come to an end of the systems of subventions and assistance to local taxation. But the House should bear in mind that if the rates were falling it was due in a great measure to the fact that we had given subventions. The policy to which Her Majesty's Government were pledged had borne very substantial fruit. The right hon. Gentleman would not expect him to make pledges or to embarrass the Government with respect to a future policy. In any adjustment of taxation they must consider local finance as an important point of the question. But he was ready to accept the view which the right hon. Gentleman asked him to accept-namely, that what had been done since Her Majesty's Government acceded to office had been in the nature of a redemption of the pledge which they recognized when they came into office. They had been told last night that they had developed these things by degrees; but they announced from the beginning certain points, though they developed them only by degrees. He wished it to be clearly understood that in this matter they were entering into no pledges for the future. He considered it the duty of the Government in the question of local taxation to pay due attention to the subject of local administration. Whatever they had done with regard to subventions would be most incomplete, and in some respects perhaps productive of mischief, if Her Majesty's Government considered that the whole task before them. They did not pledge themselves to bring forward any great measure of local administration; but they would be anxious, wherever they could do it, to introduce improvements, such as they had indicated on many occasions, for the improvement of local administration, and, therefore, for the relief of burdens, not so much by giving relief from the Imperial Exchequer as by rendering the burdens more lightly to be borne. Ashe had said already, some loans were applied for the purpose of promoting the public service, some for improvements; and with regard to these there were different considerations to be borne in mind. They must not throw upon the owners of property, for the benefit of the country at large, burdens they would have no share in regulating. Suppose they threw upon a county the burden of building lunatic asylums, they would not do that for the benefit of the owners of the county; nor, in general, had owners a voice in determining that such expenditure should be incurred. Then there were a great many other improvements which were forced upon the owners of property. His right hon. Friend had pointed out that a great proportion of the debt was cast on owners by special Acts of Parliament not promoted by them, but rather by the occupiers. What they ought to look at was that if they adjusted the burdens unjustly they threw a great impediment in the way of getting the work properly done. It did not always follow that the owner was a rich man; they had often to deal with poor owners, and that had been found one great difficulty in effecting improvements of great importance. In a pamphlet published some years ago by Mr. Edwin Chadwick, that gentleman stated that in many cases the cost of the improvements amounted to more than the whole rental of the property. Where money was raised by borrowing there was a natural solution. The money raised was charged on the occupier and was to be repaid by him in a certain time, which had reference to the probable duration of the improvement. If the occupier's tenure were equal to the duration of the improvement he enjoyed the benefit of it and paid back the loan, but if his tenure were less the charge remained on the land, and the incoming occupier would have to pay it, and of course arranged his rent accordingly, so that the matter was self-acting if the time for repayment were properly arranged. There was great danger in making the repayment fall within too short a time, for then it would fall too heavily on the occupier, while on the other hand if the time were made too short burdens might be thrown on the proprietor without his consent, and from which he would never derive any benefit. Of course, the balance of the Savings Bank Fund would be made available for the loans; but he could not say to what extent the Commissioners would be prepared to supply a certain proportion of the money. The question of the Valuation Bill and of the House Tax lay outside the immediate field of this measure. They had a Bill before the House on that subject, and he hoped it would be proceeded with if the House assisted the Government to economize time, but they were in a difficult position with regard to getting through everything that appeared upon the Order Book. They proposed to reprint the Public Works Loan Bill with Amendments, and he hoped the House would now allow them to proceed, so that they might get the money necessary for the advances. The they were justified in suspecting that set on this occasion in the construction of MR. CHILDERS complimented the President of the Local Government Board on the admirable manner in which he had brought the subject before the House. The statistics stated by his right hon. Friend would dispel many illusions. One of these was that the burden of local taxation amounted to £26,500,000 ayear, whereas it was only £22,000,000. Another illusion dispelled was the exaggerated notion of the effect of the Go-dent of the Local Government Board had vernment measures for the relief of local taxation. The charge, as far as the rural districts were concerned, had been reduced from 28. 9d. in the pound to something between 2s. 6d. and 28. 