Lords Sitting of 3 April 1838

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of BANDON, from a place in the Diocese of Ross, against the National system of Education in Ireland.—By the Bishop of EXETER, from Bolton-le-Moors, and other places, by Viscount MELBOURNE, from Derby, by the Earl of ROSEBERRY, from Newry, by Lord LYNDHURST, from Peckam, and other places, by the Marquess of SLIGO,
344
from Hilston, Preston, the Society of Friends in Southampton, from Belfast, Bath,. Weymouth, Berwick, Merthyr Tydvil, and other places, and by the Duke of CLEVELAND, from places in Durham, for the abolition of Negro Apprenticeship.—By Earl STANHOPE, from Staley Bridge, Great and Little Marsden, and other places, for the repeal of the New Poor-law.—By Lord SIDNEY, from the Chairmen of various Boards of Guardians, in favour of the Law.

DR. PYE SMITH.
The Marquess of Lansdowne, seeing the noble and learned Lord (Lord Lyndhurst) in his place, would advert to a circumstance which he had refrained from noticing last night, in consequence of the absence of the noble Lord. A few nights since he had presented a petition from Dr. Pye Smith, with respect to the improvement of the condition of the negroes. At that time he was met by the declaration of a noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham) not now present, and by the noble and learned Lord opposite, that he was in possession of a petition from Dr. Pye Smith, containing sentiments of a totally different description. From the positive statements of the noble and learned Lord opposite, he (Lord Lansdowne) had nothing to do but to acquiesce, not having any information to the contrary. He however considered it his duty to present the petition he had intrusted to him. Since that period, however, he had received a communication from Dr. Pye Smith, with respect to whom he (Lord Lansdowne) could only repeat all that had been said by the noble and learned Lord, that he was a person of very high character and of great piety. In that communication, Dr. Pye Smith stated, that the petition which he (Lord Lansdowne) had presented, was a petition of a recent date, and that it contained his (Dr. Pye Smith's) mature sentiments upon the subject of negro emancipation, and that if he had signed any other petition it must have been many months ago, and before the bill introduced by the Government was brought forward. After considerable thought upon the subject, he had come to the determination that it would be dangerous to introduce so extensive and violent a measure as the total abolition of slavery. He confessed, that, in his opinion, the bill which had been introduced into the House by her Majesty's Government, was well calculated to mitigate the horrors that had hitherto attended the slave trade. He, therefore, in common with the other persons who had signed the petition, expressed his sentiments that the measure now before the

345
other House was calculated to be productive of the best results. He thought it due to the eminent character of the individual to whom allusion had been made, that his sentiments should be thus made known.
Lord Lyndhurstsaid, that when he presented the petition to which allusion had been made, he stated, that on a former night a petition of an opposite tendency had been presented by the noble Marquess. He requested, at the same time, that the petition might be read, stating that, from what he knew of the character of the individual, when the two petitions came to be considered, one was irreconcileable with the other. He stated then that he supposed the petitions were of different dates, and that the one which he had presented, was subsequent to that presented by the noble Marquess. It turned out that these petitions were of different dates, although it turned out, contrary to his supposition, that his was of an earlier date than the other. What he had stated was mere supposition—he made no assertion, having had no communication with that distinguished and rev individual.
Subject dropped.

YEOMANRY CAVALRY (SCOTLAND).
The Earl of Haddington, having some petitions to present, wished to call the attention of the House to the subject of the disbanding of the yeomanry cavalry in Scotland, and more especially to the consequences of that measure as affecting the county of Fife. The riots at recent election had shown that there was a disposition to riot at great assemblages of the people in that country, when under the influence of political excitement; and in the town of Dunfermline, in Fifeshire, populous manufacturing borough, a serious riot had recently taken place, arising, as he believed, out of the combination system. He was informed that the same system prevailed in other parts of that country. It was worthy of remark, that the occurrence to which he alluded at Dunfermline, had taken place on the very day when the notification was received in that town, that her Majesty's Ministers had determined to dispense with the further services of the yeomanry force. The result was, that the police being inadequate to suppress this riot, application was made to the civil and military
346
authorities at Edinburgh, for the assistance of troops; and the riots were not quelled until the military were sent down. The noble Earl read an extract from a gentleman in Fifeshire, which stated, that the yeomanry of that county had existed since the beginning of the revolutionary war, and that they had been found in disturbed times, completely to answer the purpose for which that force had been instituted. In 1832, or 1833, after Bristol had been partially burnt down, when the yeomanry force had contributed essentially to the preservation of what remained of the city—after Nottingham had been partially sacked—after Edinburgh had remained for several hours in the hands of a mob, and was saved in a great degree by the efforts of the Midlothian yeomanry, now disbanded, Lord Melbourne, then Home Secretary addressed a most pressing dispatch to the late Lord Rosslyn, then Lord-lieutenant of the county of Fife, instructing him to address the loyal people of Fife, with a view to their reconstructing themselves into this description of force, which the unhappy state of the country rendered necessary for its security. Lord Rosslyn exerted himself to the utmost, and prevailed on the gentry, farmers, and loyal inhabitants of every description, to form themselves into a protective yeomanry corps. Their services were found most beneficial, and why were they therefore, now dispensed with? He (the Earl of Haddington) felt called on to advert to the conduct of a gentleman for whom personally he entertained the highest respect. The gentleman was extremely popular, and enjoyed the personal good will of individuals of all political persuasions. The individual to whom he alluded, and who was a Member of the other House of Parliament, had been chosen by her Majesty's Ministers, as a proper person to succeed Lord Rosslyn in the lieutenancy of the county of Fife. Immediately after his appointment, he showed himself so little disposed to encourage the yeomanry of Fife, that he refused to attend at the usual inspection as the representative of his Sovereign. And when, on a subsequent occasion, he was entertained at dinner by his constituents, he went the length of expressing his hope upon that public occasion, that the yeomanry force would be dismissed. To him (the Earl of Haddington) it appeared that there could be no stronger evidence of the dismissal of this

