ing ship, from which they should be | informed him with great candour that drafted into the Navy and the Mercantile the Vote was not really withdrawn. Mr. Marine, the Admiralty paying its pro- Jervoise, our Diplomatic Agent at the portion for the boys it so received, and Vatican, was appointed to that post in the Mercantile Marine in like manner 1870; but the noble Lord informed him bearing its proportion. The right hon. that the appointment was only temporary, Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers) and that the salary he should receive as appeared to think that in what had fallen clerk in the Foreign Office-namely, from him with reference to the Reserves £530-had already been voted under he had cast a personal reflection on him the head "Foreign Office," while an for his conduct while at the Admiralty. additional allowance of £270 had also Nothing had been further from his in- been voted under "Incidental Extention. He felt that they owed too much penses,' " and the remaining £200 was to that right hon. Gentleman for his valu- paid, as it was paid to Mr. Odo able services in regard to the Reserves to Russell, his predecessor in Rome, for have said anything which looked like a house rent. The noble Lord also inreflection upon him in that matter. With formed him that Mr. Jervoise's stay in respect to the course he should take on Rome was rendered necessary by the that occasion, it was clear to him that refusal of the Pope to hold any diplothe Admiralty and the Board of Trade matic intercourse with the Diplomatic were now maturing their plans. They Agent accredited to the King of Italy. had not travelled as fast as he could Now, it was a grave question whether have wished; but still he believed they this country should continue to maintain were now on the right road, and there- diplomatic intercourse with an individual fore he felt that it would be wrong in who was not the Sovereign of the Roman him to embarrass their scheme by di- States, and whether, in case that course viding the House. Next Session, if the was followed, the Vote for Diplomatic plan which they brought forward was Agency should practically be withdrawn found to be inadequate, he should have from Parliamentary control. He cared it in his power to renew his Motion. nothing for the religious persuasion of the individual to whom a Diplomatic Agent was sent; but what he objected to was that the responsible Minister of the Crown should have withdrawn the Vote from the cognizance of Parliament, so as to leave the House to suppose that no Vote whatever was required for this Mission. Last Thursday, in answer to a Question, the noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had informed him that Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE VATICAN.-RESOLUTION. MR. MONK rose to call attention to the withdrawal from Class 5, Vote 1, in the Estimates for Diplomatic Services for the current year, of the Vote for the expenses of the Diplomatic Mission to the Vatican; and to move— "That, in the opinion of this House, the omission of the Vote for Diplomatic Services at Rome, in page 343 of the Estimates, was calculated to mislead Parliament into the belief that no Vote was required this year for the Diplomatic Mission to the Vatican." The hon. Gentleman said, that last year the sum of £800 was voted for the Secretary of the Embassy at the Vatican, with £200 for house rent, and this year he intended to ask the Government what advantage this country derived from the double Mission to Rome; but finding that the Vote had been omitted from the Estimates, he withdrew the Question which he had placed on the Notice Paper. When, however, he spoke to the noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs on the subject, the noble Lord The salary of Mr. Clarke Jervoise as a clerk in the Foreign Office, amounting to £530, has been voted under sub-head A of the Vote for the Foreign Office; the additional allowance of £270 has been also voted under sub-head D for incidental expenses in the same Vote for the Foreign Office, and the allowance for house rent, amounting to £200, will be taken out of the Vote for Diplomatic Services under the sub-head P for Special Missions and Services, Mr. Jervoise's appointment at Rome being considered of a special or temporary character. In the Act of Parliament which had been passed in 1848 to regulate our diplomatic intercourse with the Roman States, it was expressly provided that it should be lawful for Her Majesty to establish and maintain diplomatic relations, and to hold diplomatic intercourse with the Sovereign of the Roman States, and it was a grave and important ques- | In accordance with that recommendation, tion whether this country could lawfully the Foreign Office received instructions send a Representative to the Court of an from the Treasury to put down Mr. individual who was not now Sovereign Jervoise's salary in the Estimates in the of those States. We had a Minister- way in which it had been put down. Sir Augustus Berkeley Paget-at the The Foreign Office had simply acted Court of the King of Italy, who was the under instructions from the Treasury, Sovereign of the Roman States; but whe- and the Treasury had acted in accordther our Government had been right or ance with the Report of the Committee wrong in sending a Diplomatic Agent to on Public Accounts. The Act alluded the Vatican as well, there could be no to permitted Her Majesty to hold diplodoubt that it was highly injudicious and matic communications with the Soveimproper to withdraw the Vote from its reign of the Roman States, and if the proper place in the Estimates, and to Pope had recognized the King of Italy split it up into three parts, two of which there would have been no further occahad been already voted without the sion for the services of Mr. Jervoise. But House knowing anything about it. The the Pope had not done so, and it was conhon. Gentleman concluded by moving sidered that it would be unfair if this the Resolution of which he had given country were left without any represenNotice. tative to discharge duties that had hitherto been discharged in connection with the Papal Court. Financially, there was no intention to deceive the House, and next year, if he were in office, he would see that the matter was stated so that it could not be misunderstood. