in the manufacturing department of his | conduct of Mr. Justice Brett, or to offer county. No one ever suspected that he any opinion on the character of the had improper motives in taking the girl sentence which that learned Judge proaway, yet the sentence imposed upon nounced upon Colonel Baker. But I him was not to be compared with that think the hon. Member for Stoke seems passed on this colonel. Again, in the to have dealt with this question as though case of garroters, the punishment that the sentence had no precedent whatever. was invariably inflicted on conviction in I have, however, in my mind at this a case of that kind was flogging and im- moment two instances of a similar prisonment with hard labour; and yet sentence having been pronounced. I this man, who was guilty of a much more shall now trouble the House by referring atrocious offence, were allowed to escape to only one, and I shall select that case as it were scot free. Then, again, there because I think it is of a character that was the case of persons who beat their will commend itself to the consideration wives, who on conviction were sentenced of the hon. Member for Stoke. In the to imprisonment with hard labour; and year 1850 a gentleman was arraigned yet the offence of Colonel Baker was of before the Court of Queen's Bench, an infinitely graver character. He had charged with an offence of a somewhat done his duty in calling the attention of similar character. [Dr. KENEALY: Parliament to that case, and he would "Hear, hear!"] I say of a similar now sit down, hoping that some justifica- character, because the law jealously protion would be offered of this extraor-tects both women and young children dinary sentence.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS: Sir, I will not stop to question the taste with which the details of this case have been laid before the House. But I wish to remind the House of a matter which I think they will recognize as true, and which ought to be considered-that, at all events, this is a legal sentence; and, without saying one single word for or against Colonel Baker, I will remark that there was a long trial before a very competent and experienced Judge. Neither I, as Secretary of State, nor this House, has the slightest power over that sentence. If there is any fault to be found, as the hon. Member seems to think, with a trial by jury, by all means let the hon. Member for Stoke bring forward some Motion to alter-if alteration is needed the law. If there is any accusation to be made against the learned Judge, the proper course is to move for an Address to the Crown with regard to his conduct. But I do hope that the House will now pass to the Orders of the Day, and that it will never, unless there is such a Motion as I have just alluded to with reference to the conduct of the Judge, undertake to re-hear, or attempt to re-try, a case of this kind. With regard to the matter referred to in relation to the Secretary of State for War, I am quite sure that the House feels that any case which comes before him is perfectly safe.

MAJOR DICKSON: I do not rise for a moment to attempt to condemn the

from aggravated assaults. I say of the
same character, because the individual
who was charged on that occasion, al-
though he was not an officer in the
Army, was a gentleman belonging to
another honourable profession-a gen-
tleman learned in the law. That in-
dividual was charged with a gross and
aggravated assault upon a young child,
and that child his own son.
He was
found guilty-not by a common jury or
at an ordinary Assize Court, but by a
special jury sitting in Westminster Hall,
in the Court of Queen's Bench-and the
Judge pronounced upon that man sen-
tence of one month's imprisonment,
without hard labour, no doubt feeling,
as Mr. Justice Brett felt, that to a man
in his position the physical degradation
of hard labour would be a far greater
punishment than it would be to an ordi-
nary criminal belonging to those ranks
of society from which criminals generally
come. That individual benefited by the
leniency of the celebrated Judge-Lord
Chief Justice Campbell-who sentenced
him, who spared him the physical degra-
dation of hard labour, and gave him an
opportunity of rehabilitating himself in
the eyes of his fellow-barristers. How
far he has succeeded in doing so I know
not. That is for the country to say. I
will only remark that I should have
thought that the last man in this House,
and one of the last men in the country,
who ought to rise up in his place to find
fault with the sentence of Mr. Justice
Brett is the hon. Member for Stoke.

SIR WILLIAM FRASER: I should | extended its indulgence to him in allowing not have risen but for one statement him to make a personal explanation, and which the hon. Member for Stoke has that the observations he is now making made which refers to a member of the are not of the nature of a personal exaristocracy, and which has not the planation. slightest foundation. I heard him make the statement that the Commander of the Troops at Aldershot placed himself in the dock beside the prisoner at the trial. Now, I happen to know upon good evidence the evidence of my own eyesight -that Sir Thomas Steele was in the public gallery, and never was near the dock until he was called to give evidence as to character in favour of Colonel Baker. He was in the public gallery the whole of the trial excepting at this time, and from first to last he never had any sort of communication with Colonel Baker. One other point. It has also been stated by the Member for Stoke that Colonel Baker was a man of fashionable or aristocratic connections. I have had no means of judging whether Colonel Baker was a man of fashion-I never saw him before the other day when he was in Court; but, as regards aristocratic connections, neither of the parties in this regrettable affair is connected, I think, with what are conventionally called the upper classes. As to the heroine of this unpleasant romance[“Oh, oh ! ”]—I do not use those words in an offensive or disrespectful sense she certainly does not belong to the upper classes and as to the prisoner, I think that no one can accuse him of being in any way connected with the aristocracy. DR. KENEALY: Sir, I hope that, as a personal attack has been made upon me, although it may not be quite in conformity with the Rules of the House, I shall be permitted to answer the hon. Gentleman. I believe that it is in accordance with the character of this House not to allow attacks of this nature to be made without permitting the person who is attacked to make his defence. I must first of all call the attention of the hon. Gentleman to the extreme inconvenience of the precedent he is endeavouring to form-namely, that the private incidents and events in the lives of Members of this House should be brought forward here on account of their performing a public duty. I submit that is a very inconvenient precedent to lay down. ["Order." "Chair."]

