posed upon the Indian Revenues, and we are to be required to find Ways and Means to the amount of £57,000,000 over and above the ordinary Expenditure, no words used in this House are sufficiently gloomy to depict the prospects of Indian finance. But I believe the right and correct view is that although these difficulties will from time to time occur, it is almost impossible for them to occur again simultaneously, as they have done. If we can only reduce our Expenditure, so as to increase that great margin between Expenditure and income which I have already mentioned, and if we are only fortunate enough in the future to have our one difficulty at a time to deal with, I believe, by thrifty and judicious administration of Indian finances, we can so increase the present margin between Revenue and Expenditure, that in a very short time those who now use such strong and gloomy language concerning the state of our finance will be the first to laugh at their own fears.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." (Mr. J. K. Cross.)

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, the arrangement was that the debate should be taken on the Motion that Mr. Speaker do leave the Chair, and that if it lasted more than two nights, that the Resolutions should be passed, and the debate resumed at another stage of the proceedings. He hoped the House would permit that arrangement to stand, and the Vote for the loan to be taken now. The Government, of course, would feel bound, on the second reading of the Bill, for instance, if that were convenient, to put that stage of the Bill in such a position as would give full opportunities for further discussion.

MR. GLADSTONE, if he understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer rightly, believed what was of importance was to get through the first stage of the Loan Bill, and that the passing of the Budget Resolution was a matter of form of no practical importance. Unfortunately, they had not had two full nights' debate; and, under the circumstances, he thought the most convenient course would be that his debate should continue on a future night, but that the Government should be allowed at once to take the first stage

of their Loan Bill. Otherwise, thoso who had already spoken would be able to speak again; while, as to the Under Secretary of State for India, he was sure the House would do in his case what it had not unfrequently done before, and permit him again to address it on matters arising in the debate.

MR. E. STANHOPE said, that, after the expression of the views entertained by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich, which seemed to be generally shared by the House, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be prepared to adopt the course which he suggested. It would, therefore, be understood that the debate going into Committee on the East India Accounts would be postponed to a future day, and that the Government should now be allowed to take the Resolution on the East India Loans Bill.

on

MR. FAWCETT, said, it would be very convenient for hon. Members if the Under Secretary of State for India, when he came to reply, would explain more expliCommission of Inquiry into the state of citly what was to be the nature of the the Indian Army which he proposed to appoint. Some persons thought it was to be a Commission in India, others said it would be a mere departmental inquiry, while others indulged the hope that it was to be a Commission not merely to inquire into departmental questions, but into all questions of military organization. Without such an inquiry, indeed, any attempt to reduce military expenditure would be perfectly ineffectual.

MR. GOSCHEN wished to urge upon the right hon. Gentleman the extreme importance of resuming the debate at the earliest possible date. The attention of the whole mercantile world, both in England and in India, was fixed upon the very serious issues raised in regard to the silver question. It was of the utmost importance that this question of the bearing of the depreciation of silver upon the Revenues of India should be discussed at the earliest possible moment, in order that no hopes might be raised which afterwards were frustated by the impracticability of the schemes proposed. This question of silver must be argued out; and as he was the Chairman of the Committee which considered this question two years ago, and as he also represented this country at the Conference [Second Night.]

which inquired into the silver question in Paris last year, he certainly should consider it his duty not to shrink from stating his views.

Motion agreed to.

the despatch to the Government of India in regard to their proposals?

MR. E. STANHOPE replied, that the Correspondence was not yet complete, but the despatch would shortly be sent. He was afraid for that reason it would not

EAST INDIA [LOAN].
Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That it is expedient to authorise the Secretary of State in Council of India to raise in the United Kingdom any sum or sums of money, not exceeding £10,000,000, for the service of the Government of India, on the security of

the Revenues of India."

MR. E. STANHOPE, in moving the Resolutions, asked leave to say a few words on a point as to which some misunderstanding had arisen. He wished to make it clear upon what grounds the Government thought it necessary to refuse their assent to the proposition of the Indian Government with regard to the depreciation of silver. He mentioned that when these propositions were received, the Government thought they ought to be looked at not solely with reference to India, but with regard to the other interests to be considered. What he intended to convey to the House was, that they did consider not only what he might call Imperial interests, but the suitability of these propositions themselves to the special circumstances of the case-that was to say, they considered the propositions upon their merits. On both these grounds, after looking carefully into the matter, the Committee considered it their duty to recommend the rejection of the propositions of the Government of India. He had only now to ask leave to substitute five for ten in the proposed Resolution.

Amendment proposed, to leave out "£10,000,000," in order to insert "£5,000,000,"-(Mr. Edward Stanhope,) -instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That '£10,000,000' stand part of the proposed Resolution."

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL asked, whether the Correspondence would be given to the House which contained Mr. Goschen

before the House.

MR. GOSCHEN asked whether it would be possible for the Government to furnish the House with the latest information from the Consuls or other authorities abroad with regard to the production of silver in other countries? Investigations were made, bringing the information down to a certain date, and it would afford great satisfaction if Papers could be laid on the Table giving further information. Perhaps, also, during the Whitsuntide Recess the Government could obtain some fresh, distinct, official information from their Representatives in Berlin with regard to the stock of silver in Germany, and the sales of the German Government. He knew that a certain amount of secrecy had been observed in regard to this matter; but if an authentic statement could be placed before the House of the actual amount of silver sold up to the present time, it would be exceedingly advisable that that should be done. He would, indeed, go further, and ask the Government to give the House all the information in its possession on the subject of silver.

