Lords Sitting of 16 July 1840

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time:— Convicted Infants; Education.
Petitions presented. By the Bishop of London, from various places in his Diocese, for the Better Observance of the Lord's Day.— By Lord Kenyon, from Bradford (Somerset), Wellcombe, and other places, against any further Grant of Money to Maynooth College.— By the Earl of Haddington, from Whittingham, in favour of the Scotch Benefices Bill.— By the Bishop of Exeter, from Exeter, against the Grammar Schools Bill.— By the Marquess of Westminster, and Lord Stanley (of Aldersley), from the Inhabitants of the Township of Clive, various places in Chester, and other places, against the Weaver Churches Bill.— By the Duke of Richmond, from Liverpool, against the Beer Act Amendment Bill.

LORD COREHOUSE.
Lord Lyndhurst 750
wished to put a question to the noble Marquess, the President of the Council, relative to Mr. Cranstoun, Lord Core-house, lately one of the judges of the Court of Session in Scotland. He had not the honour of being personally known to that eminent individual; but he, in common with many of their Lordships in that House, had often heard him with admiration, when pleading at their Lordships' bar; and he would say, that a more acute, a more able, or a more profound advocate, never adorned the profession to which he belonged, and to which he was, in every respect, an honour. The same talents which he displayed at the bar that highly-gifted individual carried with him to the bench. If there were any necessity to adduce a proof of the high estimation in which Mr. Cranstoun was held, he had only to refer to a fact that was well known to their Lordships. It was proposed in the time of the late Lord Liverpool to reduce the burden of their Lordships judicial duties, by appointing a person for the purpose of hearing and deciding appeals from Scotland; and on that occasion all who were consulted, as if by common consent, pointed to Mr. Cranstoun as the individual best calculated to fill that very high and responsible situation. Unfortunately, during the last Session of Parliament this eminent individual, in consequence of ill health, was obliged to retire from his situation as one of the judges of the Court of Session. Previous to that event, a bill had been brought into the other House of Parliament for regulating and augmenting the retiring salaries of the judges of Scotland. That bill passed into a law; but there was no provision for extending any of the benefits of that measure to the distinguished individual to whom he referred. This was entirely different from the practice which had usually prevailed in similar cases. By the 6th George 4th (the last bill for augmenting the salaries of the judges of England), provision was made, not merely for those judges who might retire in future, but for those who had retired before the passing of the act; and those eminent men Sir John Richardson and Sir William Grant, though they had left the bench several years before the passing of the act, received the benefit of its provisions. Another act of Parliament passed in 1813 (the 53d George 3rd), conferred a similar benefit on judges of England already retired; and by the 54th

751
of George 3rd, which applied to Scotland, a similar benefit was extended to judges who had retired before the act was passed. He did not on this occasion ask the reason of this difference between the measures to which he had alluded and the last bill, nor did he mean to make any complaint. He should merely confine himself to the expression of a hope that, by depriving Mr. Cranstoun of this additional emolument it was not intended to pass any slight on him, nor in any way whatsoever to express any disparagement of his services, his knowledge, or his abilities. He pressed this question on the noble Marquess, because the noble Marquess was intimately acquainted with this eminent individual, because he had had a peculiar opportunity of knowing and appreciating his distinguished abilities, and because he possessed the means of judging accurately of his eminent services.
The Marquess of Lansdownewas not only perfectly willing to answer the question of the noble and learned Lord, but was extremely obliged to the noble and learned Lord for the opportunity which it afforded him of stating his concurrence in the character which be had so justly given of this eminent individual. For no person, neither the noble and learned Lord nor any other individual, could feel more deeply than he did, if there was the possibility of any shadow of a doubt, or of a particle of misunderstanding existing in the mind of the noble and learned Lord, or in the mind of that eminent person, on the subject to which the question referred, that the matter should be set perfectly right and that doubt completely dissipated, and that he was enabled to do in the most distinct and decided terms. Because, though he was not himself officially consulted, or officially a party to the transaction of which the noble and learned Lord spoke, still, from the sincere feeling of respect which he bore to Mr. Cranstoun, whom he had known all his life, and he was proud to have known him from the earliest period, he endeavoured to make himself fully acquainted with the nature of the transaction and all its circumstances. He would not enter into those circumstances, because the noble and learned Lord had said that he did not rise to make any complaint on the subject. But the result of that inquiry he could truly declare was, that, in the whole proceeding, not the least slur was intended to be cast
752
on the character of Mr. Cranstoun. On the contrary, the most sincere feeling of respect was entertained for the services of that excellent individual, and of admiration for his great talents. His knowledge was not restricted or confined to his eminent legal acquirements, with respect to which the noble and learned Lord was so much better instructed to speak than he was, but it extended to every species of information. Mr. Cranstoun was, indeed, distinguished for universal knowledge. He combined those rare qualities with high legal attainments. At the bar he was an able and eloquent advocate; and, finally, for a period of 18 or 20 years, he was one of the most eminent and distinguished judges that had ever been known in the northern part of this country. When the bill was introduced for the purpose of regulating and new-modelling certain matters connected with the Court of Session, it was intended that the proposed increase of allowance should be granted to him. That, however, was prevented by the omission of a particular clause. But the Government had the satisfaction and gratification of knowing that Mr. Cranstoun had retired upon an honourable independence, attended by the respect, the esteem, and the sincere approbation of all those who knew him. He trusted that he might be permitted, for the purpose of showing that Government were not insensible to the merits of this excellent man, to read a paragraph from" a letter written by Lord J. Russell, who was at the time at the head of that department which was immediately connected with the administration of justice. In that letter, which he held in his hand, Lord J. Russell said, "I cannot refrain from expressing my deep regret that abilities of so high a character should be lost to the country, and that the administration of justice should be so suddenly deprived of those services by which the public has been so long benefitted." These were the sentiments of Lord J. Russell on the retirement of Mr. Cranstoun from his situation, and the same feelings of regret which were there expressed were, he believed, felt by every class of society.
Lord Broughamsaid, that in point of strict justice to Mr. Cranstoun, he could not allow this opportunity to pass without making one or two observations. His genius, talent, and ability were such that to see his equal hereafter on the bench

