Lords Sitting of 16 February 1844

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.—1a. Witnesses indemnity (Gaming).
Reported.—Metropolis Improvements.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Lord Brougham, from the Earl of Dundonald, for Extension of his Patent for Steam Engines.—By the Bishop of Salisbury, from Dean and Chapter of Wells, against Union of Sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.—By the Earl of Devon, from Kingsbridge Union, for Alteration of Bastardy Clauses.—By the Earl of Yarborough, from Woodhall, and 8 places, for Agricultural Protection.—From W. H. Stuckey, respecting his Invention for Filtering.

POOR LAW—MOTHER AND CHILDREN.
Lord Denmanhoped it was not very unreasonable to request their Lordships' attention to a matter relating to himself, which he thought likely to have passed away, but which had excited a great deal of discussion in Parliament and in the newspapers. He saw on the Votes of the House of Commons that were lying on their Lordships' Table the following notice:—"Mr. Ferrand, to put the following question to the Secretary of State for the Home Department; "That as Lord Chief Justice Denman has declared it to be the unanimous opinion of the Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench,—'that there are some cases in which it is necessary to break in upon an act of Parliament, and upon that which may have existed from all time; and has also declared that it is the mother who is the proper party to have the custody of all her children under seven years of age, and that it is not for the benefit of the mother, but for the protection of the children;' and that he thinks that 'the Judges ought to crush the first attempt to depart from that principle, and that it is of the highest importance that it should be considered the undoubted law of the land'—of the highest importance whether the Government intend to insert a clause in the New Poor-law Bill, for the purpose of prohibiting the separation of Mother and Child, if they should become the inmates of a workhouse.' "This extraordinary declaration, said to have received the unanimous concurrence of the Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, had been put conspicuously forward in a leading news-paper as a truth. It would be extraordinary indeed if such an opinion had pro-
994
ceeded from any judge. He found that his right hon. Friend the Secretary for the Home Department had already answered elsewhere, and on authority, for the Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, that no such opinion had ever fallen from their lips. But still he perceived that the statement was persevered in, and he had just seen an article occupying three columns of The Times newspaper of that morning, in which it was asserted, that he (Lord Denman) had delivered this opinion, and evidence was adduced to show the accuracy of the report. It was then observed, that the reporter who noted down this opinion, on hearing it, turned round to his brother-reporter and said to bins, "Denman has blurted out a great truth!" No doubt this remark must be received as a compliment, and if he (Lord Denman) had given utterance to a great truth in Court he should be very glad of it. He was perfectly sure that, in noticing this matter, no idea existed of saying anything unkind with reference to him, for a leading article on the subject appeared in that most eminent and highly respectable paper The Times, approving the judgment, such as it was supposed to be, and vindicating the right of ministers of the law to decide in defiance of an Act of Parliament when they thought proper. The story of one reporter turning round and making the laudatory remark to another, on this occasion, reminded him of a certain character, in ancient times, who thought much less of the people than he (Lord Denman) did, and who, when he was applauded, in addressing a large assembly, always turned round and asked the person next him—"Have I uttered any great nonsense? Have I stated anything quite beside the question? Have I committed myself by something eminently wrong?" He (Lord Denman) felt the greatest deference for public opinion, and he wished to show the greatest respect for those who undertook to lead and inform the public mind; but it astonished him, considering The Times was a newspaper of such great intelligence and talent, that any person employed on its establishment should, when a Judge was supposed to have uttered very great nonsense, turn round and say "he has blurted out a great truth." To find the nonsense repeated and deliberately defended, was even more surprising. The case before, the Court on the occasion

