Lords Sitting of 10 June 1839

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Duke of RUTLAND, and the Marquess of WINCHILSEA, from several places, against the Government plan of National Education; and by the latter, from Sudbury, against the Church Discipline Bill.—By the Duke of RUTLAND, the Earls of DURHAM, BELFAST, and HAREWOOD, Lords ASHBURTON, FAVERSHAM, and BROUGHAM, and Viscount MELBOURNE, from a number of places, for a Uniform Penny Postage.—By Lord BROUGHAM, from Blackburne, for the Repeal of the Beer Laws.—By Lord MELBOURNE, from several places, against the Repeal of the Beer Laws.—By the Bishop of HEREFORD, for Church Extension in Canada.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHANCELLOR AND ECCLESIASTICAL JUDGES.
Viscount Strangfordsaid, he was extremely anxious to put a question to the noble Viscount opposite, on a subject which he conceived to be of great interest and importance to her Majesty's Protestant subjects. He perceived, from the printed votes of the House of Commons, that an hon. and learned Member of that Assembly had given notice of his intention to bring in a bill to enable persons professing the Popish faith to practise in the spiritual courts of these realms, and to hold the office of Lord High Chancellor. He could only know the circumstance through the channel to which he had alluded; but he had heard that the announcement was received with cheers by those to whose support the noble Viscount was mainly indebted for his small majorities, and that no expression of disgust or indignation came from the colleagues of the noble Viscount, they being the Protestant servants of a Protestant Sovereign. He now wished to ask, whether the measures, of which notice was thus given, were to be brought forward with the concurrence and sanction of any portion of that section of which it was said the present Cabinet was partly composed—whether the Government had given any countenance to such a proceeding?
Viscount Melbourne: Certainly not. The subject was not introduced with the sanction or approbation of her Majesty's Government.
Viscount Strangford: I am very glad of it.
Lord Broughamsaid, such a proposition seemed to him to be as hopeless as it Was absurd.
The Marquess of Londonderryexpressed his astonishment, that certain statements which had been publicly made by an hon. Member of the other House, and which had been reiterated by the hon. and learned Member for Dublin, had not met with the reprehension they deserved from the noble Viscount and his colleagues. They ought to have been the first to repel such base, unmanly, and wicked statements. Those speeches had, however, been suffered to pass unnoticed. No attempt had been made to check such proceedings. He believed, however, that Ministers could not help themselves; and, that being the case, he could assimilate the authority that was exercised over them in no other manner than by comparing it with that sort of control which Mr. Van Amburgh exercised over his lions.
The Marquess of Lansdownerose to order. It was unusual and irregular to proceed with a discussion when there was no motion before the House.
The Marquess of Londonderrywould meet the objection of the noble Marquess by moving the order of the day, though he did not think, looking to the constant practice of the House, that he was out of order. When a question was asked with reference to certain proceedings of the hon. and learned Member for Dublin, he certainly had a right to State his opinion as to the situation in which the Government was kept by that individual.
The Marquess of Lansdownesaid, it certainly was out of order, after a question had been put and answered, to proceed with a discussion.
The Marquess of Londonderrywould put it to the candour of the noble Marquess, whether these things were not constantly done? Whether they were not done night after night, and week after week? He would ask, was not the noble and learned Lord opposite constantly doing the same thing?
Lord Broughamsaid, certainly this course was often taken. The noble Marquess was not undoubtedly the first to adopt the practice, though he often recurred to it. He admitted, that he had himself sometimes followed the example of

87
the noble Marquess. The noble and learned Lord was proceeding to state his impression of the speeches which had been alluded to, when he was interrupted by
The Marquess of Londonderry.who complained that the noble and learned Lord was then speaking, there being no question before the House. Surely, he had a right to take the same latitude.
Lord Broughamsaid, perhaps he might be excused, in consequence of some correspondence which had taken place with him on this subject. One of the hon. Members alluded to had denied having used certain very coarse expressions that had been imputed to him. He certainly felt that he ought to apologize to their Lordships for ever having entered into the subject at all. But he had deviated from his usual course, in consequence of the great respect which he owed to that illustrious family. He certainly spoke of the late Mr. Grattan, and he was greatly astonished that such sentiments should have been attributed to any relative of his.
The Marquess of Londonderry.Does he say, that he did not use the words imputed to him?
Lord Brougham.He declares that his expressions were not so strong as they have been represented.
The Marquess of Londonderry.Can the noble and learned Lord defend the expressions of the hon. and learned Member for Dublin?
Lord Brougham.Quite the contrary.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, then he would read what had been said by the hon. and learned Member for Dublin, from which the other hon. Member had not dissented. [Here the noble Marquess read an extract from Mr. O'Connell's speech, in which he spoke of the treacherous taking off of former sovereigns of these realms—of the rather novel historical discovery, that the Duke of Buckingham had murdered the nephews of Richard 3rd—and expressed his opinion that the Queen's life would not be safe in the hands of the Tories.] Did Mr. Grattan, he would ask, in his speech, say less than that? Allusion had been made by that individual to an illustrious Friend of his (the Duke of Cumberland) who was not in this country. Now, he thought it was his duty in his place in that House to state, that her Majesty had not a subject in the realm more devotedly attached to
88
her, or who would more willingly sacrifice his blood and life in her defence. Yet they found these infamous statements concerning him openly made to the people of Ireland—the most inflammable people in the world—unreproved and uncensured. Those, however, who dealt in such calumnies would, in the end, be visited by the just contempt of society.
Conversation ended.