753
was to him rather a matter of hope than of expectation. His noble and learned Friend had alluded to what had taken place under the government of Lord Liverpool; but he would remind his noble and learned Friend, that it was not one minister only, but successive Governments, that having considered of the plan for lightening the judicial business in that House, had, by the common consent of all parties, fixed on this eminent man, as he who was best calculated to carry their ideas on the subject into effect. If that plan had been acted upon, that accomplished man and venerable judge would undoubtedly have become an ornament of that assembly which he then had the honour of addressing.
Lord Denmansaid, it was his misfortune not to be able to speak of Mr. Cranstoun from personal acquaintance or from any great familiarity with his legal acquirements; but, from the character which he had received from his noble and learned Friends, and from what he himself knew, he believed that he was highly honoured and respected by the whole profession to which he belonged, from the highest to the lowest department. He trusted that at some future period it would be admitted that a debt of justice was due to this gentleman, and that debt he hoped would be paid to him.
The Earl of Haddingtonsaid, he rose simply as a gentleman connected with that part of the United Kingdom in one of the courts of which Mr. Cranstoun had presided, to express the extreme satisfaction he felt at what had been said by the noble Lords who had preceded him. What had fallen from his noble and learned Friend near him, and from the noble Marquess opposite, would, he was convinced, be most gratifying to Mr. Cranstoun. That individual, independent of his various acquirements, and of his unparalleled reputation as a lawyer, was, he would say, one of the most accomplished gentlemen of his time.
Conversation at an end.

PUBLIC EDUCATION.
The Marquess of Lansdownesaid he was anxious, before the order of the day was read, to move for the minutes of the proceedings of the Education Committee of the Privy Council. The noble Marquess expressed his confident hope that the labours of the committee would be productive of very
754
great benefit, especially as certain differences which had previously existed with other parties had been in a great degree removed.
The Archbishop of Canterburysaid, the proper time for entering into a discussion on the subject of education would be when the minutes were laid on the table; but still he felt it incumbent on him to express the great satisfaction which he experienced at the adjustment of the differences which had existed between the friends of church education and the committee of the Privy Council. The chief difficulty related to the appointment of inspectors, and that difficulty, he was happy to say, had been overcome. Should the arrangements which had been made be fully and fairly carried into effect, which he believed would be the case, he had no doubt, judging from the nature of the discussions and negotiations which had taken place in reference to them, that they would be found to operate very beneficially.
Motion agreed to.

