THE PUBLIC OFFICES-NEW INDIA AND FOREIGN OFFICES.-QUESTION. LORD REDESDALE moved for"Return of the Cost of making and erecting Four Statues recently placed against the Pilasters at the South-west Angle of the India Office, and the Cost of the decorative Painting of the Interiors of the India and Foreign Offices: And to ask, Whether it is intended to allow the East Front of the new Offices on the South Side of Downing Street to be completed on a Line which will render the Demolition of the Front of the present Government Offices in Whitehall necessary, or to require it to be so constructed as to form a handsome Elevation in connexion with those Buildings?" The noble Lord expressed his regret that the Government had this year taken so small a Vote as £10,000 to proceed with these works, and added that it was of great importance that the building should be quickly proceeded with. The appearance of the waste ground there at present greatly disfigured the locality. With respect to the statues on the exterior, those in the niches, he understood, were intended to represent Governors General; he might possibly have made out one or two, and perhaps some might be able to detect a likeness; but he could not consider them particularly ornamental. The statues to which his notice referred appeared to be female figures, and they might represent the cities of India; but they were quite uncalled for and far from being ornamental. It would have been much better that the money which they cost should have been applied in completing the building, which he thought was a matter of very great importance. The same observation applied to the large sum of money that had been expended on the interior decorations. There was another point which appeared to have been very little attended to, and was likely, therefore, to lead to a very unsatisfactory result-he alluded to the manner in which the buildings were being carried out in connection with the existing frontage of those in Whitehall. That row of buildings as altered by the designs of Sir Charles Barry presented a very handsome elevation; but it stood on & different line from that of the new offices, and it would require skilful arrangement to connect the new buildings when completed with those already erected. It that the existing buildings should be had been contemplated by the architect it took to erect buildings for public offi pulled down; but, considering the time ces, it was extremely desirable that those now erected should be rendered available. Any design which might be adopted should be carried out in a manner to secure the ultimate arrangement of these buildings and the widening of Parliament Street in the most efficient manner. Nothing but a design having for its object to connect all the buildings already erected and those about to be erected would lead to a satisfactory result. He regretted that he was frequently obliged to call their Lordships' attention to this subject, and he also felt sorry that all the land necessary for the purposes of these offices had not been purchased some time ago; for he believed that the longer the purchase was delayed the greater would be the sum required to be paid. THE EARL OF MALMESBURY said, that, on one point, he could set the mind of his noble Friend at ease, for the cost of the statues to which he referred was only £847, and the cost of the decorative painting of the interior of the India Office was about £190. He had no objection to lay before the House a Return showing the expense of painting and decorating the interiors of both the India Office and Foreign Office. A general scheme was in contemplation for concentrating the public offices. A Report on the subject, which had been transmitted to the Treasury, would be very soon laid before Parliament, when the whole plan would be explained. LORD TAUNTON desired to refer to the statues recently placed in Westminster Hall, and said, that, if anything could tend to vulgarize that noble building, it would be the erection of such statues as now stood in the Hall. A Member of the House of Commons had suggested the addition of the statue of Oliver Cromwell to the statues now standing there; but, in his opinion, the best thing to do would be to take away all the present statues. LORD REDESDALE said, that, if the cost of the four statues at the India Office was £800, or £200 for each, an expenditure of £8,000 would be required for the whole number of forty statues which were intended to be erected. He thought it would be much better to add that sum of £8,000 to the amount required to be expended for the commencement of the new buildings. The statues were positively unsightly, and, in respect to position, contrary to every principle of architecture. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL-(No. 43.) (The Earl of Lichfield.) SECOND READING POSTPONED. Order of the Day for the Second Reading read. THE EARL OF LICHFIELD stated that he had agreed, at the request of the Government, to postpone the Motion for Second Reading until next week, and begged to correct a misconception respecting the 3rd clause. That clause would in no way interfere with the power given by previous Acts of Parliament to members of friendly societies to insure the lives of their own children. It simply prevented the children becoming members before the age of seven. In reply to a suggestion from a noble Lord on the other side, he begged to say that he was most ready to consent to the Bill being referred to a Select Committee; but upon the understanding that the Committee should confine itself strictly to the clauses of the Bill. He also begged to announce that he