I cannot help thinking everyone must feel to be of the greatest importance. THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON contended that the course pursued by his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury) was justified by references that had been made by the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) to necessary legislation, and referring to the general question, said, the Commission over which he had the honour to preside in no sense recommended legislation. There was not a word in the Report to that effect, and the Commission had been careful not to state anything in their Report that had not been proved in evidence. It was true that the Report contained the passage which the noble Earl (Earl Granville) had just quoted; but the Commission merely stated matters of fact founded in evidence, and made no distinct recommendations on the subject. The Commission was appointed to inquire into all the facts of the Irish Question, and it took evidence very freely upon that question. The noble Lord (Lord Carlingford) took a very much wider view in speaking of legislation, and he did not confine himself to the question of raising rents in consequence of improvements. What the Report of the Commission over which he (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) had presided stated was, that where the tenant had made the improvements, it was not unreasonable that he should desire to have the benefit of them, or the value of them repaid him. That Report certainly did not recommend the adoption of the "three F's," although that of the Bessborough Commission did do so. In the Report of his (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon's) Commission, the Commissioners merely stated, in a carefully-drawn paragraph, that "With the view of affording such security, fair rents, fixity of tenure, and free salepopularly known as the three F's'-have been strongly advocated by many witnesses; but none have been able to support these propositions in their integrity, without inflicting consequences that would, in our opinion, involve an injustice to the landlords." The Commissioners recommended nothing-they merely stated what had been proved before them in evidence, and left it to the Government of the day to take such steps as they might think right. THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY said, he entirely agreed with the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) that the paragraph in question in the Report of the Commission over which he had presided was very carefully drawn, and was based upon the evidence laid before them. That evidence, as far as he could judge, was of very much the same character as that taken before the Bessborough Commission. The noble Duke said that that carefully-worded paragraph was not a recommendation in favour of legislation; but in that case what was it? Was it a sentiment ? [The Duke of RICHMOND and GORDON assented.] Was it then a mere sentiment which was to have no practical effect? The noble Duke must have had far too long an experience of public affairs to suppose that a statement of that character made in the Report of a Royal Com mission could be looked upon as the mere utterance of a sentiment. He (the Earl of Kimberley) was sorry to differ from the noble Duke; but he could not help remarking that that Commission first laid the groundwork for legislation, for the paragraph began by the very important declaration that the improvements were generally the work of the tenants, a view which the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) had treated as being a mere assumption on the part of Her Majesty's Government. What he (the Earl of Kimberley) himself had said about this question of improvements was, that in the great majority of instances the improvements were made by the tenant alone; that in many instances they were made by the tenant and the landlord jointly; and that he doubted whether in any instances, except those that had been specifically referred to the English system, under which the landlord alone made the improvements, was followed. The Report of the noble Duke's Commission, having laid down the premiss that the improvements were generally the work of the tenant, went on to draw the following very natural conclusion : "We are inclined to think that by the majority of landowners legislation properly framed to accomplish this end would not be objected to." tenure of land was different. He had not the facts and figures with him to show the actual results; but he believed he was not the only Irish landlord who had adopted the English system in the management of Irish estates with beneficial results. Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn. STATUTE LAW REVISION AND CIVIL PRO CEDURE BILL [H.L.] A Bill for promoting the Revision of the Statute Law by repealing various enactments connected therewith, and for amending in some chiefly relating to Civil Procedure or matters respects the Law relating to Civil ProcedureWas presented by The LORD CHANCELLOR; read 1a. (No. 140.) SOLWAY FISHERIES AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.] A Bill to amend the law relating to Salmon Fisheries in the Solway Firth-Was presented by The Earl of DALHOUSIE; read 1a. (No. 141.) House adjourned at a quarter past Ten o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Five o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Friday, 1st July, 1881. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS-Ordered-First QUESTIONS. To accomplish what end? The protection of the tenant from an arbitrary increase of rent, which he not unnaturally feared, because of the improvements effected by himself. Did the noble Duke really mean to contend that a statement of that kind was not equivalent to a recommendation in favour of legislation on the subject? It amounted to such a recommendation in practice, if not in words. In his (the Eail of Kimberley's) opinion, the words amounted VACCINATION ACT, 1867-SEC. 31. to as strong a recommendation in favour of legislation as could be framed. He MR. BURT asked the President of did not think words could have been the Local Government Board, If he more carefully or skilfully chosen for will be good enough to state whether a the purpose of bringing home to every-person who has been once fined under body's mind that additional legislation, in order to give additional security, had become inevitable. LORD LECONFIELD said, that, having been alluded to in the course of the debate, he wished to say that his estates in Ireland were managed, with great success, on the English system, so far as could be done in a country where the The Earl of Kimberley s. 31 of the Vaccination Act of 1857 is liable to be again fined within twelve months under the same order; whether the magistrates have power to grant as many fresh orders as may be demanded by the local guardians; and, whether there is any analogy in other statutes for a repetition of fines under the same magistrate's order, or for a repetition of identical orders for an identical purpose, | stored in these magazines to a considersuch repetition of fines or orders not able distance from the city? being specially provided for by the statute? MR. DODSON: Sir, a person who has been once fined under Section 31 of the Vaccination Act of 1867 is not liable to be again fined within 12 months under the same order; but the magistrates have power, when one order has not been complied with, to make a fresh order, and so on from time