THE REGENCY.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I trust your Lordships will be of opinion that the importance of the subject to which I am about to call your Lordships' attention justifies me in departing from that which is the custom of your Lordships House, namely, not to make a statement on any bill until it comes to the second reading. But, my Lords, I am anxious that your Lordships should be put in possession of the general provisions of this bill before it is placed in your Lordships' hands. Your Lordships will recollect that immediately before the accession of her Majesty to the Throne, it was thought necessary by Parliament to make a provision for the only contingency which at that time appeared to be within the limit of probability to occur—of the Crown descending to an illustrious individual who, from his important position as the Sovereign of another country, might not be in these dominions at the time of his accession to the sovereignty. For that contingency your Lordships and the other House of Parliament thought it proper to make a provision for the government of the country, and for securing the succession to that illustrious person until he should be able to arrive in this country to assume his regal position, and fulfil the duties and prerogatives which so devolved upon him,

755
That is not the only contingency, my Lords, which is now to be guarded against. Your Lordships will understand that events may occur by which for a long series of years the country may be left in this state—namely, that the heir to the throne, whether apparent or presumptive, may be an infant of tender years, and incapable of administering the duties and exercising the prerogatives of a sovereign. It is true, my Lords, that is a contingency which your Lordships would be most unwilling to contemplate, and which, if the prayers of the nation be heard, will never occur. The nation, my Lord, hopes, and has reason to hope, that the life of her Majesty will be prolonged far beyond the period at which an heir apparent would arrive at a majority. But, my Lords, whilst we trust in the goodness of Providence, it is likewise necessary for the wisdom of Parliament to guard against every contingency, and your Lordships are called upon to make provision for that event which may happen at any time for a long series of years, during which the heir to the throne would be an infant. Your Lordships have therefore to consider whether it is not expedient to guard against this possibility, and to provide the means by which, under any contingency, the duties and prerogatives of the Crown may be exercised and secured. If that should be your Lordships' opinion of the duty of Parliament, and if any of your Lordships should think it expedient now to make the provision, the question then will be—First, to whom the important trust of exercising the royal powers, during the infancy of the Sovereign, shall be confided, and whether there shall be any provision made as to the mode in which that individual shall exercise those functions. It is a great relief to me in submitting a measure for this purpose to your Lordships' consideration, to find that under circumstances very similar to the present, the opinion of Parliament was declared in an act which passed in the year 1830. I say it is a great satisfaction to me, because that act passed under circumstances which entitled it pre-eminently to the consideration of this House, and not only received the sanction of both Houses, but became the law of the land, and was introduced by a noble and learned Friend, a Member of the then Administration. It made but little progress before that Administration changed; but it contained provisions so
756
much approved of by Parliament, that it was taken up by the Government which followed, and became law by the unanimous approbation of all parties in Parliament. I said it was a great satisfaction to me to find that precedent, because it enables me to recal to your Lordships' recollection the provisions introduced into that measure on the two subjects I have referred to, and therefore supersedes in a great measure the necessity of travelling back to an earlier period of our history, and to the discussions of former Parliaments. The Act of 1830 was passed on the accession of his late Majesty, her present Majesty being then of tender years; of years that it would have been impossible, if the Crown had descended to her, for her personally to have administered its duties. The provisions of that act were, that in that event the Illustrious Mother of her Majesty should have the guardianship of the person of the Queen, and exercise the duties of the Crown, and act as Regent for her Majesty until she should attain the age of eighteen years, under certain restrictions. This act contemplated the Crown descending on a minor, and made provisions for the government. That to which I now call your Lordships' attention, also provides for the possible event of the Crown's descending to a minor. My Lords, the surviving parent, so identified with the interests of the infant Sovereign, is the person to whom you would naturally look as the proper person to have the care and guardianship of the infant, and to have the administration of the duties of the regal office. It was so considered in 1830, and I trust your Lordships will entertain the same opinion now. My Lords, the question then remains, whether the Regent so appointed should be fettered by any parliamentary restrictions, or whether the Regent should be permitted to exercise all the power, all the duties, and all the functions of the Sovereign? My Lords, a case may undoubtedly occur in which Parliament may think it necessary, for some temporary absence, or some temporary illness of the Sovereign, to provide the means of exercising the Royal authority, and yet the great object may be to preserve the Royal authority unimpaired to the Sovereign when he may return. Such was the object of the bill to which I have before adverted, and which passed in the first year of her Majesty's reign. That bill did not appoint a