intended to move for the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the subject of the insurances of friendly societies in general, more especially with reference to burial societies. He was perfectly persuaded in his own mind that nothing short of a Commission would bring before the public what was going on amongst the working classes, in respect to those insurance offices and companies. In this Bill, he only dealt with the class of societies now registered under an Act of Parliament as friendly societies; but he was aware that a great deal of evil exists in some of those that are unregistered. Second Reading put off to Tuesday next. PUBLIC PETITIONS. Ordered, That the Name of the Lord presenting a Petition shall be written thereon. House adjourned at Six o'clock, to MINISTERIAL STATEMENT. DEFEAT THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: My Lords, your Lordships will naturally be anxious to know what course Her Majesty's Government have thought it right to take after the division which occurred in the other House of Parliament on Friday morning. I have, therefore, to inform your Lordships that on Friday afternoon Her Majesty was most graciously pleased to give the Prime Minister an audience. At that audience the Prime Minister thought it his duty to begin by informing Her Majesty of what had taken place in the House of Commons; and, after reminding Her Majesty of the circumstances under which the late Government was formed under the Earl of Derby, and also of the circumstances under which the present Parlia ment was called together, the Prime Minister stated to Her Majesty that he thought her advisers were, by constitutional precedent, justified in asking Her Majesty for a dissolution of Parliament. But he added that, if Her Majesty thought that, under the present exceptional circumstances of public affairs, it were more desirable for the country that Her Majesty should call upon other servants for advice, her present Ministers were ready to tender their resignations to Her Majesty, and they did actually tender them for Her Majesty's acceptance if Her Majesty so pleased. Her Majesty said that she would take this advice and statement into her consideration: and accordingly on the next day she was pleased to give the Prime Minister another audience. At that audience Her Majesty was graciously pleased to say that she would not accept the resignation of her Ministers, and that she was ready to dissolve Parliament whenever the state of public affairs would permit. Afterwards EARL GREY: My Lords, before the House is adjourned, I should wish to make a single observation upon the explanation we have just heard from the noble Lord who represents her Majesty's Government in this House. So far as I understand it I cannot acquiesce in what has fallen from that noble Lord. It would seem that an almost unprecedented state of affairs has come upon us, and-without venturing to express any opinion as to what is the present state of public opinion throughout the country-I beg to say that, for my own part. I do not wish it to be considered that I am committed to anything like an acquiescence in the propriety of the course which it appears is about to be pursued by Her Majesty's Ministers. The noble Earl stated that Her Majesty's Government, on being defeated in the other House of Parliament had, according to constitutional precedent, a right to ask the Crown for a dissolution of Parliament. I must beg to protest against that doctrine. What we used in former times to hear was this-that, when there was strong reason to believe that the House of Commons had misrepresented the feeling of the country, it was open to Ministers to appeal to the country in order to ascertain whether that feeling had or had not been rightly represented by the House of Commons; but that unless there existed strong grounds for believing that such a difference of opinion existed, the opinion expressed by the House of Commons must be considered to be that of the country. The noble Earl whom I see sitting opposite me (the Earl of Derby) will remember that this was the doctrine which was held in 1831 with regard to the dissolution of Parliament upon the question of Reform; and that the then head of the Government never concealed his opinion that that was a measure which, in his opinion, he should not have been justified in recommending, had he not felt assured that the course he proposed to pursue would be ratified by the decision of the nation-in fact, he considered that he would only be justified in taking such a course by success. I wish to make these general observations on the constitutional principle, as I do not believe that the mere fact of the Govern ment being defeated is in itself a justification for an appeal to the country. which my noble Friend made to your Lordships. My noble Friend was careful to point out that the advice tendered to the Crown by the Prime Minister was based, among other things, by the circumstances under which the present Parliament was elected. If your Lordships will carry back your recollection you will remember that the present Parliament was elected in 1865, at the time when the late Lord Palmerston was Prime Minister. Your Lordships will agree with me that, without entering into any argument as to the merits or demerits of the great question which has lately occupied the House of Commons, a more important one at no time ever engaged its attention. What was the issue presented to the country at the time the Parliament of 1865 was elected? Was the country at that time asked by the noble Lord who was then Prime Minister to express its opinion with regard