BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11870, 23 January 1902, Page 5

BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS-IN- - ■•■ REPLY. BRILLIANT SPEECH BY MR. CHAMBERLAIN. TERMS OF PEACE. THE COLONIES TO BE CONSULTED. AMENDMENT NEGATIVED BY 283 TO 61. VIEWS OF THE LIBERAL LEADERS. SPEECH BY MR. BALFOUR,

By Telegraph.— Association.— London, January 21. In the House of Commons. Mr. Cawley, member for Prestwick, in a pro-Boer speech, moved his foreshadowed amendment to the Ad-dress-in-Reply. [The amendment was supporting the effective prosecution of the war, and declaring that the Government's attitude does not conduce to the rapid termination of the war, or to a durable peace.] No Liberal leader had risen when Mr. Chamberlain brilliantly replied, vindicating the humanity of the Government and generals. He twitted the Radicals with urging the vigorous prosecution of the war, while approving of restitution and the independence of the Boers. He hoped the supporters of the Chesterfield policy would not do the country the disservice of voting with the Opposition. The war would long have been ended if the care of the women and children had not been undertaken. Excepting Miss Hobhouse, every visitor to the concentration camps acknowledged the care and humanity shown. While he would not be deaf to reasonable overtures from any responsible authority he denied that the Boers should now receive the terms Botha refused in March. Though they

may be the same in spirit, details were open to modification. The credentials of the Boer representatives must be closely examined. Kruger's entourage had lost the confidence of the Boers in the field. It was doubtful who was now able to " speak in the name of all the commandos. A solid and lasting peace required the foe to recognise that he was beaten. Unconditional surrender did not mean extermination. The severities up to the present did not equal the precedents in the Canadian rebellion. Nobody had been shot for treason. Extremely light punishment had been awarded for treason. No general confiscation of property was in- j tended... The people were promised equal rights and privileges.: He did not believe the Boers were permanently alienated. The Government refused to be drawn away into weakness and vacillation. They had not withdrawn the proclamation of August 7. A very large measure of amnesty would be granted for military offences. Ordinary crimes would be punished, others would suffer by the withdrawal of the franchise. The claims of the colonies, who had nobly assisted, to be heard in the final settlement, would certainly be allowed. Despite the protest of a small section of the Opposition. Cape Colony was paying £200,000 a month towards the war, which was an enormous contribution. He concluded : We have the confidence, affection, and support of the colonies in an unprecedented degree. We mean to keep them.'' The speech was received with cheers. ■■ ••

Mr. John Dillon moved an amendment on Mr. Caw] ey's amendment, denouncing the systematic devastation of the ex-Republics-, and the barbarian concentration camps. The amendment was negatived by 283 to 64. Fifty-seven Nationalists and four Radicals were included in the minority. The Times says that so far the Liberal attack has been a sham. The Standard says Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman has completely failed to reunite the Opposition.

(Received January 23, 1.20 a.m.)

London, January 22. Mr. Cawley's amendment was negatived by an overwhelming majority. The minority consisted of the Nationalists and a few of the extreme Radicals. Mr. Lloyd George and Mr. Labouchere abstained from voting. The minority included Sir H. Campbell-Banner-

man, Sir W. Harcourt, Mr. John Morley, Mr. Bryce and Mr. Fowler. The Liberal Imperialists abstained from taking part in the debate en the ground that Mr. Chamberlain's speech left no wide divergence in principle. Sir Edward Grey, Mr. Haldane, K.C., Mr. Munro and others did not vote. Mr. Asquith was ill. •

Sir W. Harcourt, in the course of his speech, said that it was impious to insist on an unconditional surrender. The Government's policy gave no promise of a durable peace. He denounced the proclamation of martial law and the suspension of the Cape Constitution. He said the amendment moved by Mr. Lloyd George simply affirmed two contradictory propositions.

'. (Received January 23, 12.30 a.m.) ■■; London, January 22. In the House of Commons "Mr. Balfour said he was disgusted with the attacks on the War Office, whose administrative performance was unequalled in the history of the Empire. He attributed the extraordinary dulness of the debate to Mr. Chamberlain's .speech knocking everybody out of time. ;; He bantered Sir W. Harcourt for devoting' threefourths of his speech to proving that he I was tied to Lord Itosebery's chariot wheels. Unconditional surrender* was only meant so far as . political arrangements involving incorporation of the ex-republics were

concerned. There must be surrender of some kind. Peace was delayed because Great Britain refused independence. He appealed to the Opposition to abstain from V parade fights; calculated to.i encourage the Boers to prolong the war in the hope that the' Government would be displaced. " . \ Sir H. ; Campbell-Bannerman said the devastation policy was a gigantic political blunder. The concentration camps were :an offence against civilisation," a military mistake and a political disaster. He urged a generous, magnanimous peace/- '■-' ■ :■:::■'•;■"■■ A