to time, on the application of the Guardians. The Local Government Board have, however, frequently pointed out the expediency of discretion in the exercise of this power of repeating prosecutions. It is not correct to say that the fines are repeated under the same magistrate's order, as a fresh order must be made before a second fine can be imposed; and the orders are not identical, as a fresh time is prescribed for the performance of the operation in each case. | SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: Sir, this is, no doubt, a very important matter, and I have been in communication with the authorities at Liverpool with regard to it. I am informed that these magazines are under a special Act passed in 1851, and that they are exempted from the operation of the Act of 1879. They are, therefore, under the jurisdiction of the Admiralty and the War Office, and my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty will answer the Question put by the hon. Member. MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, in answer to my hon. Friend I may say that the private gunpowder magazines in the Mersey are under a special Act of August, 1871. By this Act the Board of Admiralty, with the approval of the Master General of the Ordnance and the Conservators of the River Mersey, are to appoint places for mooring these hulks; and, if it is represented to the Admiralty that they are unsafely placed, the Admiralty have power to remove them to another place in the same river. The MR. R. N. FOWLER asked the Se-Master of the Ordnance, which now cretary to the Admiralty, Whether he means the War Office, is directed to has received any Despatches or Reports appoint an officer to superintend the concerning recent outrages in the Solo-stores, and has the power of making mon Islands, and the reprisals inflicted by H.M.S." Emerald ?" WESTERN PACIFIC - THE SOLOMON NATIVES. MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, the Report of the proceedings of Captain Maxwell has been presented to the House. It is in the hands of the printer, and will shortly be published. No despatches relating to the subject have since then been received at the Admiralty. CITY OF LIVERPOOL-POWDER MAGA ZINES IN THE MERSEY. MR. SUMMERS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has on more than one occasion been called to the floating powder magazines in the Mersey; and, whether, having regard to the enormous damage that would be caused to the City and Port of Liverpool in the event of an explosion, he will, notwithstanding the recent expression of opinion by the Mayor of Liverpool that all possible precautions are observed, take steps to prevent so disastrous a calamity from occurring, in the only completely effective way, viz., by procuring the removal of the 400 tons of powder stated to be regulations for the safe keeping of the STATE OF IRELAND - WRIT-SERVING MR. BIGGAR asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been drawn to a letter addressed to "Freeman's Journal" of 22nd instant, by Rov. L. Kinsella, C.C., of St. Michael's, Castlepollard, under the heading of " Writ-serving in Westmeath," in which he vouches for the accuracy of the statement that a Mr. | granting the compensation; but he had Richard Gradwell, of Dowth Hall, near given fresh instructions, which he hoped Drogheda, accompanied by his son and would prevent any such delay in future. three hundred police, proceeded to serve writs for arrears of rent; did the son really act on the occasion as writ-server; and, does the same person, Ashurst Gradwell, hold a Commission from Her Majesty as Lieutenant in the Royal Meath Militia? MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, he had not seen the letter in question. He had sent for information, which had not yet arrived; but he really thought it was hardly a matter in which he ought to interfere. It was evident from the fact that 300 police accompanied Mr. Gradwell that it was considered a matter of danger to serve the writs, and he did not know that he was to blame. MR. HEALY asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been called to a statement in the "Freeman's Journal" of the 22nd June, that Lieutenant R. A. Gradwell, of the Royal Meath Militia, had recently acted as process server near Castlepollard, county Westmeath, having gone hammer in hand and nailed up writs on the doors of some twenty people; whether Lieutenant Gradwell has recently passed an examination for the Line; and, if the Government will state what notice they will take of the matter? MR. CHILDERS: No, Sir; my attention had not been called to the para graph in question; and, if it had, I should have taken no notice of it, as the Royal Meath Militia has not been called out for training this year, and I have no power to order Militia officers not to serve processes at other times. Lieutenant Gradwell has not passed his examination for the Line. POST OFFICE-THE BELFAST LETTER CARRIERS. MR. BIGGAR asked the Postmaster General, If it is true that, although the sorters and letter carriers of Belfast performed much extra duty at Christmas last, they have not yet received any extra compensation beyond their ordinary salaries, nor have they received any reply to a memorial they addressed to the Inspector on the subject? MR. FAWCETT, in reply, said, that the claim referred to was perfectly just and reasonable. He had to express his regret that some delay had occurred in Mr. Biggar POST OFFICE-TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT-RELIEF CLERKS. MR. W. J. CORBET asked the Post master General, If it is with his approval that telegraph clerks are sent from the central and larger offices to the of "relief" clerks to supply the place smaller provincial ones in the capacity the annual leave-taking, a portion of of those who are ill or absent during the "assistant" staff of these provincial offices being at the time suppressed, and which, if provided, could readily take the place of the absentees, and thus save the Department the expense attendant on "relief" clerks together with the loss of service at the office from which these are temporarily withdrawn; and, is this one of the principal causes the clerks attached to the larger offices; of so much extra duty being exacted of if so, will he direct the district surveyors to see that, before entertaining any application for "relief," the proper for by the Department is duly provided "assistant" staff sanctioned and paid by the postmaster making such appli cation? MR. FAWCETT, in reply, said, that he would make careful inquiry on the subject referred to. In calculating the strength of the central establishment, number of relief clerks necessary to be care was taken to estimate the average sent to assist in different places. CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION — OFFICE OF WOODS AND FORESTS. MR. JAMES HOWARD asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whe ther the Officers of Her Majesty's Woods and Forests' Office come under the provisions of the Civil Service Superannuation Act; whether their appointments are subject to the Civil Service Commission; and, under what regulations they hold their appointments? LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH : The officers of the Office of Woods and Forests are subject to the same conditions of appointment, tenure, and pension as the other members of the Civil Service whose salaries are voted in Committee of Supply. The receivers, surveyors, and local officers who are ap |