MR. E. STANHOPE replied, that the Government recently took steps to collect and systematize all the information on the subject in their possession. He did not know whether there were any further Papers on the subject which he would be able to lay on the Table; but he would look over those in his possession, and if he could give the House any further information he should be very glad to do so.

MR. ONSLOW suggested that the report of the Currency Commission of 1866, which elicited a great deal of very valuable information, should also be laid on the Table of the House.

Question put, and negatived.

in the United Kingdom any sum or sums of money, not exceeding £5,000,000, for the service of the Government of India, on the security

of the Revenues of India.

Resolution to be reported upon Monday next.

as to the correctness of its principle. Instead of referring a matter to the Referee to decide, this Bill proposed to refer a case to him for decision once for all. He thought it was far preferable to adopt the procedure instituted by the Judicature Acts, and to send a

BILL.

THE ADJOURNED DEBATE.

MR. CALLAN said, that the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Sullivan), who had charge of the Bill had asserted that, unless he could move the second reading at an early day, he should move to discharge the Bill. He found that the hon. and learned Member had not put in an appearance, nor had he given any instructions on the subject. Under those circumstances, he (Mr. Callan) did not feel justified in moving that the Order be discharged; but he assured the House that if the Order was postponed until Monday, and the hon. and learned Member then did not move its discharge, he himself would do so.

MR. SPEAKER said, that in the event of no day being fixed for the adjourned debate it became a dropped Order.

COMMON LAW PROCEDURE AND

JUDICATURE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. (Mr. Waddy, Mr. Wheelhouse, Mr. Ridley.)

[BILL 181.] SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. MR. WADDY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it had been submitted to the Attorney General, and had received his sanction. With the exception of some clauses at the end, which had reference to a matter of procedure, the Bill proposed simply to extend the powers of the official Referees, by giving them the opportunity of doing work which at present they were unable to do, and to prevent their getting into difficulties by conflicts of jurisdiction.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Waddy.)

MR. HERSCHELL did not know whether the Attorney General had given his careful attention to the Bill; but, for his part, he had considerable doubts

not think it was at all an improvement to enable a Judge or the Court to refer a case to the Referee for him to decide as arbitrator. That should only be done by consent of the parties, as at present.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir JOHN HOLKER) thought the principle of the Bill was one which ought to be approved. It was at first the opinion that under the Judicature Acts a Referee could deal with the whole matter; but recent decisions had shown that that was not so, and that the Referee's power was very considerably defined and limited. For his part, where the parties to the action consented, and where the Court thought it right that the Referee should have full power to decide the whole matter, and how the costs should go, he could see no objection to such a rule. In his humble opinion, if such a provision were passed into law, it would render the Referees a great deal more useful than they were now, and would induce parties to go before them much more frequently than was at present the case. There were other provisions, with regard to giving bankers' notes in evidence, which he had not very carefully considered, and therefore he reserved to himself the right to consider these in

Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday 9th June.

COSTS TAXATION (HOUSE OF COMMONS) BILL-[BILL 190.] (Mr. Raikes, Mr. Mowbray.)

COMMITTEE.

Order for Committee read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair." (Mr. Raikes.)

MR. W. H. JAMES moved the adjournment of the debate till after Whitsuntide. The Bill was only read a second time the night before; and though

REGISTRATION OF PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS

he believed its proposals were equitable, yet he thought that time should be given in order that the measure should be sent down to town clerks and others in the country whom it affected, for their consideration.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned." -(Mr. James.)

MR. RAIKES had not the least desire to ask the House to proceed with extraordinary haste; but he thought the hon. Gentleman was hardly acquainted with the objects of the Bill. It proposed no new costs and no new system of taxation, but simply proposed to legalize a system which had been in operation for 30 years, of taxing Provisional Orders and Bills of that description in the same way as if they were private Bills. The officer of the House in charge of these Bills had recently had occasion to consider the matter, and he came to the conclusion that there was some question as to its legality. As that officer was paid by salary and not by fees, it made no difference to him, and it was merely enacting the existing practice, because some doubts had arisen on the subject. It did not make any change in the existing practice, and did not impose any fresh costs.

MR. COURTNEY said, if the Bill merely legalized an existing practice which had been pursued for so many years, it surely might be pursued a little longer. Why could not the hon. Gentleman allow the Bill to be postponed till after Witsuntide.

SOUTH AFRICA NATAL AND THE TRANSVAAL-APPOINTMENT OF SIR GARNET WOLSELEY AS HIGH COMMISSIONER.-OBSERVATIONS.

THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: It

may be convenient, and perhaps inte resting, to your Lordships to know that Her Majesty has been pleased to ap point Lieutenant General Sir Garnet Wolseley to be Governor of Natal and the Transvaal, and to be High Commis

sioner and Commander-in-Chief in those Colonies, and in the lands adjacent to the North and East of those Colonies in South Africa. I believe that at this time Sir Bartle Frere has returned to Cape Town; and Sir Bartle Frere will exercise the power which he possesses in the Cape Colony, and in all the adjacent dependencies and regions attached. I ought, perhaps, to remind your Lord