Lord Broughamwished to ask a question of his noble Friend, the Secretary for the Colonial Department. He had read with great attention the bill which his noble Friend had laid on the table respecting slavery in the West Indies; a bill which did not satisfactorily meet his (Lord Brougham's) views; but one of the most important of all its clauses was that which gave certain powers to the governor, or rather to a court of error in the colonies, with respect to actions and judgments, whether in matter of equity or of law. Now he wished to ask his noble Friend what was the constitution of those of error, and particularly the constitution of the court in Jamaica, and what their numbers were?
§ Lord Glenelgsaid, they consisted of the governor and two or three of the council: I am not now quite certain which.
Lord BroughamAy, ay! but my noble Friend did not draw the bill. If it had been drawn by my noble Friend, I should have understood it; for be would have known what he was about. Will my noble Friend, the Secretary for the Colonies, say whether there is a court of error in every colony in the West Indies? Because, if there be not, then those colonies which have no such courts will be deprived of the benefit of this bill altogether. There are different constitutions in different colonies, and I hope my noble Friend will accede to the proposition I am about to make. That proposition is to move for a return, stating the constitution of the courts of error in the several colonies respectively to which the bill applies, and in the mean time postpone the second reading of the bill.
§ Lord Glenelghad no objection to the return asked for by the noble Lord; but he had a decided objection to postpone the second reading of the bill on that account. He knew that in some of the colonies there were not courts of error, and it was his intention, as he should be perfectly prepared to do on Monday, to state to the House, what it was proposed to do with respect to those colonies in which no courts of error existed.
Lord Broughamhad no wish to delay the second reading of the bill; indeed, his opinion was, that the sooner it was disposed of the better; but it was necessary 706 that some information should be had on the subject.
§ The Duke of Wellingtonthought, that perhaps the better course would be to postpone the second reading from Monday to Tuesday, as before that time the information required by the noble and learned Lord might be procured.
§ Viscount Melbournehad no objection to any reasonable postponement; but he begged leave to remind their Lordships of the manner in which her Majesty's Government had been reproached for not bringing forward this measure. They were said to be guilty of great delay, to have been supine, and indeed every sort of reproach had been thrown out against them, and now that they had brought in the bill the first application for delay came from the noble and learned Lord, who was the loudest in making those reproaches, and that application was seconded by the noble Duke, who certainly had joined with the noble and learned Lord in pressing the Government to use all haste and speed with this measure. However, he had no objection to postpone the second reading from Monday to Tuesday for the convenience of the noble Duke.
Lord Broughamsaid, that his previous course was perfectly consistent with his present proposition. He did not wish to delay bringing on the measure; but it had been brought forward in such a shape as to render it impossible for him to call it other than an abortion, an ill-conceived and ill-contrived measure, because it was framed upon the supposition of there being in every island a court of error, and it also proceeded upon the supposition that those who framed it knew what the constitution of the court of error was in each of those islands. Was there anything, he would ask, that was inconsistent in wishing a measure to be brought forward without delay and without imperfections also? How could he tell whether he could agree to the principle of the bill, unless he knew how the courts of error were constituted?
The Marquess of Sligosaid, it was desirable that the bill should be carried through before Easter, in order that certain proceedings should take place in the colonies which the bill rendered necessary.
§ Lord Glenelgwould submit to the House whether it was quite fair on the part of the noble and learned Lord to enter into a discussion of a bill before the individual who introduced it had an opportunity to develop its provisions? With 707 respect to the proposition of the noble Duke, he was most ready to accede to a postponement of the second reading from Monday to Tuesday.