*SIR JOSEPH DIMSDALE (London) benefit of the Port. That was not the opposed the Motion. It was not necessary fact. The Council had no reserve to for him, as the representative of the City make free gifts of the kind, and the of London, to answer the unjust innu- money would have to be found by the endoes thrown out by the hon. Member ratepayers. He objected to the Resolufor Poplar. The Prime Minister had tion, and could not support it. This was said, in reply to a Question, that as the not a quasi-private Bill but a GovernBill was a quasi-public Bill, it could ment Bill. What took place at the properly be carried over to next session. Joint Committee was simply to push the But the Bill was purely a public Bill. Bill through, to rush it as quickly as The Bill was brought in by the President possible. The Prime Minister should at of the Board of Trade, was almost forced least allow the Resolution for recommitthrough this House on Second Reading ment standing in his hon. friend's name, after a very short debate. It was im- the Member for the City, and his own, to mediately handed over to the Joint Com- be properly debated when the Bill again mittee. The Chairman of that Joint came before the House. Committee strained almost to breaking point his prerogative as chairman, with the view of getting the Bill reported to the House, so that it might pass this session. The Bill was very far-reaching in its influence. It effectually wiped out the docks of London as a private enter prise, and it performed a similar act with regard to the Thames Conservancy. It was destruction to the Watermen's Company, it involved very large expenditure, and none of the threatened interests had been permitted to defend themselves by evidence before the Joint Committee. If it was contended that it was a Private Bill the preamble should have been proved. It was absolutely necessary it should be discussed by the whole House. He had been amused by a letter in The Times from a member of the London County Council, which either showed what ignorance was displayed by some members of the Council, or was designed to throw dust in the eyes of the rate This gentleman spoke of £2,500,000 being given by the London County Council as a free gift for the VOL. CXXVII. [FOURTH SERIES.] payers. *MR. REA (Gloucester) said the decision of the chairman to exclude the question of the purchase of the docks was unanimously approved by the Committee on the ground that it was in the nature of a principle agreed to by the House on the Second Reading. MR. SYDNEY BUXTON asked whether the Bill was carried over for a session of this Parliament, or, in the event of a dissolution, to a new Parlia ment. MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is quite irrespective of a dissolution. MR. DAVID MORGAN (Essex, (Walthamstow) asked whether, if the Bill was hung over till next session, the companies in the interval would be free to carry on their business just as if no Bill had been brought in, and to apply to Parliament for further monetary powers if they wished to do so. 2 Q Ordered, That further proceedings on the Port of London Bill be suspended till the next session of Parliament. Ordered, That on any day in that session a Motion may be made, after notice, by a Minister of the Crown, to be decided without Amendment or debate, that proceedings on that Bill may be resumed, and if that Motion is decided in the affirmative the said Bill, as reported from the Joint Committee, shall stand committed to a Committee of the Whole House in like manner as if the previous proceedings on the Bill or in relation thereto had taken place in that session, after duc compliance with all Standing Orders. MR. BUCHANAN (Perthshire, E ask whether the Lord Advocate could assure the House that there was no Ordered, That this Order be a Standing Order of the House. (Mr. A. J. substantial alteration in the Bill. Balfour.) REVENUE BILL. *THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire) said the As amended, considered; Bill read Amendments involved no substantial the third time, and passed. EMPLOYMENT OF CHILDREN BILL. Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to. LICENSING ACTS (SCOTLAND) CON- Lords Amendments considered. MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid) moved, as a consequential Amendment, in page 5, line 22, after "appeal" to insert "and no other magistrate is a vailable." alteration, with one exception. By an Amendment introduced in this House, railway refreshment rooms were exempted from the Bill. It had been pointed out that that might allow them to be opened on Sundays, and an Amendment had been inserted in another place to prevent that. An Asterisk (*) at the commencement of a Speech indicates revision by the Member. LIGHT RAILWAYS ACT, 1896. Orders made by the Light Railway Commissioners, and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade. I. Authorising the Construction of Light Railways in-The city of Gloucester; the parishes of Wotton St. Mary (Without), Barnwood, Hucclecote, and Brockworth, in the county of Gloucester. II. Amending the Callington Light Railway Order, 1900. III. Amending the West Manchester Light Railways Örder, 1899, and authorising the construction of additional light railways in the parish and urban district of Stretford, in the county of Lancaster. Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table. LOCAL TAXATION RETURNS (SCOT- NAVAL SAVINGS BANKS. Account of deposits in Naval Savings Banks and the payments thereof, and of interest thereon, of all investments under the Naval Savings Banks Act, 1866, and the application of the interest or dividends accruing in respect thereof, and of the proceeds of any sale of any stocks, annuities, or securities during the financial year 1901-1902. HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (IRELAND) FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1870. Two Orders in Council of the 10th August, 1903, entitled "The Niger Navigation Order in Council, 1903," and "The Niger Transit Order in Council, 1903." "OPTIONS" AND "FUTURES" IN FOOD-DOCKYARD PORTS REGULATION ACT, STUFFS (LEGISLATION RESPECTING). Reports from the Canadian Government and from His Majesty's representatives abroad on legislative measures VOL. CXXVII. [FOURTH SERIES.] 1865. Order in Council of the 10th August, 1903, making rules and regulations for the dockyard port of Queenstown. 2 R MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894. Two Orders in Council of 10th August, 1903, (a) varying the dues payable in 1espect of the Basses and Minicoy lights, a and (b) confirming three Merchant Shipping Ordinances enacted by the Governor and Legislative Council of Hong Kong. MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894, AND MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) ACT, 1898. Order in Council of 10th August, 1903, altering the scale of light dues set out in the Second Schedule to the Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Act, 1898. Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table. REVENUE BILL. Brought from the Commons. SHEEP SCAB BILL. PATENT OFFICE (EXTENSION) BILL. Read 3a (according to Order), and passed. LICENSING ACTS (SCOTLAND) CONSOLIDATION AND AMENDMENT BILL Commons consequential Amendment considered (on Motion), and agreed to. REVENUE BILL. Read 1a Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended), read 2a: Committee negatived: Bill read 3a, and passed. MACEDONIA, CHINA, AND VENEZUELA. * EARL SPENCER: My Lords, seeing the noble Marquess, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, I beg to ask him a series of Questions, of which I have given him private_notice. The first refers to Macedonia. I think everyone must regret to see in the news Returned from the Commons, with the papers that the state of things in MaceAmendment agreed to. donia seems now worse than when the last conversation about them took place in this House. I hope the noble Marquess will be able to give us some assurance with regard to that country, and will also explain the attitude which His Majesty's Government has taken in regard to the grave state of affairs which prevails there a state of affairs which, I am afraid, shows that the arrangements proposed by the Austrian and Russian Governments have not succeeded in re storing contentment and happiness to the people. The second Question is with regard to China. We do not know whether the reports are true which have appeared in the newspapers, but we have during the last few weeks repeatedly seen accounts of disputes between the powers at Shanghai and the Chinese Government, in regard to certain Chinese connected, I believe, with the Press, who have been tried for alleged sedition. We understand from the public Press that there has been a demand for these men to be given up to the Chinese Govern ment at Peking, or its representatives. I should like to know from the noble Marquess what has taken place with regard to that, and what line His Majesty's Government has taken. The third Question which I have to put to the noble Marquess is with regard to Venezuela. According to the protocol made at the time of the dispute which took place with regard to Venezuela, certain matters were to be referred to the tribunal at the Hague, among them being the question whether the money to be paid by Venezuela in satisfaction of the various claims against her, was to be paid preferentially to Great Britain, Germany, and Italy, or equally between all the creditors of Venezuela. I wish to know whether the proposal included in the protocol has been carried out, to the effect that these matters should be referred to the tribunal at the Hague, and that the Czar of Russia should name the three Commissioners to form that tribunal. If this has not been carried out, I should be glad if the noble Marquess would inform us why it has not been done. Perhaps I had better read the Questions which I desire to put to the noble Marquess. They are: (1) whether he can give the House any information as to the position of affairs in Macedonia, and the attitude of His Majesty's Government in relation to the state of things in that country; (2) as to the question of giving up certain Chinese journalists who have been tried, or are still under trial, at Shanghai, to the Chinese Government at Peking, or to its representatives; and (3) as to what steps have been taken to carry out the engagements of the protocol of 7th May, made between Great Britain and Venezuela for the appointment of three persons, to form a tribunal under The Hague Convention, to determine whether the money to be paid by Venezuela, in satisfaction of the various claims against her, is to be paid preferentially to Great Britain, Germany, and Italy, or equally between all the creditors of Venezuela; whether the Emperor of Russia has been asked by His Majesty's Government to appoint the three persons, and, if this has not been done, why not? *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE): My Lords, I am afraid I cannot add very much to the information which is, no doubt, already in the possession of the noble Earl with regard to affairs in the Balkan Peninsula. We all hoped that the insurrectionary movement which prevailed in that part of Europe during the spring had permanently abated, and that it would become possible to intro duce into that country the reforms of which it stands so much in need. That hope has, unfortunately, been disappointed, and we are aware that a very serious recrudescence of the trouble has recently taken place, mainly, I am afraid, owing to the increased activity of the Bulgarian revo utionary bands. The noble Earl desires to be informed of the attitude of His Majesty's Government with regard to this matter. The noble Earl will recollect that in the spring we readily admitted the claim of AustriaHungary and Russia to deal with this question, and to propose measures of reform for Macedonia. We gladly supported the proposals of the two Governments, although we made reservations in case these measures should fail of success. If they have failed, I do not know that we can be very greatly surprised; because it would be almost too much to hope that the introduction of reforms would be possible during such a period of unrest as that through which these provinces have lately been passing. in We have recognised that, if it was the duty of the Turkish Goverment, on the one hand, to take energetic measures for the suppression of these disorders, it was also their duty to restrain their troops from excesses, and to use their fluence over the Mussulman population with the same object. Advice of that kind has constantly been given to the Turkish Government by our Ambassador, Sir Nicholas O'Conor, and we have every reason to believe that it has been taken to heart. We have received during the last two or three days a circular communication from the Turkish Government, in which they announce that considerable progress has been made in the execution of the scheme of reforms; that punishments by imprisonment and degradation have been inflicted on the soldiers who committed excesses at Komanoff, Matzoff, and Smirdesk, and on the officers who failed to restrain them; that Courtsmartial have also been instituted at Uskub, Monastir, and other places in these vilayets for the trial and punishment of similar offenders, and that several civil officials, of whom the Ambassadors have complained as failing in their duty, have been suspended and Sir Nicholas O'Conor tele recalled. |