9d., or about 14d. in the pound, whilst in the towns the rates had increased by 2d. or 3d. in the pound, and on the other side there had been an addition of 1d. to the Income Tax. Although he took exception to some of the remarks of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and hoped they would not in future years be taken as a rule to guide them, he thought the right hon. Gentleman had rendered good service in qualifying the rather summary refusal with which the President of the Local Government Board met the Motion of the hon. Member for Hackney. That Motion touched a question of great interest, and, instead of going into it, the President of the Local Government Board snuffed it out with the remark that in towns it was impossible to get at the owner. He held it was perfectly possible to get at the owner and distribute the charge between the persons interested in house property. It was a problem which was by no means difficult to solve, and it must be solved if they wished to settle the question. They had also to thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for another statement he had made, because for some time they had been drifting they knew not where in regard to the relief of local taxation from Imperial funds. In his Budget speech in 1874 there was no allusion to prisons, and when an addition was made to the points then enumerated The Chancellor of the Exchequer SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL said, he only wished to make one remark with regard to that which had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to a boon which the people of Scotland thought they had a right to, in order to put them on an equality with other people. He understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that probably the public loans to Scotland would be at 4 per cent, and not 3 per cent. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider this question. In Scotland the price of money was lower than anywhere else. The Scotch were a prudent people, and could get money cheaper than it was to be obtained by most. There were very few cases where the local bodies could not borrow at 4 per cent on their own credit, and it would be a great disappointment to them if the Government loans they thought themselves entitled to were not given at 33 per cent. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer was influenced by something that was said by the hon. Member for Hackney (Mr. Fawcett), with whom he had sat on the Public Works Loan Commission. He (Sir George Campbell) took a different view with regard to the evidence given before the Commission with regard to loans at 3 per cent to that of the hon. Member. The hon. Member had said that these loans were a loss to the public Exchequer; but he (Sir George Campbell) took a different view of the result of the evidence. It was true it was brought out in evidence that, taking into account what had occurred with regard to some old Irish loans, which no one expected would be repaid, and some others, there had been a loss to the Exchequer ; but, on the other hand, he thought it was distinctly brought out that modern loans, such as they would give to the prudent people of Scotland, was not likely to prove a loss if given at 3 per cent, for this reason, that the Government was able to borrow at 3 per cent, and when they lent the money so borrowed at 33 per cent there was a certain margin to cover any possible loss. Therefore, he contended, the kind of loan he referred to was not likely to result in a loss to the Exchequer, and they should be given to the people of Scotland at the rate they expected. He was aware that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Hackney, and some others, did not desire that loans should be given from the public Exchequer for local purposes; but, on the other hand, he believed that the control which was obtained over the expenditure was beneficial. He hoped the people of Scotland would not be disappointed in their fair anticipation in respect of this matter. MR. BIGGAR thought the same rate of interest ought to be charged for all loans raised for public purposes. Amendment, by leave withdrawn. MR. FAWCETT said, as Parliament was to be made responsible for the loans he hoped the Bill would specify the purposes for which the loans were to be granted and the rate of interest which they were to bear. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER replied that it was impossible to specify these matters in the Bill. The Public Works Loan Commissioners would exercise their discretion in making advances; but instead of the Treasury having power to make reductions in the rate of interest, as at present, that power would by the Bill be transferred to Parliament. Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to. Bill considered in Committee, and reported; to be printed, as amended [Bill 228]; re-committed for Thursday. APPELLATE JURISDICTION BILL. [Lords]-[BILL 111.] (Mr. Attorney General.) COMMITTEE. Order for Committee read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Attorney General.) SIR HENRY JAMES wished to observe that the present condition of our judicial administration was very unsatisfactory. It was clear that we did not at present possess suitable machinery for the speedy administration of justice, and therefore it was necessary that those who had practical knowledge of the subject should lend their aid in improving the system. An opportunity for doing this was afforded by the introduction of the present Bill, and he felt certain the Government would carefully consider any suggestion which might be made. Under this Bill a serious question arose as to the constitution of the Intermediate Court of Appeal. For his own part, he should have preferred one Court instead of two Courts of Appeal, but the House had already given its decision on that point, and therefore it would be useless for him to argue it. In his opinion, the Intermediate Court of Appeal had proved to be very inefficient, although the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government had argued that that Court had satisfactorily discharged its duties. The inefficiency of the Court was due first to the want of numerical strength; and, secondly, to the want of personal direction. was no member of this tribunal, with the exception, perhaps, of Lord Justice Mellish, who had been a practising member of the Common Law Bar, and, therefore, the authority of the Court was the less respected when they overruled Common Law judgments. Under the 14th section of the present Bill provision was made to strengthen that fixed Judges, who, however, were not Court by adding two permanent and to be appointed until the death or resignation of certain members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The appointment of the new Judges ought not, in his opinion, to be deferred until