995
alluded to was of the most simple nature. Certain justices thought themselves warranted in removing a child from the mother, within the age of fourteen, because the mother had given her consent to such removal. The Judges of the Queen's Bench were all of opinion that the mother was bound in duty to take care of her child; and that no consent of hers would justify the magistracy in removing the child from that protection which was provided for the child's benefit, not for the mother's. That was held to be the law of the land. A case of "The King v. Bennett," had, however, been cited in the argument, which turned on the operation of the 59th of George 3rd. In that case the question was, whether an Irish female pauper, having a bastard child born in England, within the age of nurture, could be removed and passed into Ireland with her child. Lord Tenterden had said, "Great inconvenience would certainly arise in separating the mother from the child: but that inconvenience must be endured; if the law does not give authority for the removal of the child, it roust remain where it is." Lord Tenterden added in a subsequent part of his judgment—"The Statute authorised and required the parties to remove the mother to Ireland, who had no settlement in England; but they had no power to remove the child who had a settlement in England. The law gives the magistrates no power to remove the child to Ireland. There may be hardship in removing the mother without the child, but the act is imperative, and it must be obeyed." Precisely in the same spirit, he (Lord Denman), in the observations which he recently had made, said, "There may be some acts of Parliament by the operation of which it may be necessary to depart from the ancient rule of law; but in this case there is no such necessity. The old rule is in operation, and no Act of Parliament requires us to go against it." The plain intimation was, that if there had been such an Act, it must have been obeyed, notwithstanding the ancient rule;—that is, the direct contrary of what he was supposed to have declared—that was the unanimous opinion of all the Judges. He had had no communication with the right hon. Secretary of State, nor with his brothers of the Court of Queen's Bench, on this subject; but with respect to the latter, he must bear his testimony, that they
996
never uttered a word having the tendency imputed. He might be allowed to observe, that he had received a letter from Mr. Adolphus (the reporter of the Court), in which that gentleman stated what had actually passed—namely, "that in some cases, to meet the provisions of a statute, it was necessary to break in upon an established principle; but that no such necessity existed here." His note was short and general, but he added, "that, if anything had been stated, purporting that the Judges ought in any case to go against the law, it certainly would not have escaped his memory."

THE EARL OF DUNDONALD'S INVENTION.
Lord Brougham rose, pursuant to notice, to present to their Lordships a petition from the Earl of Dundonald, on the subject of his Lordship's patent for an improvement in steam machinery, as applicable to ships. The noble and learned Lord took that opportunity to advert at some length to various useful inventions of the father of the Earl of Dundonald. That noble Lord was a most scientific man; but, by his application to scientific discoveries, instead of increasing his wealth, he had greatly impaired his fortune. Amongst his most useful inventions was that of coal-tar, which was now so generally applied for the protection of wood and wooden buildings. At first—nay, for many years, indeed until after the period of the patent had expired, there was a great objection to using that valuable article. It was regarded as most disagreeable in its smell, on account of the hydrogenous gas mixing with the coal; and this was regarded as being disagreeable and tainting the air. But this smell was soon dispersed and lost on account of the volatile compound which formed the coal-tar. The late noble Earl's patent expired at the end of fourteen years, but on application to Parliament the term was renewed. Nevertheless, although he had the patent twenty-eight years, he obtained nothing for his invention, for the public entertained such strong prejudices against using it, that it was not until long afterwards that the invention was held of value. The late noble Earl was also a great promoter of agriculture; so long ago as 1803 he published a work applying chemistry to agriculture, which was at this day considered as a text-book on the ssubject. The noble and

997
learned Lord, after pronouncing a warm eulogium upon the distinguished gallantry and professional skill of the present Earl of Dundonald, expressed an earnest hope that the House would listen to the prayer of his noble Friend's petition. His invention was one of great importance. There were many difficulties to solve which other parties had in vain endeavoured to overcome. The invention of which he spoke would effect a material change in the steam-engine, the object of his noble Friend being to introduce a rotatory motion. This mechanical invention it was not so easy, without much preparation, to explain to their Lordships, as it was to put them in possession of the details of the chymical discovery to which he had just alluded; but if any noble Lords felt sufficiently interested in the subject to examine its details, he would find that the encyclopædias generally stated the object which Lord Dundonald had accomplished to be impossible; and Watt himself had been foiled in his attempt to solve that extraordinary problem. But Lord Cochrane, now Lord Dundonald, succeeded in effecting that which Watt had failed in accomplishing. His noble Friend having got over the difficulties of this problem took out a patent, of which thirteen years had already expired. It had, therefore, but one year to run, and the Bill not long since introduced and carried through Parliament gave the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council only the power of extending a patent of this nature for a further period of seven years. Now, seven years would not be sufficient to remunerate him for the trouble which he had taken and the expense which he had incurred; and Mr. Watt for his great invention had been under the necessity of applying to Parliament for fourteen years more, otherwise instead of dying in the enjoyment of large wealth, he would have died, like the late Earl of Dundonald, very poor. On these grounds he did beg to press the subject upon the consideration of the House, in the hope that they would see the expediency and the justice of giving to Lord Dundonald the full benefit of his invention.
The Earl of Haddingtonexpressed his entire concurrence in what had fallen from his noble and learned Friend with respect to the discoveries of the late Earl of Dundonald; and it was no doubt perfectly true, that the public were reaping the benefit of the exertions of a whole life,
998
whilst he was entirely dependent on his gallant son, the present Earl. With respect to the Earl of Dundonald, as a naval officer, there could be but one opinion—he was as gallant as daring, and as skilful an officer as ever walked the quarterdeck of a man-of-war. He believed that all his noble Friend had said would be remembered by all who recollected his feats, or who had read the naval history of the last war. With regard to the inventions of Lord Dundonald there could be no doubt that they were likely to turn out most important, and they were such as must necessarily have caused great expenses. So far he had had the advantage of having his works put up at Portsmouth Yard, by leave of the last Government. And the time for its remaining there had been extended by the present Government; but it was impossible, except after a great length of time, to bring these discoveries to perfection. It was a most beautiful and promising discovery, and the Admiralty had shown their sense of its merits by allowing the noble Lord to build a ship, of which he had himself laid down the lines, and he had received the report of the chief engineering department, containing a most promising account of the progress. The machinery took very little room, much less than the old.
The Marquess of Normanby: As his noble Friend had alluded to the first professional distinction of the noble Earl, under his father, he must say, that though he was too young at the time to recollect the services, he had never heard his father mention the noble Lord's name without commendations of his extraordinary professional abilities and determination of character, which led to his employment in the difficult service of the Basque-roads.
Petition laid on the Table.

