358 



GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. 



dom and declared by our proclamation to be current 

 and lawful money of such dependencies, respectively 

 bearing our style or titles, or any part or parts 

 thereof, and all moneys which shall hereafter be 

 coined and issued according to such proclamation, 

 shall, notwithstanding such addition, continue to be 

 lawful and current money of such dependencies re- 

 spectively, until our pleasure shall be further de- 

 clared thereupon. 



The language of the proclamation was after- 

 ward (May 2d) attacked in both Houses of 

 Parliament, on the ground that it involved a 

 violation of the promise of the Government 

 that the new title should be used only and 

 solely in India, In the House of Lords the 

 Lord-Chancellor, in answer to an inquiry by 

 Lord Selborne, maintained that every engage- 

 ment entered into by the Government had been 

 fulfilled both in the letter and in the spirit, and 

 the proclamation applied only to cases where 

 of necessity the complete title of the crown 

 must be used. There were certain documents, 

 which originated in the United Kingdom, but 

 did not spend their force there, in which it 

 would be necessary to set forth the full titles 

 of the sovereign, but with that exception it 

 was not intended to use the new title in Eng- 

 land. A similar explanation was made in the 

 House of Commons by the Chancellor of the 

 Exchequer, and Mr. Disraeli said, in answer to 

 an inquiry whether the imperial title would be 

 usad in military commissions, that the procla- 

 mation would completely cover every single 

 public document or instrument of state which 

 could be employed in the whole of the ad- 

 ministrative system, with the exception of 

 military commissions. These were purposely 

 omitted, because the army served the Queen 

 in India as well as in other parts of the world, 

 and it was not thought right that the title of 

 Empress of India should be omitted from their 

 commissions. On the llth of May Sir Henry 

 James moved, in the House of Commons, a 

 resolution that, having in view the declarations 

 which have been made by the ministers during 

 the progress of the act, the proclamation did 

 not " make adequate provision for restraining 

 and preventing the use of the title of Empress 

 in the internal affairs of her Majesty's do- 

 minions other than India." This resolution 

 was negatived by a vote of 334 to 226. Ar- 

 rangements were made to have the new title 

 assumed and proclaimed in India with grand 

 ceremonies, in presence of the native princes, 

 on the 1st of January, 1877. 



Sir Charles Adderley, President of the Board 

 of Trade, introduced a bill to amend the mer- 

 chant shipping acts of 1875 into the House of 

 Commons, February 10th. The temporary act 

 of the previous year had worked so satisfac- 

 torily that all of its provisions were made per- 

 manent in the new bill. An additional clause 

 provided for the establishment of a court of 

 survey, to which any ship-owner charged with 

 dispatching an overloaded ship might imme- 

 diately appeal; or he might have a survey 

 made for himself, with the assistance of an as- 



sessor appointed by the local marine board. 

 The bill gives authority to local officers to de- 

 tain ships suspected to be unsea worthy until 

 they can communicate with the Board of Trade, 

 and provides for the appointment of commis- 

 sions of a superior class of officers to conduct 

 investigations of shipwrecks. A clause was 

 added imposing additional restraints on deck- 

 loading. The bill was passed in the House of 

 Commons May 26th, and in the House of Lords 

 July 22d. 



In the House of Commons, April 5th, Mr. 

 Dixon moved a bill in amendment of the Ele- 

 mentary Education act of 1870. The bill con- 

 tained provisions for the establishment of 

 school boards in all the districts of the coun 

 try, as well as of the towns, throughout the 

 United Kingdom, and for the universal en- 

 forcement of compulsory attendance upon the 

 schools. It was favored by the Nonconformists 

 in preference to the bill which it was under- 

 stood the Government was about to propose, 

 because they believed that educational affairs 

 would be administered more satisfactorily to 

 them by boards chosen expressly for the pur- 

 pose than through the ordinary local officers. 

 Mr. Dixon's bill was defeated on the second 

 reading, by a vote of 281 to 160. The bill 

 agreed upon by the Government was introduced 

 into the House of Commons by Viscount San- 

 don, May 18th, was passed by the House by a 

 large majority early in August, and became a 

 law August 15th, to go into operation on the 

 1st of January, 1877. This act is intended to 

 supplement the educational act of 1870, by en- 

 larging the provisions for enforcing attendance 

 upon the schools. By the act of 1870, direct 

 compulsion could be applied only in districts 

 where school boards were established, and its 

 adoption was left optional with the boards. 

 The optional feature is retained in the new act, 

 but the privilege of applying compulsion is ex- 

 tended to the local authorities ot % all the dis- 

 tricts, as well those where there are not :is 

 those where there are special school boards. 

 The compulsory by-laws made by the school- 

 attendance committees of such districts are, 

 when sanctioned by the education department, 

 rated as equally binding with those of any 

 school board. The chief means, however, re- 

 lied upon in this law for securing attendance, 

 is indirect compulsion. Its operation is uni- 

 versal and obligatory. During the year 1877 

 no child under nine years of age, after 1878 

 no child under ten years of age, can be em- 

 ployed at all. No child who is under eleven 

 years of atre in 1877 (to be raised to twelve 

 years in 1878, to thirteen in 1879, and to four- 

 teen in 1880) may be employed who has not 

 obtained a certificate of proficiency in reading, 

 writing, and elementary arithmetic, or of pre- 

 vious due attendance at a certified efficient 

 school. Every person taking a child into his 

 employment contrary to the provisions of the 

 act is liable to a fine not exceeding forty shil- 

 lings. A parent who employs his child in any 