IRISH PACKETS.
The Earl of Wicklowwished to put a question to the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty on a subject of considerable importance, and which had recently become more important in consequence of the facility which the Liverpool railway afforded for communication with Dublin. Before the management of the mail packets was transferred from the Post-office to the Admiralty, a great advantage was derived from the Government packets conveying parcels of a certain weight, at a moderate charge, across the Channel. If the convenience were great at that time, it was infinitely greater now, in consequence of the formation of the railway. Since the transfer, the Admiralty had thought it necessary to appoint an agent for the transmission of parcels. He did not complain of the appointment in itself, but he complained that it was given in such a manner as to confer on the agent a complete monopoly with respect to the transit of goods, and enabled him to impose such conditions as he pleased on that transit. The Government had a right to choose the person who was to fill this situation, and he did not complain of the individual whom they had selected. That person was Mr. Peter Purcell, who had been one of the prime agitators of Ireland—a determined Precursor, and an active supporter of a gentleman who had been a good deal spoken of that evening. In consequence, however, of his having called for a detailed account of the funds of the Precursor Society, he believed that Mr. Purcell was no longer patronised in that quarter. Under such circumstances, it was probable, that were the appointment now to be made, he would not be favoured with it, but he had received it in June last. Now, what he complained of was this, that the agent thus appointed had a right to ask what sum he pleased for the transit of goods; and further, that he might refuse to take them unless he was employed to

89
forward them to whatsoever part of the country they were destined for. This was felt as a matter of great grievance and vexation to the other carriers in Dublin. He contended, that the noble Earl had no right to make an appointment to which such powers were attached. He ought not, for the sake of patronage, to have bestowed such a monopoly on any one individual. He had no right to deprive all other persons of the advantage of the transit of goods by those packets unless they also commissioned the Government agent to send them to those places for which they were ultimately intended, and unless they agreed to pay whatsoever sum he pleased to charge. He had himself felt the inconvenience of the system of which he complained, for many packages were transmitted to him from this country, and he had found the charges so high that he was actually obliged to forego the benefit of the railroad. He wished to know, whether it was intended to remove this evil?
The Earl of Mintofelt obliged to the noble Lord for having intimated his intention to him to bring forward the subject, which had enabled him to make such inquiries as placed it in his power to give a satisfactory answer. Originally, the Post-office packets had not been allowed to carry parcels at all; but in the course of 1837, the Admiralty packets were allowed to take such packages as were usually conveyed by mail coach. The superintendents of the Admiralty packets had represented to the Post-office the great inconvenience of this, and wished the practice to be no longer continued. A communication to this effect had been made to the Treasury, but the Treasury had ordered an arrangement to be made for the transmission of such packages, and had directed Commander Chappel, of the Post-office packet station at Liverpool, to make the best arrangement for such transmission. About a month afterwards, an offer was made through Commander Chappel by Mr. Purcell, to undertake the conveyance of all parcels. He (Lord Minto) could assure the noble Lord, that the politics of Mr. Purcell were perfectly unknown at the Admiralty. Commander Chappel stated, that this Mr. Purcell was a considerable coach proprietor in Ireland and was therefore a likely person to succeed with the arrangement. An arrangement was made with him as to the con-
90
veyance of those packages; but nothing of the nature of a monopoly was granted to him. It was thought advisable, that some person should be responsible to Government for the safe delivery of all packages, and that was the reason of the appointment. With regard to the future arrangement of the packets at the Admiralty, the contracts for the packets were that they should deliver the mails; they took no cognizance of them as passage boats for passengers or for parcels. The Admiralty had nothing to do with what they charged for them. If it were true, that this gentleman had abused his privilege, it was quite obvious that parties might send their packages by other steamers.
The Earl of Wicklowsaid, it was quite evident to him, that the noble Earl did not clearly understand the position he was explaining. He was aware, that the noble Earl had matters of greater importance to manage, and might not therefore have attended so closely to this; but he (the Earl of Wicklow) was always disposed to think, that persons filling inferior positions were never guilty of abuses if proper superintendence were exercised over them; and, therefore, the responsibility rested with those whose duty it was to exercise that superintendence. It was quite clear the noble Earl did not understand the subject, for he said it was no monopoly, as parties could send by other packets. The very reason of establishing this mode of conveyance was, that the Post-office packets from their greater velocity afforded greater facilities for transmitting parcels, and this advantage was now monopolized, and the public were deprived of it except at unreasonable charges, Mr. Purcell charging what he liked.
The Earl of Mintosaid, no doubt there must be some slight fault, but if the noble Earl had mentioned it to the Admiralty that there was any irregularity, or any abuse, or overcharge, the Admiralty would have paid immediate attention to such representation. He really knew nothing of the manner in which Mr. Purcell proceeded. He understood Mr. Purcell undertook to deliver the parcels to the parties to whom they were addressed.
Subject dropped.