that contingency occurred. He had consulted with many of his learned There Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the debate be now adjourned." SIR GEORGE BOWYER seconded the Motion. friends, and he believed that his views MR. MORGAN LLOYD asked that the debate might be fixed to be resumed before the Members of the House who were members of the Bar went on Circuit. MR. DISRAELI said, the debate would be resumed at a Morning Sitting on Friday. Motion agreed to. Debate adjourned till Friday, at Two of the clock. BISHOPRIC OF TRURO BILL-[BILL 185.] (Mr. Assheton Cross, Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson.) SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time." (Mr. Assheton Cross.) two members of the Bench in the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court of Justice should be taken from the Primary Court and transferred to the Appellate Court as permanent and fixed Judges. It would be necessary for Her Majesty's Judges to apply themselves to this work, not according to old precedents, but according to the necessities of the time. It would never do to allow our Courts of Nisi Prius to be less than six in number, but many cases which were now argued before three Judges sitting in banco might well be disposed of by one. This would secure a great saving of time and economy of MR. DILLWYN, who had an Amendjudicial power, and it could not be said ment on the Paper that the Bill be read that this was a new principle, for it had a second time that day three months, always been adopted in the Chancery said, that the object of this Bill could Courts. By this arrangement they might only be to turn the voluntary donations have two Divisions of the Appellate that had been given for the establishCourt always sitting. He would also ment of this Bishopric into a State enallow one Judge to take special cases dowment, and to create a high State on the Crown Paper. Three Judges official to be able to sit in Convocation, might be allotted for sitting at Cham-to possess certain legal powers, to hold bers and at the Central Criminal Court. a certain social position, and in his By this means they would have sufficient numerical strength on the judicial bench and justice would be better administered than at present. He had reason to believe that the suggestions he had made pointed in the direction of a great reform. It might not be beneficial to the Bar, and it might find but little favour with the Bench; but it would meet with the approval of the suitors who were asking, and asking in vain, for justice. He hoped the Government would not shrink from dealing with the subject in the manner it deserved. MR. FORSYTH moved the adjournment of the debate, the subject raised by the hon. and learned Member being one of great importance, on which several Gentlemen intended speaking. Sir Henry James turn to have a seat in the House of Lords. He was not a Nonconformist; but he represented a large body of Nonconformists, and their objection to the Established Church was that they sincerely believed it interfered with and retarded the spiritual development of the country and the cordial co-operation of one class with another in society. In that House it retarded and prevented the passing of measures that would otherwise be conducive to the welfare of the community, and but for the religious difficulty the education of the country would be in a better condition than it was at present. It being ten minutes before Seven of the clock, the Debate was adjourned till this day. "That, in any measure for the consolidation and amendment of the Factory and Workshop Acts, it is desirable, in the interests alike of employers and employed, that all trades and manufactures employing the same class of labour should be placed upon the same footing and under the same protective and restrictive provisions." The hon. Gentleman said, he was aware that in calling attention to this question he was introducing a dry and uninteresting subject. It was important, however, affecting as it did the manufacturing interests of this country. ORPHAN AND DESERTED CHILDREN (IRELAND) BILL.-[BILL 32.] (Mr. O'Shaughnessy, Mr. O'Reilly, Mr. Bruen, Mr. Redmond.) SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. care. MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, the object of the measure was to limit the age up to which Boards of Guardians in Ireland might board out of the workhouse orphan and deserted children who should come under their had been regulated by two statutes-The law up to the present time the 25 & 26 Vict. c. 83, and the 32 & 33 Vict. c. 25. The 9th section of the first of the statutes enabled Boards of Guardians to board out such children with persons of the religion in which they were registered, until they had attained the age of 5 years, or, under special circumstances, 8 years. The 32 & 33 Vict. c. 25 repealed this section and extended the limit of age to 10 years. The Bill, of which he now moved the second reading, proposed to extend the age to 13 years. In England the limit was 16 years; and he had been much urged by authorities in England to adopt that age for Ireland. He admitted the advantage of uniformity of the law in this. respect, and had he followed his own views he should probably have adopted that limit. But none of those in Ireland who had most experience-the Boards of Guardians to whose discretion the carrying out the law was left, had asked for an extension to 16 years, and he had thought it preferable that their views should be carried out. If in future it was necessary to advance beyond the age of 13, it would be open to any one to introduce a Bill. At present the age of 13 would satisfy the Boards of Guardians who had expressed their wishes on this subject. The object of the Bill was that children who would come under its operation might be gradually absorbed. into the population, and not subjected to lives. The policy of absorption could the stigma of pauperism throughout their not be carried out so long as the age was kept as it was now, at 10; for it was a subject of complaint that in too many cases the children when they had attained the age of 10 were sent back by the peasants who had nursed them to the |