STATE OF IRELAND.
The Earl Fitzwilliamsaid, that he had moved for returns relative to the number of troops now stationed in Ireland, which had not been laid on the Table.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the return had been made out.
The Earl Fitzwilliamwould be glad to see it, and he wished that the people of this country would see the expensive mode in which it was now necessary to govern, or rather to occupy Ireland. He was sure that their Lord-

999
ships, and the public at large in England, would soon have very good reason to consider that subject. There was another subject to which he must allude, and however distasteful it might be to the public at large, peculiarly distasteful as it might be to their Lordships, and however distasteful it might be before the other House of Parliament, it was a subject which at no distant period must force itself on their Lordships' attention. If he had not been misinformed, his noble Friend, the President of the Council, not long since, had discussed the subject in that House, and had stated his objections to arranging or adjusting it. From this he concluded that the Government saw the difficulties one way, and another way, and a third way, and a fourth way; and the conclusion which he could not but form was, that people who discovered great difficulties in accomplishing a great object, had declared that the object should not be accomplished, and therefore he drew the inference, that Her Majesty's Government would not be too extremely curious in discovering the mode of overcoming those difficulties. He had not told their Lordships as yet what was the subject on which the difficulties presented themselves to the minds of the Government, and he was sure, though he had not told it, that his noble Friend, and the noble Lords opposite, must have a strong suspicion on their minds of what that question was; and that was, the condition and the mode in which spiritual comforts were administered, and the provision made in this country for the administration of spiritual comfort to the people of Ireland. He apprehended that no person in that House would deny, and he trusted that no one in the other House would deny, that one of the most important duties that could devolve upon the Civil Government of this country was to provide for the spiritual comfort of the people of this country. The Government of this country had not provided for the spiritual instruction of the people of Ireland; it did provide for the instruction of a small portion—it did provide for the noble Marquess opposite—it did provide for the noble Earl who sat near him—it did provide for the noble Lords on the benches near him—and it did provide for him when he did occasionally reside in Ireland—but it provided no instruction for the people of Ireland. The Govern-
1000
ment had neglected one of its most important duties towards the people they were governing. In his opinion, the time had arrived when the consideration of the people of this country must be turned to a provision for the spiritual comforts of the people of Ireland; and as long as there was ecclesiastical property in that country, out of that ought to come the funds for providing that spiritual instruction to the people. That proposal was extremely distasteful to noble Lords opposite, but there were many things which were more distasteful than providing religious instruction for persons of different religious opinions; and the time had arrived when the people of this country must make up their minds fully to consider what they are to do. He knew that there were prejudices and antipathies growing out of what men fancied to be religion, but what was not religion, but which, when they got hold of people's minds, rendered it difficult to reconcile a nation to what militated against their views: but that this must be considered, and that the provision must come out of the ecclesiastical property in Ireland he had no doubt.

THE GAMBLING ACTS.
The Duke of Richmondstated, that he was desired by the Committee of their Lordships' House now sitting on the subject of the Gambling Acts, to state to the House that they had been met at the outset of the inquiry by the obstacle that the witnesses did not choose to answer questions lest they should criminate themselves, and to present to their Lordships a Bill for indemnifying such persons as might be summoned to give evidence before the Committee. The noble Duke having laid the Bill on the Table, and moved that it be read a first time,
Lord Campbellsupported the motion, and said, that discoveries were making before the Committee which would astonish the public.
Bill read a first time.
House adjourned.