NATIONAL EDUCATION.
Lord Brougham, having presented a petition from a Dissenting congregation of Cote, in Ox-

91
fordshire, in favour of the national Education scheme, and asserting, that the clergy scheme the Established Church had no right to assume the exclusive education of children, stated, that he was not disposed to any longer refrain from not pressing forward his bill on education. Nothing could be more absurd than the stories going forth, that his noble Friend's minutes of council was for a great system of national education, for nothing could worse describe the plan than such a title. His bill applied itself to every part of that important question. He should, therefore, consult the convenience of the House, on the warning of the day, as their Lordships would not wish to be absent.
Bill to be brought forward on Thursday.
The Bishop of Londonhad several petitions to present of a contrary nature to that presented by the noble and learned Lord, against the scheme of national education. The petitioners to whom the noble and learned Lord had alluded supposed the clergy to put forward claims for the exclusive education of the people. That was a claim which was never put forward by the clergy. What the clergy had put forth was this, they claimed a right to the exclusive education of the children of the Church of England; that was the right which they claimed, and which, by God's, blessing, they would never recede from.
The Marquess of Lansdownesaid, his noble Friend in the other House had not put forward any such extravagant and absurd pretension as that adverted to by the noble and learned Lord. Such a pretension was certainly supposed to have been put forward by the Church of England. The plan proposed by his noble Friend was for the partial training of schoolmasters for the accommodation of all classes, which had been objected to by persons in high authority, and connected with the Church of England, on grounds utterly untenable, except on the ground, that the Church of England enjoyed a monopoly in educating youth. He was glad to hear from the right rev. Prelate, that he distinctly denied this. He would not then detain their Lordships by going into any detail on the subject; but he had thought it right to the right rev. Prelate to exempt him from entertaining that inordinate pretension which had been held in different places.
The Bishop of Londonhad not presumed to speak on behalf of the Church. He had stated his own opinion, and what he believed to be the opinion of the clergy at large. He was unwilling to bring himself forward as the representative of the Church on that occasion. What he had stated was, that the clergy of the Church of England claimed the exclusive education of the children of their own persuasion.
Petitions laid on the table.

THE MAURITIUS.
The Marquess of Normanbywould take that opportunity of observing, with respect to the Mauritius, that though he had as yet received no official communication from the island, yet he had had information from colonial newspapers of the 3rd of March, which had been put into his hands, to the effect, that the Order in Council had arrived there, and had been proclaimed, and that total emancipation was to take place almost immediately.
Lord Broughamsaid, it was a cruel thing to think, that slavery should have existed longer by six months in the island of Mauritius than in any other of the British Colonies, whether Crown or chartered colonies, when in reality emancipation ought to have come into operation sooner there than anywhere else. He said, sooner than anywhere else, because, by the owners' own accounts, it was admitted, that one in three, or 1,000 out of 3,000 slaves, were imported into the country in direct defiance of the law, by which such importation was made a capital felony. This was the amount admitted, but in reality not fewer than one-half of the whole number of slaves in the island were imported under the connivance of various persons who had been in authority at different times, and who for their conduct therein ought to have been impeached.

CHURCH DISCIPLINE BILL.
The Bishop of Exeter, on presenting a petition from the clergy of a portion of his diocese against the Church Discipline Bill, said, he would take the opportunity of stating, in consequence of something that had occurred the other night, what was his habit with respect to the petitions of his clergy. It was his habit, when any important measure affecting the Church was about to be submitted to Parliament, to consult his

93
clergy through the medium of his archdeacons, and on a late occasion he had permitted the publication, in a country newspaper, of a letter addressed by him to one of those officers for that purpose. No opinion of his was stated in that letter, nor any bias whatever given. He begged to add, that he should continue to pursue this course, because he thought, that as the clergy hid no longer an opportunity of recording their sentiments on meeting in the two houses of convocation, they should have an opportunity of meeting, privately or otherwise, and apprising their bishops of the result of their deliberations respecting measures torching the interests of the Church.
Adjourned.