Lords Sitting of 29 April 1839

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time;—Designs Copyright; Designs Copyright Extension; Bishops' Residences; Church Disciplins.
Petitions presented. By the Duke of RICHMOND, the Earl of BANDON, and Lords BROUGHAM, GLENELG, and PORTMAN, from a great number of places, for a Uniform Penny Postage.—By the Marquess of BREADALBANE, from several places, against any further Grant to the Scotch Church.—By the Earl of HARRINGTON, and the Bishop of LLANDAFF, from two places, for Church Extension in Scotland.—By the Earl of RIPON, from one place, for Church Extension in Canada; and from Leeds, against forwarding Letters through the Post on the Sabbath.—By the Earl of HARDWICIKE, from Wisbeaeh, against Beer Shops.—By the Earl of BANDON, from the County of Cork, against the Establishment of any College likely to follow a plan of Instruction not founded on Religious Truth.

MAGISTERIAL DUTIES.
The Earl of Hardwicke,on presenting a petition for the amendment of the Sale of Beer Act, observed upon the extreme difficulty which magistrates experienced in the administration of this act, for, with the greatest desire on their part to carry it into effect fairly and impartially, the purposes of justice were frequently defeated. He hoped that the noble and learned Lord, who had given notice of a bill on the subject, would turn his attention to the difficulty he had mentioned, and try, if possible, to afford the magistrates some relief.
Lord Broughamsaid, that everything encouraged him to bring forward the bill in question, but he was prevented by a noble Friend of his in the other House, the Member for South Lancashire, giving notice of a motion which he (Lord Brougham) hoped would have superseded the necessity of his proceeding in the matter. However, he would now say, that on one day next week he would move the second reading of his Bill.
The Earl of Hardwickesaid, that country gentlemen and magistrates had the greatest difficulty in doing anything with beer houses. He might quote himself as a proof of the way in which a person, desiring to do nothing but strict justice, had been treated. Some time ago a conviction had been made out by him, inflicting certain penalties on a beer-house keeper; but the beer-house keeper brought an action against him on the ground of informality. The judge at Cambridge sent the matter to the courts above, where he was cast, and costs to a considerable amount given against him, although he had understood the superior courts always dealt very leniently with the mistakes of magistrates.
Lord Broughamsaid, that similar instances were very common, in which the law left now power to the judges of showing indulgence to technical errors of magistrates.
Petition laid on the Table.

SLAVERY IN THE MAURITIUS.
Lord Broughamwished to know whether there would be any objection to produce a dispatch from his noble Friend, the former Secretary for the Colonies, to the government of the Mauritius. It had given the greatest satisfaction to him (Lord Brougham) and to all who took an interest in the emancipation of the slaves there, to see the judicious and vigorous step taken by his noble Friend, for he had given notice to the government of the Mauritius that if the Council refuse of themselves to carry into effect the emancipation, he should do it for them without waiting for communications from this side of the world. This had saved six months in the liberty of the slave in the Mauritius, but he (Lord Brougham) was sorry to find that no news had come from thence that any thing had been done. In no place was the measure of emancipation one of such absolute necessity, or of such strict justice as in the Mauritius. There might be some title in Jamaica, but in the Mauritius at least one slave in three was detained by an act of felony. He wanted to know whether there would be any objection to the production of the dispatch. If there were, he would give notice.
Lord Glenelg,in reference to the receipt of intelligence from the Mauritius, was understood to say, that there had not been time to receive an answer to his dispatch.

DESIGNS COPYRIGHT BILL.
Viscount Duncannon,in moving the second reading of the Designs Copyright Bill, and the Designs Copyright Extension Bill, said, that the first of these Bills was intended to grant protection to those engaged in the arts of design. Under the present system, no sooner had a manufacturer brought forward a design which met with the public approbation but it was immediately pirated and imitated. Every person claiming the protection of the present bill would be required, within a limited period, to register his design, and the time of protection would be computed from the day of registration. The second bill extended the provision to certain articles not mentioned in the other bill, and also extended the provisions of the whole of these bills to Ireland.
Lord Broughamsaid, that he spoke the sentiments of his noble and learned Friend, at whose request the second reading of these bills had been deferred, as well as his own, in stating that these bills were well worthy the attention of their Lordships. He considered they effected a great improvement in the present law, by affording protection to those deserving and ingenious persons who were engaged in inventing designs. He thought they were calculated to produce great good, and his only objection to the bills was, that they did not go far enough, that they protected the Manchester designs only, and not the Yorkshire, which were models, and could not be described as drawings. He hoped that, in the committee, the protection would be extended to those models as well as to the designs contemplated by the bill in its present state.
Bills read a second time.