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "in the opinion of this House, the omission of the Vote for Diplomatic Services at Rome, in page 343 of the Estimates, was calculated to mislead Parliament into the belief that no Vote was required this year for the Diplomatic Mission Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." VISCOUNT ENFIELD said, he hoped, in the few observations he had to address to the House, he should be able to convince the hon. Gentleman that there was no attempt on the part of the Treasury or the Foreign Office to deceive the House in this matter. Had Mr. Jervoise been a regular diplomatic Secretary of Legation or Secretary of Embassy, or even an Attaché, no doubt, his salary would have appeared in the Vote for Diplomatic Services; but that was not the case, and as he received an increase of salary while he performed temporary diplomatic duties, it had been arranged, in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee on Public Accounts, that his salary should be accounted for in the way it had been, the recommendation being in these terms "Where a public officer receives a grant or temporary increase of his fixed salary in respect of special services, we are of opinion that provision should be made accordingly in connection with the Vote in which the fixed salary is charged." MR. SINCLAIR AYTOUN wished to re-state the legal question. Formerly it was illegal to accredit a Diplomatic Agent to the Pope; then an Act was passed by which power was given to accredit one to the Sovereign of the Papal States. As the Pope had ceased. to be a temporal Sovereign, how could we legally accredit a Diplomatic Agent to him? Was Mr. Jervoise acting as a subordinate to Sir Augustus Paget, or had he a separate commission? Did he correspond with the Foreign Office direct, or through Sir Augustus Paget? [Viscount ENFIELD said, they held sepaUnder those cirrate commissions.] cumstances, he wished to know if any similar course had ever been adopted in the case of any other country? At the same time, he would be glad to hear for what purpose Mr. Jervoise was accredited to the Pope. The Government were bound to offer an explanation on these points; and he appealed for one to the Attorney General. MR. SCLATER-BOOTH was inclined to think there was something anomalous in the position of Mr. Jervoise; but did not understand that the adoption of the Committee's recommendation was called in question. MR. BAXTER said, the recommendation of the Committee was approved at once by the Treasury, which communi cated with the Foreign Office, and the recommendation was at once acted upon. MR. M'LAREN said, this was not a question of accounts, but of legality. The Roman Pontiff had ceased to be a Sovereign; therefore he wanted to know why the Government sent a diplomatic representative to him, thus spending public money without Parliamentary sanction, and, by implication, violating an Act of Parliament. Not a word had been said on that point. The appropriation of the money was altogether without the sanction of Parliament. This gentleman (Mr. Jervoise) could not be acting as a clerk in the Foreign Office at the time he was in Rome. If Parliament voted £600 for a clerk in the Foreign Office, Parliament meant that he should sit at his desk, and should not go to Rome as an Envoy to the Pope. So long as the Roman Pontiff reigned in the Roman States, it might have been right that we should be represented there; but the moment he ceased to reign such an act was improper, and he believed illegal. He should, therefore, cordially support the Motion. VISCOUNT ENFIELD assured the hon. Member that clerks in the Foreign Office were constantly detached for special services, and yet continued to be clerks of the Foreign Office, and to draw their salaries. At this moment one was in Washington, engaged on the work of the Treaty, and three were at Geneva; but they did not cease to be clerks in the Foreign Office because the exigencies of the public service induced the Secretary of State to send them to discharge public duties in different parts of the world. MR. DICKINSON asked what were the relations which this gentleman was to maintain at the Papal Court? Such a Mission was not the work of a Foreign Office clerk, but of a diplomatic representative. SIR PERCY BURRELL said, it was quite clear that Mr. Jervoise was an unauthorized agent at Rome. The Act of Parliament allowed Her Majesty to send a representative to the Sovereign of the Roman States; but Mr. Jervoise was accredited to one who was not the Potentate of the Roman States, and the appointment was therefore illegal. MR. OSBORNE MORGAN observed that no answer had been given to the objection that this Vote sanctioned the accrediting of a Diplomatic Agent to a non-existing