to the disestablishment of the Irish Church? So far from that being the case only a short year or two years before the dissolution, Lord Palmerston, through the Chief Secretary of the Lord Lieutenant, one of his subordinate Ministers, declared in the House of Commens that so far as he was concerned no consent to any measure of that kind would be given. I speak, my Lords, from recollection of the words which I myself heard Sir Robert Peel, when Chief Secretary of the Lord Lieutenant, use, when he said he spoke in his own behalf and on the part of the first Minister of the Crown. It was under these circumstances that the country was asked to elect new representatives in 1865. We may entertain among ourselves opinions which may differ as to what view will now be taken by the country on this question; but in this all will agree, that, under such circumstances, the Parliament which was elected in 1865 is not a Parliament from which the opinion of the country can fairly be elicited; and that there should be an express appeal to the country on an issue of this kind. EARL GREY: I must confess the noble and learned Lord has rather added to my astonishment than diminished it by what he has said. For what does it come to? It comes to this-that the country is to decide upon every particular measure; and that, because this particular measure was not under consideration when the present My Parliament was elected, therefore it is not competent to the present Parliament to deal with it. The very same thing might have been said, if there was any force in THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Lords, I cannot help thinking that the noble Earl who has just sat down has somewhat misunderstood the statement the argument, with reference to Reform. aware of all the difficulties of the case. When the Parliament of 1830 was elected The Government say if they at once make the great question which was afterwards an appeal to the country it will involve brought before it had attracted but very the necessity of a second dissolution within slight attention; for it was the Revolution a very short period. Do Her Majesty's in France which first laid serious ground Government mean to appeal to the country for public opinion. The argument used at once, or only so soon as the state of pubwould have applied as much to that occa- lic business will allow them? Is the appeal sion as to the present. Further, it has to be put off until next February? because, always been held that what the country if so, Parliament would be in this positionis to decide upon is the confidence to be We have two Reform Bills before us which placed in certain persons as their represen- are necessary to a dissolution-is the Gotatives, and having elected these persons, vernment in a position to carry those it is the duty of such representatives to measures through Parliament? Or is it, exercise their judgment upon the measures on the other hand, intended that, as soon brought before them. The House of Com- as the money necessary to carry on the mons is not a meeting of delegates, but business of the country has been voted, of persons authorised to exercise their own Parliament will be dissolved? I should judgment and discretion on the great ques-like, if possible, to know what course the tions which concern the interests of the Government means to adopt. country. To say that Parliament is not competent to settle a question because it was not under consideration when that Parliament was elected, is, in point of fact, to say that Parliament is a mere assemblage of delegates, who can only express on each question the feeling of their constituents, and not a body elected to exercise their deliberate judgment on the questions which come before them. Such a doctrine is totally at variance with the opinion of our greatest statesmen, and it is one from which I, for one, entirely dis sent. THE LORD CHANCELLOR: The noble Earl has put into my mouth expressions which I never used. I did not say that Parliament was not competent to deal with the question; what I did say was that a vote on a subject of great national importance arrived at by a Parliament elected under circumstances which I endeavoured to describe, offered exactly one of those occasions on which the Government of the Sovereign, in the exercise of their constitutional right might fairly tender to the Sovereign that advice which on this occasion has been given. THE DUKE OF SOMERSET: I think, my Lords, it must be admitted that this discussion in the House of Lords is somewhat anomalous. We are now waiting to know what the House of Commons think of the present state of affairs. So far as I can understand, the Government gives no decisive opinion on the subject. The Government are in a minority in the House of Commons, and under such circumstances the usual course is either to resign or to appeal to the country. I am perfectly Her THE DUKE OF RICHMOND: I can assure the noble Duke that the Government have made up their minds very distinctly on this matter, and I cannot help thinking that the noble Duke was absent when my noble Friend the Lord Privy Seal made his statement to the House. Had the noble Duke been present he would not have made the remarks he has just made. I can only recapitulate to the noble Duke imperfectly what my noble Friend stated so clearly as to the position of affairs at this moment. The Prime Minister, on the part of his Colleagues, tendered to his Sovereign the resignation of their offices on Friday afternoon. Majesty took time to consider the matter, and received the Prime Minister again in audience on Saturday. Her Majesty expressed her