MR. SPEAKER: I must point out to the hon. Member that the House has

DR. KENEALY: I shall then, with the permission of the House, give a personal explanation with reference to that matter, upon which I certainly did not expect that I should be interrogated to day. It is perfectly true that in the year 1850 I was brought before Lord Campbell in the Court of Queen's Bench charged with an assault. As to that indictment I need not characterize it or the way in which it was framed; but I am entitled to say what the learned Judge told the jury— that it contained charges which were not only not true, but were disproved by the evidence. It is perfectly true that, in the exercise of what I thought was right, and for the purpose of correction, I did administer chastisement to a child of mine. I myself was chastised over and over again when I was a boy. I should not be surprised, Mr. Speaker, if many hon. and right hon. Gentlemen have themselves been chastised when they were boys, and probably hence guilty of the same offence of correcting the erring propensities of their children. Now, the learned Judge sentenced me, and I should be extremely glad if the hon. Gentleman who brought this matter forward would read the sentence which was imposed upon me by that Judge; for I should not care if it were blazoned in the House of Commons or in any Assembly in the world. The learned Judge, instead of speaking of me in the language which the hon. Gentleman has thought fit to use, spoke of my kindness to my child in the most feeling and affectionate terms, and he expressed the greatest and, I believe, the most profound regret that technically he was called upon to sentence me because I had violated the law. He imposed upon me a sentence of a month's imprisonment. That imprisonment I suffered, and I left the prison without, I think, having suffered in the opinion of any man who ever knew me. Her Majesty several years afterwards, on the recommendation of one of the most illustrious Lord Chancellors this country ever had, did me the honour to nominate me to the rank of Queen's Counsel; and I am quite sure that he would never have advised Her Majesty to do that if he had thought

First Seven Resolutions agreed to.
Eighth Resolution-

"That a sum, not exceeding £72,105, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1876, in aid of Colonial Local Revenue, and for the Salaries and Allowances of Governors, &c., and for other Expenses

in certain Colonies," -read a second time.

that a single stigma of dishonour rested | his reasons for annexation was their on my character. I therefore make the value as a coaling station, and as a field hon. Member who introduced this matter for the cultivation of cotton and coffee. -I do not know who he is a present They had also been told that New South of this contradiction; and I hope I have Wales and New Zealand had offered to done quite enough to satisfy everybody take their fair share of any burden the in this House that nobody who had the Islands might impose on us; and he spirit of a true gentleman would ever wished to know whether any communihave thrown this in my teeth. cations had taken place between the Government and these Colonies on that subject, and what was the result? He and a few other Members had opposed the annexation of the Fiji Islands, on the ground that they did not think that we were called upon to set up a Government for the good of the 2,000 Whites who had established themselves there. In one of the debates which the House used periodically to have about Fiji, the Junior Lord of the Treasury (Sir James Elphinstone)-who was not heard so often now as then-spoke of these SIR WILFRID LAWSON raised an 2,000 Whites as the "most unmitigated objection to the grant of £40,000 pro- ruffians" in the world. They had been posed to be made to Fiji. The previous told also that there were a few savages day had been remarkable for speeches-cannibals-living in those Islands, made by the late and the present Prime and that it was desirable to annex them Minister. In the House of Commons also. We had taken over a considerable the former right hon. Gentleman rather debt which, but for that, would never reproved-and very properly reproved-have been paid, and we had, moreover, the House of Commons for being 'ex- pensioned off the King. In what retravagant, and of stimulating rather spect we were the better for all this he than controlling expenditure. As an was at a loss to perceive. It was all humble portion of the legislative ma- very well to talk of the "strength and chine he (Sir Wilfrid Lawson) wished splendour" of the Empire. That did not to stimulate, but to check expendi- very well at the Mansion House. Anyture. But then there was the speech of thing did very well there. The result, the other right hon. Gentleman who, at so far, of our dealings with the people the Mansion House on the previous of Fiji, seemed to him simply to be that night, gave a very glowing description we had given them the measles and they of our Colonies, and said we should had given us a war-club. In a paper he "assimilate not only their interests, but was reading when coming down to the their sympathies to the Mother Country, House he saw a paragraph about a new and that they would "prove ultimately industry which marked the progress of a source, not of weakness and embar- Fiji. A man had got an elaborate still rassment, but of strength and splendour from some distant country, and was now to the Empire." However this might turning out 200 gallons of rum per day be, he thought it right that they should for the few whom the measles had have an explanation of how the money spared. It had been said by a promihe referred to was to be expended. He nent speaker at a meeting in the City had no doubt the Under Secretary for that, now we had begun a connection the Colonies would give an explanation with the islands of the Pacific, there which, if not satisfactory, was plausible. would be no limit to the extension of Perhaps the grant was proposed on ac- our Empire in that quarter of the globe. count of the sad epidemic which had This meant that wherever 200 or 300 been raging in Fiji. His hon. Friend" unmitigated ruffians" settled down the Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. M'Arthur), in advocating the annexation of the Fiji Islands, used to describe their beauty and excellence, and among

