§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, as the noble Lord could only speak once on the Motion before the House, he would now put a question to him, of which he had given notice, relating to the execution of the 12th article of the Treaty of Paris. The only practical effect of the Treaty of Paris on the Asiatic provinces of the Black Sea was that a terrible war bad since been raging between Russia and Circassia. It had been stated that in the course of last autumn a document had been sent to the Representatives of England and France at Paris asking assistance for the Circassians in this war. He wished to ask the noble Lord whether any such document had been received in Paris, and if so, if there was any objection to lay it on the table; and also whether anything had been done in pursuance of the 12th article of the Treaty of Paris, and if so whether there was any objection to produce any correspondence on the subject?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONSir, in answer to the question of my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Ewart), I have to state that Her Majesty's Government are quite willing to give effect, as far as they properly can, to the wishes of the House expressed by the Resolution which was adopted last year, but my hon. Friend is, I am sure, aware that the terms of that Resolution are exceedingly ambiguous and liable to misconstruction. A Department of Justice may mean either a Department for superintending the execution of the law or a Department for superintending the formation of the law. I think that my hon. Friend is of opinion that the establishment of the former would not be at all desirable in this country, or in accordance with the spirit of our institutions. The execution of the law is intrusted to the Courts of Law, which are independent, and 1736 it would be very improper in my opinion that any Department should have control over them. With regard to the latter,—namely, a Department for superintending the formation, harmonizing, and amendment of the law, we agree with the opinion of my hon. Friend; but the House, I am sure, will admit that it is extremely difficult to make an arrangement of that sort, and up to the present moment we have not been able to satisfy ourselves as to what kind of arrangement would be most expedient for accomplishing the purposes which Parliament had in view, and which when properly accomplished will, I have no doubt, be of the greatest advantage. With regard to the question of the noble Lord opposite (Lord J. Manners), I beg to submit that he should have given in his notice a more precise description of the question he intended to put. He wishes to know whether any representation was made by certain Circassian Chiefs to the Conference at Paris or to the French or English Governments, and what answer was returned to them; and also whether there would be any objection to lay before the House the reply to the application of those Chiefs. As to the latter point, I will communicate with the noble Lord, for the purpose of determining whether the documents in question are such as can properly be laid before Parliament. But, speaking from recollection, I may say that an application was made by certain Circassian Chiefs, who represented that they had been attacked by Russians, requesting aid, moral or physical, from the allied Powers who had been engaged in the late war with Russia. Now, with regard to that point, it must be borne in mind, first of all, that the Circassians did not deem it expedient to co-operate with the English and French forces in that war, and they are therefore, I apprehend, not entitled to claim any assistance from those two Powers as having been their auxiliaries. In the next place, so far as regarded our rights to have exacted from Russia any conditions respecting the inhabitants of the eastern coast of the Black Sea, it must be borne in mind that those rights arose out of the war, and depended upon its close. Our success was complete in the Crimea and on the waters of the Black Sea. We therefore were entitled to require from Russia, on the conclusion of peace, certain conditions with regard to the waters of the Black Sea and the fortified places in the territories which we occupied. The course of mili- 1737 tary operations, however, did not extend to the Eastern shores of the Black Sea, and therefore we did not stand in the position of being entitled from our military success to demand from the Russian Government any stipulation as to their relations with the tribes and people inhabiting that region. Well, Sir, under these circumstances the answer which was given to that application, I forget, at this moment, whether verbally or in writing, was, that we did not feel ourselves to be under any obligation, peace having been concluded, to go to war again with Russia for the sake of those tribes, however much we might regret the situation in which they described themselves to be placed. Now, with regard to the other part of the question, which relates to the 12th Article of the Treaty of Paris, that article provided that the waters of the Black Sea should be thrown open to the vessels of all nations, and that its ports should be open to the commerce of all nations, subject, of course, to established regulations respecting Customs, quarantine, and police. Well, Sir, the Russian Government opened three ports, stating that those were the only three ports in which they had established a Custom House, a system of police, or a system of quarantine, and therefore that for the present those three ports were the only ports in which commercial intercourse could be carried on. Her Majesty's Government remonstrated with the Russian Government upon that restriction, and contended that that Government was bound, by a fair construction of the treaty, to open all the ports in the Black Sea. We were told in reply, that there were certain ports communicating directly with the interior of the country where hostilities were going on between the Russians and the people inhabiting that district, and that at present, therefore, it would be impossible to establish Custom Houses at those ports, and without Custom Houses foreign trade could not be carried on. Communications upon the subject are still going on between the Russian Government and ourselves, and I have been recently informed that the Russian Government intend to establish a Custom House at a fourth port in the Black Sea, where commercial intercourse will be allowed. I do not think that in the present state of the correspondence it would tend to a satisfactory settlement that the papers should be laid upon the table of the House, but I have informed the House precisely how the matter stands. We do not 1738 admit that the Russian Government have properly construed the 12th Article of the Treaty of Paris, while they state that the present arrangement is only one of temporary character, and that in the course of no distant time they will be able, after having established Custom Houses, a system of quarantine, and a system of police, to open many more ports in the Black Sea to foreign vessels. I hope that that time will arrive earlier than we may be led to expect; for although, upon the one hand, foreign commerce cannot be well carried on where there is no Custom House, or police, or quarantine, still, upon the other hand, the Russian Government, we think, is bound to establish Custom House arrangements in every port which is accessible to foreign vessels.