unwillingness to accept the resignation of office tendered by the Prime Minister; and the result is that we still occupy the same position we did before, and intend to conduct the affairs of the country so long as we are able to do so; and in the event of any difficulties arising Her Majesty was graciously pleased to state that she would make no objection to a dissolution of Parliament. It, of course, will depend upon the state of affairs whether that dissolution shall be a dissolution under the existing constituency, or whether it shall be a dissolution under the new constituency to be formed under the Reform Acts; but Her Majesty was graciously pleased to state that she would make no objection to either course being adopted by her Advisers whenever they should see fit to tender to Her Majesty a recommendation on that subject. LORD FEVERSHAM: My Lords, I must express my satisfaction that Her Majesty's Advisers have not resigned their offices; for I cannot disguise from myself that, owing to the course pursued by the Opposition during the present Session, a fair and reasonable opportunity of carrying on the business of the country has not been afforded to the Government. It was a most extraordinary circumstance that the very first night the present Prime Minister went down to the other House of Parliament to assume the reins of Government -on which occasion he was received on both sides with marks of cordiality and warmth the noble Earl (Earl Russell) who is not now in his place, thought it becoming to deliver a most uncalled for and bitter attack upon my right hon. Friend. Before the Government had actually been arranged, or the distribution of offices settled, the noble Earl came down and made that most unjustifiable attack on the First Minister of the Crown. The Ministerial party no doubt regret very much the loss which the country must sustain by the retirement of the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby); but it was clear from the long and distinguished services of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), from the way in which he has raised himself by his own abilities, energy, and industry, to the head of his party in the House of Commons, he must naturally succeed to the office of First Minister when the noble Earl resigned. The least which the Prime Minister might have expected from Parliament was fair play, and that he has not received. After the adoption in last Session of the important measure of Parliamentary Reform, it was obvious that the necessary business of the present Session was to complete that great work by passing the Scotch and Irish Reform Bills, supplemented by the Boundary and Bribery Bills. Surely that business, in addition to the ordinary work carried on in every Session, was sufficient to occupy one Session of a moribund Parliament; and yet the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire (Mr. Gladstone), without notice, came forward with this question of the Irish Church, which up to that moment had never been heard of. The Parliament and country were, therefore, taken by surprise. I must, however, say that the noble Earl (Earl Grey) opposite, and another noble Earl not at present in his place, having raised the war-cry on that question, now, when they see the difficulties and the crisis which have arisen, make every excuse for the course they pursued. Then, may it not be said that an unfair advantage has been taken of the Ministry in bringing forward this question of the Irish Church at the present peculiar time, when it is so difficult to test the sense of the country? But if I know anything of the practice of Parliament, all I can say is, that an Administration placed in a minority in a Parliament not their own, have the undoubted privilege of appealing to the constituencies. Here, however, is a question brought forward at a time so inopportune that it is most difficult to deal with it in the usual way. I am rejoiced that the Government will not yield up their offices in consequence of the unworthy and unjustifiable attack that has been made upon them; and I challenge noble Lords on the Opposition Benches to say whether the Administration of this country has not been conducted with ability and success. I challenge them to say whether they can find fault with the Administration of the Government in any of the great Departments of the State? Can they find fault with the administration of affairs in reference to Ireland or in respect to the domestic concerns of this country? The able manner in which the foreign affairs of the country have been carried on merit entire commendation; and it redounds to the credit of the Government that they have brought the Abyssinian War to such a successful termination. Under these circumstances, it would be highly inexpedient and unusual if. Her Majesty's Advisers were to resign their offices without making an appeal to the country on so great a question as this of the Irish Church; and I believe that the Protestant feeling of the country will be found opposed to the disestablishment of the Irish Church. However, I trust that, after what has occurred, the Opposition will see the error of their ways, and will not persist in that reckless and extraordinary course they have pursued on this question. Depend upon it, it will be better for all parties to allow the ordinary business of the Session to be carried on, and to complete the great work of Re form; for nothing can be more important than to complete that great constitutional change upon which the future representation of the people is to be based. House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock. |