347
force being attributable to political motives than the fact that this gentleman, who was a very eager and decided friend of her Majesty's present Government, thought it the most acceptable thing he could say to his Whig, and more than Whig, constituents, that he trusted the whole yeomanry force of Scotland would be disbanded. In his opinion, a greater error had never been committed by a Government than the dismissal of this useful force. In proceeding to that dismissal, they had acted, as it appeared to him, upon no ostensible grounds. What, he would ask, had taken place, since his noble Friend opposite had transmitted the despatch to which he had before referred, to justify this change? He felt perfectly satisfied that it was from political motives alone, the yeomanry force of Scotland had been put down. Why was that force suppressed in Renfrewshire, in which a large portion of Glasgow was situated? Why was it put down in Stirlingsbire, which contained the populous and important town of Stirling? Was he to look upon this as the commencement of a system for getting gradually rid of the constitutional yeomanry force, and of supplying its place by another force, under the complete control of her Majesty's Government, a sort of gendarmerie all over England as well as Scotland? The only two counties where the yeomanry corps were not to be dismissed were those of Ayr and Lanark. He sincerely hoped that this measure would be reconsidered by her Majesty's Government, and that, at all events, if any of the disbanded corps offered to continue their services gratuitously, he hoped that it would be immediately accepted.
Viscount Melbournesaid, that with respect to the observations in which the noble Lord had indulged upon the subject of the reduction of the yeomanry corps, he (Lord Melbourne) had no hesitation in declaring, that considering the present state of Scotland, and the whole of the circumstances respecting the advantage of retaining the services of this force, her Majesty's Government did think it consistent with the public safety and with the preservation of peace throughout that country to dispense with the services of the yeomanry force, and content themselves with the services of the ordinary force, which would no doubt be found sufficient. The noble Lord had observed, that from what
348
had taken place on a recent occasion, it appeared that when anything arose to excite the public mind, or produce a fermentation of public feeling, a disposition to riot would exist; but he did not think that this possible source of dissension and tumult would afford a sufficiently strong ground for taking such permanent precautionary measures. It might be reasonably doubted whether upon election occasions the yeomanry would be the proper force to employ. He did not see how anything that Ministers had hitherto done, should have had any effect on the yeomanry of Fifeshire with regard to the exertion of their services in the suppression of the riot at a town in Fifeshire, to which the noble Earl had referred. A very serious doubt existed in the minds of many persons with respect to the policy of maintaining such a force, and the expediency of employing them in cases of domestic tumult; and this was the precise feeling which would explain the conduct of his hon. Friend, the Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Fife. A gentleman did not necessarily change his political opinions, because he became the Lord-Lieutenant of a county; nor did he change those opinions so as to make them in accordance with those of the Government of the day. Upon the occasion to which the noble Earl referred, his hon. Friend was asked to give his opinion upon the question, as a Member of Parliament. The Government had adopted this measure without the slightest reference to politics, and without the slightest intention to give offence to any of the members of the yeomanry corps; and he therefore must say, that the noble Earl had been rather hasty and premature in adopting an opposite conclusion.
The Earl of Malmesburywas not aware of what might be the opinion of other men on this subject, but he was well aware what were the opinions of a noble Friend of his who now sat opposite to him, when he held the seals of the Home-office in 1831, and he recollected perfectly well that it was at his noble Friend's suggestion that the corps of yeomanry, which was now reduced, was formed in the county in which be the (Earl of Malmesbury) resided. When the disturbances prevailed, before the yeomanry corps was established, there was one small town which was literally sacked, being in possession of the mob two days, and the riot was at last

