PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.

Friday, July 2 (Lords). — The subject of the Licensing Laws is too com
plex for the Government to tackle just now, “but they
hope at no very distant date to submit a measure
correcting some of the chief evilsof the present system. ” So much, in answer to in
quiries from the Thane of Fife, commonly called Earl “of that ilk. ”
For the satisfaction of the Duke of Somerset, Lord Kimberley said that if Cyprus should be handed over to the Colonial Office, the mode in which it has been acquired will not pre
vent him, the Earl of Kimberley, from trying to form a valuable possession of it, or at least to make the best of a bad bargain.
The Earl of Northbrook informed the Earl of Ra
vensworth that the Ad
miralty had decided on their shipbuilding programme for the year. Good, my Lords.
Their Lordships passed a few Bills of little or no remarkable consequence to the community.
(Commons, Morning. ) — Prayers; after which Mr. Bradlaugh walked in and took his affirmation and seat sub silentio.
Debate on an Amendment to the Employers’ Liability Bill, moved by Mr. Macdonald in the interest of the Employed, and seconded by Mr. Inderwick. Time called, and Sitting suspended till
Ecening, when Dr. Cameron moved an Address to stay British subjects from taking law into their own hands with uncivilised natives after the manner imputed to some missionaries, particularly certain “Blantyre Missionaries in Central Africa, ” who are reported to
have punished offending savages not only by flogging some of them,
but also by hanging others, to reclaim — not encourage — the rest. On assurance from Sir Charles Dilke, upon the part of the Government,
that they wished to prevent such doings, the Doctor withdrew his Motion.
Perhaps the Blantyre Missionaries have been belied by the wicked, and are falsely accused of having “Lynohed” or “Blantyred” the heathen they could not convert.
Saturday (Commons). — Committee on Relief of Distress (Ireland) Act Amendment Bill, and thereupon lengthy debate, chiefly financial,
in the course of which Mr. Forster begged the Irish Members to get on, for if the Bill were not finished that day, he could not be sure when it would be brought on again. Nevertheless, Amendment and Division follewed and followed again and again; the talk went on,
and they kept it up from 12 at noon on Saturday to 12 30 Sunday morning, when at length, on Motion of Mr. Forster, the debate was adjourned.
Bis dat qui cito dat; and, as Sancho Panza might add, whilst the grass is growing the steed may starve. As is the growth of grass to the sustenance of horses, so is that of potatoes to the support of
people who subsist on them, or would, if they were not starving for want of them. Despatch, Home-Rulers, or else, by the time ar
rangements for the relief of your countrymen’s wants are completed, Irish distress will be over — and much of it relievable no more.
Monday (Lords). — Lord Fortescue recalled attention to a favourite idea-not to say “fad”-of his Lordship’s, which he has frequently
urged before — that of supplementing the intellectual education ox the Army by physical competition; which would be an excellent arrangement if there existed any necessity for it whatever.
But His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, General Commanding in Chief, who may be supposed to know, assured their Lordships that there was none at all.
Lord Spencer moved, and noble Lords agreed to, the Second Reading of an Elementary Education Bill to facilitate the working of certain educational by-laws ancillary to inoulcation of the Three R’s.
(Commons. ) — In answer to Mr. Baxter, Lord Hartington said the total excess expenditure of the Afghan War was some £ 9, 000, 000,
of which £ 3, 370, 000 would have to be found in 1880-81. So much for our Scientific Frontier.
Debate on Irish “Disturbance Bill” resumed by Lord R.
Churchill, who pitched into it so severely that he straightway brought up in its defence its author’s Official Big Brother.
Mr. Gladstone upheld the Government Bill before the House in the teeth of opponents who vilify and abuse it, calling it an Irish Landlord Ruination Bill, and still harder names. He repelled the
statement of the noble Lord (R. C. ) that it had been introduced for the purpose of “oiling some part of the parliamentary machine, ” and vindicated it against “inflamed and exaggerated statements”
made by other Hon. Members. He contended, very forcibly, that, as for confiscation, it was no worse than several previous Acts (which he named) had been.