757
Regent; it appointed lords justices, and the object of the bill was to do as little as might be, but to preserve things in that state that the Sovereign on coming into this country to assume the reins of government might find public affairs in the same state, as nearly as possible, as they had been left by the preceding Sovereign. But, my Lords, when your Lordships are making provision, the object of which must be to provide for the Government of the country for a long series of years, your Lordships will be of opinion, that it is not prudent, that it is not safe, and that it is not consistent with the principles of the constitution, that the Sovereign power should be fettered in the hands of the Regent. The power and prerogatives of the Crown are given to the Crown to preserve the balance of the different parts of the Constitution of the country, they are given to the Crown in order to preserve the power of the Crown in that state in which it is most beneficial to the public it should be preserved. They are not, therefore, given to the Crown for any other purpose than that of being exercised, and as occasion may require, of adding to or strengthening the power of the Crown, or dealing with the affairs of the State, in such manner as it is the duty of the Crown, according to the Constitution, to exercise or deal with them. They are not larger than the Constitution of the country thought necessary, and if they were necessary so to be exercised in the person of the Sovereign sitting on the Throne, in his own right, and in the plenitude of the power a Sovereign exercises, how much more necessary must they be when the powers of the Sovereign are exercised by a person with the diminished powers and authority of a Regent, by one not acting in his own right, and wielding his own powers, but as a substitute for another? To impose fetters and restrictions in such a case would be to set a dangerous precedent, which I trust your Lordships will not be disposed to set. There are, however, certain restrictions which cannot interfere with the due exercise of the prerogative of the Crown, and which it might be thought proper to impose upon a Regent. I refer to those which were introduced in 1830, and which appear to be so proper and reasonable, that I have introduced them into the present measure. It is obvious that a Regent acting for and on the behalf of a
758
Sovereign incapable of acting for himself, should not have the power of assenting to any bill by which the succession to the Throne could be in any manner altered. Your Lordships, I apprehend, will be of opinion, that such a power should not be confided to a Regent. I do conceive, that your Lordships will also be of opinion, that no power should be given to a Regent of altering the laws which relate to the uniformity of worship in the Church of England. Neither should the Regent have power to interfere with the rights of the Church of Scotland. These powers should not be intrusted to a Re gent, but should be preserved entire to the Sovereign. But, my Lords, with these restrictions, with these exceptions, I trust your Lordships will be of opinion, that the Regent ought not to be called upon to exercise the functions of the Sovereign with fettered and restricted powers. Your Lordships are aware, that if it should seem fit to Providence to inflict upon the country the misfortune of a termination to the life of the Sovereign before the time at which the heir apparent could assume the reins of Government, and your Lordships should then be called upon to make the necessary provisions, the country would be in a state of anxiety from which your Lordships would be most anxious to relieve it, because this important question would then come to be discussed at a time when the Constitution would not be entire—in which there would be no one to exercise the royal function, and prerogatives, whereas your Lordships are now called upon at a time when the Constitution is perfect to provide for an event which may by possibility happen. It therefore, as I apprehend, becomes the duty of Parliament now to provide for that contingency. My Lords, I have now briefly stated what are to be the provisions of the bill, and it would be highly satisfactory, in a matter so interesting to every individual in the kingdom, to find, in adopting the provisions and restrictions contained in the act of 1830, that the proposition received unanimous approbation. Bill read a first time.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
The Lord Chancellor moved the third reading of the Administration of Justice Bill.
Lord Denmanwas of opinion, that it would be advisable to remove the present defects of the Court of Chancery by im-

759
proving the forms and processes by which the business was carried on, as well as by adding to the judicial force of the court, although its present state might render that measure also absolutely necessary. The numerous petitions on this subject presented to their Lordships were not merely in favour of the present bill, but prayed likewise for further reforms. He was persuaded, that it was the duty of the heads of every department to cherish the spirit of reform as far as that could wisely be done, and this object could not be attained without calling in the aid of public opinion to sanction their efforts. On one part of this bill he looked with great satisfaction, he meant, that which abolished the equity jurisdiction of the Court of Exchequer—not that he presumed to form any opinion as to the propriety of dealing with the Exchequer as an equity court, but that he believed the common law of the country would derive great benefit from the constant attention of the Chief Baron. The bill of 1830 had removed many of the difficulties which stood in the way of the Exchequer becoming a good common law court, and had led to the appointment of the great judges who had since sat in the court, and had rendered it one of the most important in the country. Bill read a third time and passed.

GRAMMAR SCHOOLS.
The Earl of Devon moved the second reading of the Grammar Schools Bill.
The Bishop of Salisburyhad no other object in rising than to express his deep gratification that a bill should have come up from the other House of Parliament, and would shortly receive their Lordships' attention, having for its object to remedy existing evils of a very serious nature in these most important institutions. A large proportion of these schools had become extremely limited in the range of their utility, and, from the general scope of this bill, and the mode in which its provisions were shaped, it was extremely likely to meet with a general concurrence.
The Lord Chancellorremarked, that the grievance was felt in all parts of the country, and that nothing but an Act of Parliament could prevent any attempt at improvement from being foiled by the continued existence of the old regulations.
Bill read a second time, and referred to a select committee.