Sovereign. Before 1848 it was absolutely unlawful to accredit an English Diplomatic Agent to the Pope of Rome. The Act of 1848 empowered the Queen to accredit a representative not to the Pope of Rome, but to the Sovereign of the Roman States. Now, the Pope had ceased to be the Sovereign of the Roman States, and in point of law he was the subject of the King of Italy, and there appeared to be no useful purpose served by this mission. It had been said that the Pope had not yet acknowledged the Sovereignty of the King of Italy; but if we waited till that time we might wait till the Greek Kalends. Queen Isabella was not likely to acknowledge the sovereignty of King Amadeus; but we did not on that account continue to send a representative to Queen Isabella. Unless he heard from the Attorney General a better reply than had been given by the noble Lord he should regard this Vote as absolutely illegal, and would therefore vote against it. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL remarked that the Act to which reference had been made was brought into Parliament as a Bill to enable the Queen of this country to hold relations with the Sovereign Pontiff. There could be no doubt as to who the Sovereign Pontiff was; and the term " Sovereign of the Roman States" was put into the Act by the then Lord Derby in the House of Lords not for the purpose of describing any other person than the Pope, but as a description of the Pope which would not offend the religious susceptibility of many English people. The Queen however was empowered to hold diplomatic relations with a particular person who might be called Pope, Sovereign Pontiff, Bishop of Rome, or Sovereign of the Roman States. He was at that time Sovereign of certain portions of Italy, and although a great deal of that State had been taken from him he remained, within certain very small limits, an independent Sovereign. He believed that in a certain portion of Rome, the Pope was still supreme, and had the power of life and death. He did not pretend to an accurate knowledge on this point; nor was it material for his argument. The claim of the Pope to be an independent Sovereign was exactly what it was before the Act of 1848, and could not depend upon whether he had lost nine-tenths or even nineteen-twentieths of his domi- | That Motion was simply a Vote of Cennions. Nay, more, Pope Pius IX. was sure for the form in which the Vote was actually the same person with whom the laid upon the Table. But the form of Act of 1848 authorized diplomatic rela- the Vote was entirely in pursuance of tions. The Act of Parliament which the recommendations of the Committee. empowered the Queen to hold these relations with the Sovereign of the Roman States eo nomine was in no degree affected because since that time a large portion of his dominions had been taken from him. The importance of a Throne, and of holding diplomatic relations with it, must not be measured by the number of square miles of a country over which it rules; and "the Sovereign of the Roman States" were mere words of description, the person remaining the same. SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN said, his hon. Friends near him prided themselves on their advocacy of the principle of non-intervention; but the moment what was called "the red rag" of Popery was shaken in their faces the non-intervention principle of hon. Gentlemen vanished. There was one observation, however, which he wished to make, and which would commend itself to the common sense of everyone. Was there a Power in Europe, no matter how antagonistic to the Pope-such as Germany or Russia, that did not acknowledge the status of the Sovereign Pontiff; and, whether possessed of a large dominion or of the Leonine City alone, was there a man in this House who would say that the Pope was not a Power in Europe? It was not befitting, therefore, that this country, containing within it, as it did, so many different religions, should in this age of enlightenment be the only nation in Europe to ignore the fact that there was still a great Power resident in the Leonine City, and should be the first to withdraw the man who had been appointed to maintain diplomatic relations with that Power. MR. MACFIE contended that this country would never have sent any diplomatist to an ecclesiastic. It was only because that ecclesiastic happened to be a temporal Sovereign that diplomatic relations had been maintained with him. He, therefore, for one, as representing a Scotch constituency, could not compromise either his constituents or his country by doing anything now to perpetuate those relations. MR. CARDWELL desired to call attention to the Motion before the House. MR. MONK said, that a great error of judgment had been committed by Her Majesty's Government in the matter. Under the circumstances, however, he would not ask the House to divide; but on the Vote of £200, on which the question might again he raised, he would certainly take the opinion of the House. And it being ten minutes before Seven of the clock, the Debate was adjourned till this day. And it being now five minutes to Seven of the clock the House suspended its sitting. The House resumed its sitting at Nine of the clock. EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL. Order of the Day for the consideration of the Lords' Amendments read. THE LORD ADVOCATE said, that in moving that the Lords' Amendments be now considered, it would be satisfactory to the House if he stated, in a very few words, the course which the Govern- . ment meant to pursue with