A very satisfactory and convincing argument, no doubt — as far as it goes.
Mr. W. C. Cartwright opposed the Bill from the Liberal benches. Ditto Mr. Brand, speaking also from the Ministerial ditto.
The Marquis of Hartington assured the House that nothing but the strong conviction of those responsible for the peace of Ireland that a measure such as the present was necessary, would induce him to support any proposals of the kind. But it was the duty of the Government to prevent the object of the Land Act of 1870 from being defeated. They wished also to compel the landlord to exercise his rights with moderation. The Executive Government in Ireland could not carry out the law unless the Irish were convinced that it was not only law but justice; and it was, above all, in order to produce that conviction that the Bill was brought in.
After a fling at the Bill by Sir S. Northcote, debate wound up by Mr. Forster; then division. Second Reading carried by 295 to 217, majority 78 — considerably less than the “normal” Cabinet figure.
Tuesday (Lords). — Lord Winmarleigh caused a parley by calling attention to the new scheme of the Charity Commissioners for the Grammar School of Kirkham; hut it came to nothing.
Lord Norton asked Lord Spencer whether the Inspectors of the Education Department had not deprecated the grants for results in the specific subjects of the fourth schedule, and whether their deprecatory remarks would not be laid on the table.
Lord Spencer answered both these particular questions in the negative, but would consider the main question to which they related, during the recess.
Conversation, without result, ensued.
(Commons, Morning. ) — Debate on Employers’ Liability Bill resumed by Mr. Warton (Conservative), who urged the reference of the Bill to a Select Committee, which Mr. Knowles (Conservative) — Mr. Macdonald’s Motion having been withdrawn — moved that it be. Motion opposed by Mr. Chamberlain, supported by Mr. Hussey Vivian (Liberal), Mr. Schreiber (Conservative), Mr. Wiggin (Liberal), and Sir H. Giffard; but opposed by Mr. Gladstone,
and negatived by 259 to 130. Debate on going into Committee again adjourned.
This Employers’ Liability Bill proposes to make Employers very much more liable than they seem to like. Mr. Vivian, on the part of many Liberals besides himself, entreated the Government not to force it on their staunchest supporters, and warned them that it would be fought over clause by clause in Committee. It will not have escaped notice that amongst the Liberals opposed to them in voting for the Amendment, Ministers had a Wiggin.
(Evening. ) — A discussion of much interest, doubtless, to military readers arose on a Resolution for the reduction of the active list of Generals to an adequate and no more than adequate number, moved by Mr. Trevelyan. Assured by an intimation from Mr. Childers that the Government would, as soon as they had time, apply to the Army the same system of pay and retirement that they had formerly applied to the Navy, Mr. Trevelyan withdrew his Motion.
Mr. Richard Paget then began to expatiate on a Motion respecting the maintenance of high roads; when, presto, the Honourable House was counted out.
Wednesday (Commons). — The Irish Fishermen — as is occasionally the case with a few others of their countrymen — require assistance. Accordingly, Mr. E. Collins moved the Second Reading of the Sea- Fisheries (Ireland) Bill, of which the objects were — firstly, to create an unpaid Commission to manage them, and, secondly, to lend them £ 30, 000 — he should have liked to ask for £ 100, 000. Supported by Colonel Colthurst, Mr. Blake, Mr. Parnell, and other Home
Rulers, but deprecated by Mr. Forster, because the Government could not commit themselves to finding capital for the fishery business; and of course negatived on division.
In the course of the debate, Mr. Blake stated that the loans made to Irish fishermen out of the Reproductive Loan Fund had been punctually — except in a few instances — repaid; and Mr. T. P.
O’Connor confirmed this remarkable statement. Money lent to Irish fishermen has been actually — yes, and punctually — repaid. Fact.
By-and-hy, perhaps, the Irish Fisheries will pay interest on loans; a possibility to be considered by capitalists, who hitherto have mostly regarded Irish, financially, as no better than Turks.
Another fact not generally known was mentioned by Sir A. Gordon. Irish herrings are too oily to take the pickle, and there