349
put down only in consequence of the gentry, farmers, and tradesmen, getting on horesback, furnished with such arms as they could provide at the moment, and encountering the mob, who were put down, not without difficulty, and he was sorry to say, not without bloodshed. If they had had that cheap, and he would add constitutional force, the yeomanry, no such thing would have happened. It was said that the yeomanry corps might be reduced, because the country was now in a state of tranquillity. He wished he could say that it was so entirely in a state of tranquillity as was supposed. Several laws had passed the Legislature of late years which had contributed to render the rural population anything but tranquil. The Beer Act had demoralised the peasantry more than any one measure which had ever passed, and to a certain extent the New Poor-law, as it had been carried out, had also had its effect. Undoubtedly that effect had been greatly exaggerated, but, to say the least of it, the law had not been carried out in a prudent manner. The new Game Act had also been attended with the most pernicious results. He would therefore urge his noble Friend to reconsider his determination. All that would be gained would be about 10,000 l. or 12,000 l., just as much as was spent in one week to support that Auxiliary Legion which had gone out to Spain. It was the more impolitic to make this reduction now that so large a portion of the regular army was going out to Canada. At this moment there was but one regiment of cavalry doing duty from the Land's-end to Portsmouth and where he (the Earl of Malmesbury) lived they were forty miles distant from any military station. The South Hants Yeomanry were now all dismissed, while the North Hants were retained. But the eight troops reduced contained each fifty-four men, while in the five troops retained there were but twenty-nine men per troop. He repeated, therefore, that he hoped his noble Friend would reconsider his determination as it was not too late to recede.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, as Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Hants, he felt it his duty to inspect the yeomanry corps in that county—and as regarded the value and efficiency of that body, he entirely concurred in the view taken of the subject by his noble
350
Friend who had just addressed the House. He considered this force the most efficient that could he had for the preservation of the internal peace of the country. He would venture to assert that the expense of the eight troops of Hampshire yeomanry cavalry, which had been disbanded, did not exceed 2,000 l.; and he would also say, without hesitation, that the special commission which was issued to try the offenders in the south western part of England, had cost thirty times that amount; there having been, on that occasion, above 100 individuals capitally convicted. It was, indeed, lamentable that a district, comprising the New Forest, and the counties of Dorset and Wilts, should be exposed to the consequences that might result from the reduction of the yeomanry force for the purpose of effecting so paltry a saving. As Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Hants he had had no communication with the Government on the subject, and, therefore, was unaware of the measures they intended to adopt. He lamented the result at which they had arrived; but they adopted the course they had thought proper to pursue on their own responsibility; and all that he had done was, when he received the order for disbanding the eight troops, to carry it into execution.
The Earl of Winchilseahad expected the noble Viscount would have entered into some explanation of the principle upon which the Government had acted with respect to the dismissal of the yeomanry force. The noble Viscount, however, had not done so, and his opinion was, that party feeling had characterised these dismissals. And then with respect to the expense of these corps. Why, if the whole force had been retained it would not have cost half as much as was about to be expended on the mission of the noble Earl, whom he did not see in his place, to Canada. With regard to the argument of the noble Viscount, that the country was in a tranquil state, and that, therefore, this was a proper opportunity for sending these corps to the right-about; in his opinion that was the very ground upon which their services ought to have been retained for if they had not existed during the last twelve months, there would, he was satisfied, have been local disturbances in every part of the country. He must say, that, in his opinion, her Majesty's Ministers had some ulterior object in view in des-

351
troying this most constitutional force. He would trouble their Lordships with but one observation on the subject of the course pursued by the Lord-Lieutenant of Fife-shire, which was, that the opinion of that gentleman, as expressed regarding the yeomanry force of that county, ill became him, holding the situation which he did, which was one of great public importance, and which ought to have induced him to support the interests of the yeomanry cavalry. The country was greatly indebted to those individuals who had come forward in the county of Kent when it was in a disturbed state—when property was assailed by night and by day—when the law was set at open defiance, and who had enrolled themselves in that hour of danger in the yeomanry force. His impression was, that these corps were disbanded because the majority of them held Conservative opinions; and his belief was, that, in the regiment which he had had the honour to command, every individual composing it, except one entertained those opinions. During the period he had held that command he had felt it to be his duty to refrain from originating or attending public meetings in the county of Kent on great political questions, and he rejoiced that her Majesty's Government had deprived him of this command, and the Crown the services of his regiment. He said he rejoiced in this circumstance, because he was now free, and he had determined to become a great agitator in that county.
Petitions to lie on the table.