board of 14 feet or of 8 feet was the better, and if we found that the one of 8 feet was superior, then we might go down a little lower; but it was not safe to do so at present. He hoped the Committee would not allow the proposed vessels to be built. With respect to what had been said by his hon. Friend the Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) that Sir Spencer Robinson was daily over-ruled about the repair of ships, and thus all responsibility was taken off his shoulders, he could state that so far as he recollected, during the two years he was at the Board they almost always gave way to that gallant officer, and even in some instances thought him rather a hard master. class solely to those turret-ships which they were about to construct. It was much less satisfactory, however, to see that the very last type of production, against which he strove unsuccessfully last year, and pointed to as being both experimental and bad-namely, those of the Audacious class, carrying guns in overhanging sponsons-were placed as low down as the third grade, and yet the Admiralty would not be dissuaded from laying down six of these ships last year involving £1,500,000, and are now compelled, before one of them is afloat, to assign them the inferior position of a third class ship. He was quite prepared to give his adhesion to the proposal to build the turret-ships in question, because he beMR. SAMUDA said, he believed that believed that, even if any deficiencies if every Member of the Committee was should be discovered, those vessels pospolled separately, it would be found sessed within themselves the means of that they were all of opinion that at pre-correction. The great dread of naval men sent we could not stand still and refrain appeared to be with regard to the freefrom proceeding in any shape or way to board, but if the quantity of breastwork recruit our Navy. His hon. and gallant which formed an additional freeboard Friend the Member for Stirlingshire in parts was found insufficient, nothing (Admiral Erskine) urged them to avoid what he called "experimental shipbuilding;" but he would like to ask what had they taken in hand for the last eight years in the way of building ships of war that had not been experimental? In the discussions that had been carried on last Session he had pointed out that from the time we had commenced the re-construction of our fleet, we had tried no less than eight different classes of iron-clads in as many years. Therefore all we had to inquire just now was whether we were producing the best result with our present experience. He had been a staunch advocate of the turret system since its introduction, and since he had a seat in the House, he had endeavoured to convince others that the advantages of the turret system were so many that sooner or later we must adopt that system and give up building broadsides. In that view he had been opposed by many who held leading posts in the Admiralty, but he was happy to see that the Admiralty were now prepared to go a considerable way with him, and that the debates of last Session had convinced them that they would be wrong if they were to continue to build broadsides. He observed, too, that in classifying the fleet, which we had now and were about to build, the Admiralty confined the first The would be easier than to add a poop and tention ought to be turned to the con- |bers was a large Committee, and it was struction of turret-ships. Under all the undesirable generally to increase it. The circumstances he should support the object of appointing the Committee was Vote. to secure that there should be a full conCAPTAIN EGERTON said, that in sideration first, of the general quescoming down to the House he went into tion; and, secondly, of the special inthe Admiralty, and looked at the draw-terests concerned. He had hoped that ings of the ships proposed to be built. in the Committee, as originally named, He had supposed that they were to judge the very large interests of the City of from their experience of the trials of the London had been provided for; but, on Monarch and Captain, but he had come understanding that this was not the case to the conclusion that the comparison so much as he thought it had been, he was totally useless. We might gain some could not object to the Motion of his sort of experience from the promised hon. Friend to add his Colleague in the trials, but the question now was not be- representation of the City. tween broadside and turret-ships, but between turret-ships with masts and turret-ships without masts; and, so far as the drawings of these vessels enabled to judge, he would say that no fullmasted and full-rigged turret-ship could be so effective as a turret-ship without masts. He thought these ships had a good many faults-with regard to ventilation in particular-but he thought also they would be the most powerful naval machines ever sent afloat. He hoped their defects might be remedied, but if he had had any doubts as to the course proposed to be taken by the Admiralty, such doubts must have been almost entirely dissipated by the admirable speech delivered by the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty. Motion agreed to. Question put. The Committee divided:-Ayes 46; Original Question put, and agreed to. Select Committee on the Endowed MR. J. LOWTHER said, he would beg to move that the Committee do consist of twenty-three Members, with the view of adding the name of Mr. Collins. It was the general rule that the balance of parties on public Committees should be maintained, and that would not be the case with the Committee as now agreed to. Except by himself and another hon. Member, the North of England was not represented on the Committee, though in York and other cities, towns and districts of the North very valuable endowments existed. He agreed that it was very inconvenient that names should be added in this manner to Committees already large enough; but it would be hard if the Government assented to an additional Member from the Ministerial side, and refused a similar favour to the Resolutions to be reported upon Mon- Opposition. day next. Committee to sit again upon Monday next. ENDOWED SCHOOLS BILL. SELECT COMMITTEE. MR. CRAWFORD said, he would beg to move that the Select Committee on the Endowed Schools Bill do consist of twenty-two Members, with the view of moving that Mr. Alderman Lawrence be added to the Committee, in order to secure the representation of the City of London more efficiently on it. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he did not rise to object to the Motion. Certainly a Committee of twenty-one Mem MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he reHe had endeavoured to give as large a gretted that he must oppose the Motion. representation to the other side of the House as to his own. The hon. Gentleman had, however, forgotten that there were not only two sides of that House to be represented, but also special interests, which were not very favourable to the objects of the Bill. It was not to his interest, as the promoter of the Bill, to add Members to the Committee representing special interests, but five representatives of these interests had been appointed, three of whom represented large schools that objected to the Bill. Putting these three Gentlemen out of view, he believed that the Opposition had a majority, and it would be un-On a former occasion this common had reasonable, therefore, to add the proposed name to the Committee. MR. COLLINS said, he was, of course, not going to vote upon the Motion, but with regard to the majority on the Committee, the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley) had on former occasions somewhat separated themselves from their party on the question of education. MR. LOCKE said, he thought the Vice President of the Committee of Council (Mr. W. E. Forster) had brought this discussion upon himself, because he had left out of the Committee any representative for the City, where there was a larger number of schools affected by the Bill than in any other part of the country. Now, when he was compelled to have one such Member, he was obliged to choose one of Liberal politics. He did not suppose that he had acted in this way advisedly. But still he was not a man who did things by accident. It was true the Liberals had a majority upon the Committee, but the question was one which would not depend upon party matters. He thought the proposal of the hon. Member opposite (Mr. J. Lowther) was a reasonable one, and he should vote for it. Motion made, and Question, "That the Select Committee do consist of Twenty-three Members," (Mr. James Lowther,)-put, and negatived. Sir JOHN HAY discharged from attendance on the Committee; Lord ROBERT MONTAGU added to the Committee. WISLEY COMMON. MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE. MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN said, he would beg to move that a Select Committee be appointed to consider the proposed enclosure of Wisley Common. The object was to ascertain whether there were any circumstances which should exempt this common from coming under the jurisdiction of the Inclosure Commissioners in the same way as commons ordinarily did? MR. T. CHAMBERS said, he must oppose the Motion, because he objected to the consideration of the subject at all. been specially exempted from an Inclosure Bill. The Metropolitan Board of Works, which in this matter represented the interests of London contended that, at all events for the present, the matter should stand over, as there was a growing feeling that within a reasonable distance of the metropolis existing open spaces should remain unenclosed. The state of things had materially changed since the Inclosure Commission was appointed, and it was now desirable in many cases to act on the opposite principle to that on which it had proceeded, and instead of inclosing to leave open spaces. MR. BRUCE said, that the course taken on the present occasion was that ordinarily adopted whenever objection was made to include any particular common in a general Inclosure Bill. The fullest notice of inquiry had been given, and the Commissioners considered the enclosure necessary. If the circumstances required further investigation, they would receive it at the hands of the Select Committee. Rapid as the growth of the metropolis undoubtedly was, it was scarcely to be supposed that it would soon reach a district of nineteen miles from London, and where, moreover, there was at present more unenclosed than enclosed land. The Government were willing to enter into any reasonable agreement with regard to the constitution of the Committee, or to leave its appointment to the Committee of Selection. MR. ALDERMAN W. LAWRENCE said, the forms of the Act had certainly been complied with, but it was a mistake to suppose that the public had received notice that Wisley Common was to be enclosed. The proposal had taken the inhabitants of Kingston and the adjacent district completely by surprise. He hoped the House would reject the proposal, and allow the parties to come forward again, if so inclined, and make out their case. The common was situated in a most beautiful part of the country; it would never be converted into agricultural land; but it was, no doubt, perfectly possible that a railway might be brought through it, and then it might be turned into building land. The House, he thought, should mark its sense of the impropriety of attempting to enclose commons unnecessarily. MR. GLADSTONE said, he thought too much credit could not be given to metropolitan Members for their zeal in endeavouring to secure for the metropolis the advantage of fresh air; but he was sure they would only wish to attain this end by just and fair means. A fixed and well-understood system had been established by law for the regulation of enclosures, and parties setting this machinery in motion were put to considerable expenses, in return for which Parliament incurred something like an obligation to see that the system established by its authority was not interfered with. It would be a sweeping proposition to lay down that no common within nineteen miles of the metropolis should be enclosed, yet it would be necessary to go that length to justify the course which was now recommended. If it were alleged that insufficient notice had been given, that defect would be cured by the reference to the Select Committee. But any change of system, or of policy by the House with regard to enclosures near the metropolis ought to be adopted prudently and carefully, and not avowed suddenly and with haste with reference to an isolated proposal. However strong the feelings of hon. Members might be, something was due to the general principles of justice. MR. KINNAIRD said, he wished to point out that the House was not suddenly expressing any new view as to enclosures near the metropolis. This was the third time that objection had been urged to the principle which they were now asked to adopt; and, in a Select Committee not very favourable to the preservation of open spaces, the proposition to restrict enclosures within twenty miles of the metropolis was defeated by a very small majority-he believed of only 1. MR. LOCKE said, he doubted the accuracy of the recollection of the Secretary of State for the Home Department as to the course taken in doubtful cases. He remembered several instances in which proposals for enclosures, instead of being referred to a Select Committee, were struck out of the Schedule without compunction. Petitions had been presented from all quarters against this Wisley Common proposition. It was clear that Wisley Common was a condemned place, and the House was asked to send the question of its enclosure be fore a Select Committee, which would have the effect of putting those who objected to its enclosure-not wishing to be suffocated in this metropolis-to considerable expense and trouble. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House made a great mistake in asking them to leave the question in the hands of the Inclosure Commissioners, because that body could only inquire whether or not the Lord of the Manor, and other parties interested had agreed to the enclosure, while the rights of the public were never taken into consideration by it. This common had been omitted from the Schedule, and there the matter had better rest. MR. FAWCETT said, he hoped that the hon. Member for Marylebone (Mr. T. Chambers) would press his objection. They were getting into a habit of referring everything to a Committee. That was a very expensive proceeding, and ought not to be countenanced. The House itself was perfectly competent to say whether it was right that Wisley Common should not be enclosed. The method proposed to be adopted in the present case was a novelty, and he knew of cases where places had been dropped out of the Schedule, and no Committee subsequently appointed to consider them. When the Government informed those opposed to the enclosure of this common that it would be dropped out of the Schedule not a word was said about referring the question to a Select Committee. MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN said, he felt bound to state, in answer to the observations of the hon. Member who had last spoken, that when he had informed the deputation who waited upon him upon the subject of this commonnot that the common would be dropped out of the Schedule-but that, understanding from them that a public opinion existed against its enclosure, he would postpone the Bill for some days, in order to give them an opportunity of making evident the existence of such public opinion; and, if they succeeded, he would take care that no enclosure should take place without an opportunity for full consideration subsequently; in answer to a Question in that House, he had stated that he had heard sufficient to induce him to leave Wisley Common out of the Schedule with a view to farther inquiry, and that he thought the House would probably prefer that such inquiry should be conducted before a Select Committee. From the evidence which he heard, he fancied there were proprietary rights which, in the absence of a public feeling on the subject, would justify the enclosure of the common. What had been said showed that further inquiry was necessary. If hon. Members objected to the present system of enclosure they should bring in a Bill to alter it; but after persons interested in an enclosure had performed all that was required of them in the Act of Parliament; and after he, as responsible for the Bill, had gone so far as to introduce what was called "a novelty," in order that no injustice to the public might possibly occur, it was hardly fair to step in at that stage of the proceedings and actually deny the inquiry which had been granted in order to satisfy those who now wished to refuse it. He would MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, he wanted to know how the poor people residing near Wisley Common were able to afford to come up to London and plead their cause against this enclosure before a Committee of the House of Commons. It was bitter irony to tell them to do so. appeal to the Government to give way, and let the ground be open to the people. MR. AYRTON said, it was the duty of the House to confirm the Report of the Inclosure Commissioners, unless a Select Committee over-ruled the Commissioners' decision. It was the usual practice of the House, when private rights of property were involved, to have an investigation of the matter by a Select Committee before the House decided upon it. MR. MORLEY said, he felt compelled to say there was a growing determination on the part of hon. Members of this House to prevent the enclosure of these commons, and if the original clause which was inserted in the Act of Parliament for the enclosure of Wisley Common had not been taken out by the Government itself, the House, he believed, would have struck it out. He held that, without further inquiry, it was perfectly competent for the House to say whether this common should be enclosed or not. He hoped his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Marylebone (Mr. T. Chambers) would persevere in his opposition to the Motion; and, if he did, he (Mr. Morley) should certainly VOL. CXCV. [THIRD SERIES.] feel it his duty to vote against the Government. That a Select Committee be appointed Motion made, and Question put, to consider the proposed Inclosure of Wisley Common." (Mr. KnatchbullHugessen.) The House divided:-Ayes 43; Noes 22: Majority 21. And, on April 6, Committee nominated as follows:-Sir FRANCIS GOLDSMID, Mr. FREDERICK STANLEY, Mr. BROWN-WESTHEAD, Mr. GOLDNEY, and Mr. FAWCETT :-Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Three to be the quorum. House adjourned at half after One o'clock, till Monday next. HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, 5th April, 1869. MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading- * Second Reading East India Irrigation and GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA BILL. THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, he had to propose to their Lordships the insertion of an additional clause of some importance, to which he desired to call the attention of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Ellenborough). The Act of 1833 contained five or six clauses, providing that Europeans should not reside in India without the consent of the GovernorGeneral in Council, and empowering him to issue regulations as to their residences and as to licenses, amounting, in fact, to a system of passports in that country. Now, the whole condition of the country had so much altered that these clauses were practically obsolete; but nevertheless they acted as a very inconvenient impediment on the action of the Government in India in dealing with vagrants, the number of whom had F |