we were, after a certain time, to put up an expensive government to look after them. That was what we called adding to the strength of the Empire. He did

death of some of the leading inhabitants and chieftains, on whom the Government had, in the main, depended for carrying out the measures connected with the annexation of the Island, had thrown additional burdens upon the Executive Government. He should add that this grant was to be repaid at some

not deny that annexation was very popular. It was popular in that House and in the country; but, for his part, he objected to all those wild expeditions, enterprizes, and annexations. Each seemed to him to be more senseless than the other. In Abyssinia, after spending millions of money, we managed to get the crown of King Theodore; in Ash-future time. [A laugh. His hon. antee we secured an old umbrella; and he wished to know whether the warclub of King Thakombau was worth the £40,000 which it was now proposed to give. He moved to reduce the Vote by

that amount.

Friend seemed to be incredulous; but he might observe that only the other day £10,000 was repaid on behalf of the Settlement of Lagos, which showed that better days were in store as regarded colonial loans. He thought the House would see that in regard to an extraordinary outlay of this character they ments of New South Wales and of New could not fairly call upon the GovernZealand to contribute any portion of it; but those Governments had rendered very valuable assistance in various ways with respect to the annexation. The assistance of the Governor of New South Wales and some of his judicial staff had already been placed at the disposal of the Government. He hoped his hon. Friend would not feel it necessary to press his Motion.

primitive innocence and simplicity. They pretended to be actuated by the highest motives of Christianity when they annexed these countries; they sent out missionaries there who really were like the gentlemen mentioned by the hon. Baronet, simply rum merchants in dis

MR. J. LOWTHER said, he had DR. KENEALY sincerely hoped that understood the hon. Baronet to require the hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle him to justify the annexation of Fiji. would press this matter to a division. He He need hardly remind the House that, found that annexation was invariably although the annexation was carried followed by this unhappy consequence to out on the entire responsibility of the the islanders annexed-that there was Government, without Parliament being an influx of European vices and demoraliasked in any way to share that responsi-zation which tended to destroy their bility, it nevertheless happened that on a Motion which was brought forward in that House a very general approval was expressed of the policy of that annexation. That approval was not rendered the less valuable on account of the arguments in a contrary sense having been most ably put before the House-guise; but the real object of all their as any arguments coming from his hon. Friend always were-by the hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle himself. Therefore the House had not decided ex parte upon this matter. As to the special point now raised he had to state that the £40,000 was required, in the first instance, to promote the erection of buildings, the construction of roads and telegraphs, and other works, which might fairly be classed under the head of capital account. But owing to the terrible visitation of measles a decrease in the revenue of the colony had unfortunately occurred; and further, the

annexations was to give more patronage and power to the holders of office at the Treasury, who cared not what might be the result so long as they were able to provide for their own friends in these distant countries where they could do exactly as they pleased. The hon. Member for Carlisle was engaged in a crusade of most glorious and honourable description, and he certainly would add to the respect which was felt for him wherever the English language was known if he would adopt in his programme of reform a resolution against the system of taking possession of Islands like Fiji

MR. P. A. TAYLOR remarked that his hon. Friend (Sir Wilfrid Lawson) had deprecated our colonial policy altogether,read a second time. saying that wherever we had gone we had made great mistakes. But he could hardly have meant to go so far in view of our noble dependencies of Australia and New Zealand. The policy of going to Fiji had been settled by the House and the country, and they ought to make the best of it, and not seek to starve the colony by miserable economy.

MR. WHITWELL trusted his hon. Friend would not divide. Since the an