MR. NAPIERsaid, that the statement of the noble Lord with respect to the establishment of a Department of Public Justice called for a few observations on his part, to which his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General would, perhaps, think proper to give a reply. That subject had first been brought before the House about two years ago, and the noble Lord himself had at that time assented to the Resolution which had been moved. On the 12th of February last year the House had again adopted an Address to the Crown, moved by him (Mr. Napier) for the formation of such a department; and the reply of Her Majesty to that Address was, that she "would give directions that the subject should receive the attentive consideration which its importance demanded." In bringing forward his Motion, he had stated the general scope of the scheme which he wished to see adopted, and he had afterwards communicated his views upon the matter more in detail to his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General. But the noble Lord at the head of the Government had just informed them that different constructions had been put upon the language employed in that Resolution. Last year Her Majesty's Government had asked time to consider the subject, and that demand he had thought a perfectly reasonable one. On the 2nd of July, when a charge had been brought against the efficiency of the Statute Law Commission, they had been told not to press the matter, because a Department of Public Justice was about to be established, which would carry into effect all the proposed reforms. His hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General had stated upon that occasion that he was 1739 preparing a scheme, which "he hoped would be sufficiently matured to be made public before the end of the Session." Parliament, however, was prorogued before any such measure was submitted to their consideration. In the course of the vacation a very important meeting had been held at Birmingham, and the noble Lord the Member for London (Lord J. Russell) who had presided over the department of law reform at that meeting, had pointed out with great clearness, in an able speech, the proper functions of an English Department of Justice. The general character of the duties which would devolve upon such a department were, in fact, known to everybody who had ever given any attention to the subject. But according to the noble Lord, the whole affair was at present at an end, and the Resolution of Parliament and the answer of the Crown were to be treated as perfectly nugatory. Now, if that were the case, he wished to give notice that he would take the earliest possible opportunity of bringing the question again under the consideration of the House.
MR. LOCKE KINGsaid, that in 1856 the right hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down had moved a Resolution upon the subject, and then the excuse made for not acceding to that Resolution was to wait and see what the Statute Law Commission would do, but that Commission having done nothing, and the noble Lord at the head of the Government, perhaps, never expecting them to do anything, in the following year agreed to a similar Resolution. More than a year had since elapsed, and no step had been taken, and he hoped that the House would receive an assurance from the hon. and learned Attorney General that some measure would shortly be proposed to Parliament.
THE ATTORNEY GENERALsaid, that no one was better aware than his right hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Napier) of the sincerity of his desire to make the Re-solution of the House become one of a bonâ fide character. As long ago as the month of May last, he had prepared a plan for giving effect to that Resolution. He was afraid, however, that that plan laboured under the disadvantage of having been too general, and of having embodied too many subjects. The scheme had since been under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government, and he believed he could state that some of the Members of the Government had approved of several of its provisions, and more especially of 1740 those which provided for the establishment of a system of superintendence of public prosecutions, and for the creation of some effectual means of checking and supervising the progress of current legislation. His own conviction of the necessity of a public department of that kind was strengthened exceedingly when he looked to the state of our law, not only in the United Kingdom, but also in the Colonies. Those distant dependencies of the Crown in respect to the law of bankruptcy, the law of insolvency, and that portion of the law which was committed to constables and other officers, required the most careful consideration. In the present state of the business of the House, and with the many important questions which were then pressing for a solution, he could not state when it would be in his power to bring the subject of the establishment of a Department of Justice under their consideration; but he promised that he would use his best efforts to secure for it the earliest possible attention; and, in conclusion, he had to state that he hoped that would be the last time when he could only give an assurance that the thing would be done.