reference to the Amendments. He hoped he should be able to do so in such a manner as neither to provoke nor invite any preliminary discussion. The first Amendment of the Lords was upon the Preamble, and introduced a certain narrative with respect to instruction in religion. That Amendment he should propose to amend, so as to make it more strictly accurate in point of fact, and then, subject to the Amendment which he should propose, he should ask the House to agree to the Lords' Amendment. The second Amendment related to the Scotch Education Board. The view of the Lords in reference to this matter differed, in some, but not many, essential respects from the proposal contained in the 3rd clause of the Bill as it left the Commons. The chief of the distinctions was, that the Lords proposed to call that a Board which the Commons called an organizing Commission; and, of course, he should not for a moment think of asking the House to disagree upon Motion agreed to. Lords' Amendments considered. Page 1, line 20, after ("Scotland") insert And whereas it has been the usage in Scotland, sanctioned by legislation, to make provision for religious instruction in public schools as an essential part of education, and it is desirable in extending the system of education to afford means children whose parents do not decline it on confor continuing such religious instruction to all scientious grounds, the first Amendment, read a second time. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the first word "the" to the end of the Amendment, in order to add the words "custom in the public schools of Scotland to give instruction in religion to children whose parents with liberty to parents, without forfeiting any of did not object to the instruction so given, but the other advantages of the schools, to elect that their children should not receive such instruction, and it is expedient that the managers of public schools shall be at liberty to continue the said custom," (The Lord Advocate,) with their Lordships upon a mere name. I which related to parents of poor children But there was no provision in the clause refusing or having the choice of the introduced by the House of Lords for school to which their children should be the cessation of the Board after the ex- sent. To these Amendments he should piry of such a period as should be ask the House to assent. He moved thought sufficient for them to discharge that the Amendments be now conthe whole of the duties by the Act im-sidered. posed upon them. He should therefore propose to amend the Lords' Amendment to the extent of making the Board a temporary Board, the period of its endurance being substantially the same as the Government proposed for the organizing Commission. With respect to the duties of the Board, they did not propose to interfere with the views of the Lords, but those were duties to be performed during the period of their existence as defined upon the clause sent down by the House of Lords. But there was one matter upon which they thought it proper to make the provisions of the Bill quite clear-namely, the preparation of the Minutes upon which the Parliamentary grant was to be distributed. He did not think there was any substantial difference between Her Majesty's Government and the House of Lords upon this matter; but they thought it fitting to make the language such that there should be no doubt two points -in the first place, that it should be the duty of the Scotch Board to offer their suggestions on this subject to the-instead thereof. Government-that was, to the Education Department; and, in the second place, that it should be the duty and the responsibility of the Department to prepare the Minutes containing the rates and conditions according to which the Parliamentary grants were to be distributed. With those Amendments he substantially assented to the Amendments of the Lords upon that head; but he thought it proper to explain the facts, in order that the House might quite understand the Amendments he had to propose upon the Lords' Amendments. In order to make the Board temporary in its duration; in order to make the matters clear to which he had adverted; and also to correct what appeared to him to be a certain inconvenience, if not an absolute inaccuracy in point of drafting, they proposed to substitute other clauses for those which the Lords had introduced into the Bill. The only other Amendments of any materiality proposed by the Lords were upon the Conscience Clause, and upon the clause of the Bill VOL. CCXIII. [THIRD SERIES.] MR. GORDON protested against the inconvenience of the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate coming down to the House, and making proposals which hon. Members first heard as they were just put from the Chair, and had not therefore the opportunity of considering. The general rule of occasions of this kind was either to accept or reject the Amendments of the Lords, and not propose, as was now done, to amend them. He invited the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate to state clearly the nature of his objection to the form of the Amendments proposed by the Lords. For his own part, he saw no difference, and therefore he could not admit the necessity for the alteration proposed. THE LORD ADVOCATE said, his reason was generally that the form he proposed was more accurate in point of fact than the statement in the Preamble proposed by the House of Lords. The House would be in a position to judge between them, whether the words they had just heard as put from the Chair G |