Lords Sitting of 1 August 1854

MINUTES.
Took the Oaths.—The Earl of Bantry.
PUBLIC BILLS.—la Metropolitan Sewers; Duchy of Cornwall Office; Stamp Duties.
3a Burials beyond the Metropolis; Parochial Schoolmasters (Scotland); Valuation of Lands (Scotland); Youthful Offenders; Land, Assessed, and Income Taxes; Spirits (Ireland).

THE RIFF PIRATES.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE,in putting a question of which he had given notice on the subject of the Riff, to his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, said, that our commerce on the highway of the Mediterranean had of late been much exposed to attack by a body of men known as the "Riff Pirates," who amounted in number, he believed, to 4,000 or 5,000, and who occupied a situation on the coast of Morocco, about 120 miles from Gibraltar. They lived under the immediate rule of their own chiefs or sheiks, but were tributaries or subjects of the Emperor of Morocco, and had lately become known as being most dangerous to the trade of all nations. The matter was of the more importance inasmuch as the position they occupied was on the direct highway of the commerce to the East and the Mediterranean, and it was of the highest importance that some measures should be taken to check their piratical proceedings. They were, he believed, first heard of in 1851, when they made a piratical attack on a vessel of this country, named the Violet, belonging to Wisbeach, which was treated in the manner customary with pirates, having been attacked and plundered, the master wounded, and the mate killed. The Government on that occasion sent a vessel of war to inquire into the circumstances, with a view to revenge the attack and bring away the plunder if possible. That vessel was received in a warlike manlier, but it succeeded in bringing away the captured vessel; and he was not quite certain, but he believed she was obliged to return with her captain and some of her men wounded. That was in 1851; but as late as June or July last a vessel coming from Malta to England, named the Cuthbert Young, of Newcastle, was treated in the same manner, and the Prometheus was sent out to recover her, and to do what she could against the pirates; whether she succeeded or not he did not know, one statement being that she brought

1063
back the hull of the captured vessel, and another that she did not succeed; but, at all events, it was established that those pirates were ready for any sort of work, and committed great ravages. As the case now stood, he believed that the Government had only thought it necessary to deal with it by advertising traders to beware of that coast. But, having served in the Mediterranean many years of his life, he knew it was not very easy in passing through the Straits of Gibraltar to keep clear of it, as a current set in that direction, and vessels were driven on it whether they would or not; the consequence of which was, that it proved a capital trap for those men, giving them a position in which they could deal with the vessels as they liked. It did appear to him that something more was necessary to be done than the course taken by the Government of giving notice at Lloyd's that it was a dangerous coast; and he thought if the Government were not prepared to deal with those people by any measures of a warlike character, there should be at least a steam cruiser constantly there as a sentry for the protection of trade. The question which he wished to put to his noble Friend was, whether the Government intended to take any, and what, steps for the safety of trade with respect to these pirates?
THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, the subject had long occupied the attention of Her Majesty's Government. Four or five cases of piracy had happened since 1847, and applications had been made in the matter; but the difficulty of dealing with those men was, that they occupied a portion of the territory of the Emperor of Morocco, and were his subjects. In that state of affairs, an application had been made to the Emperor, of Morocco to prevent the continuance of these depredations; but the Emperor professed his inability to do so, when Her Majesty's Government then informed him that they would undertake to do it irrespective of his assistance. In the case to which his noble Friend had alluded—that of the Cuthbert Young—the vessel which was ordered to look out for the pirates immediately went to the coast and recaptured the vessel, which was defended by the pirates, who were fired at and shelled, and there was reason to believe that they sustained considerable loss. The main difficulty of dealing with these people, however, appeared to be the necessity for a land force, and, with respect to
1064
that question there might be at this moment some delay; but he could assure his noble Friend that the attention of the Government had been directed to the subject, and there was a vessel now at Gibraltar specially charged to watch that coast for the protection of vessels passing through those straits.

MEDICAL GRADUATES (UNIVERSITY OF LONDON) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
LORD MONTEAGLEmoved, that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill, the object of which was to extend the rights enjoyed by the graduates of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, in respect of the practice of physic to the graduates of the Universities of London and Durham.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that he had no objection to this Bill, though it might, perhaps, have been well introduced in connection with the larger question of medical reform. He had given notice of his intention to move the insertion of words extending the provisions of the Bill to the Scotch Universities; but he was, at all events, anxious to provide that graduates of the Scotch Universities should no longer be under penalties for practising as physicians in England. Since he had given that notice he had had a very large number of communications from medical men of various classes, and from Professors of the Universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh, who had pointed out to him the fact, that a large number of very eminent medical men in England had nothing but a Scotch degree. Some of these gentlemen were of such eminence that they had received the honour of knighthood, yet every one of them was liable to penalties; and though the penalties were not easily recoverable, yet it was felt as an indignity that these gentlemen should be legally liable to penalties. All he wished to do was to insert a clause in this Bill to the effect, that the graduates of the Universities of Scotland should be put on the same legal standing as those of other Universities, as physicians—not as apothecaries, nor as general practitioners, but as physicians. The Durham University had been inserted in the Bill in the House of Commons, which University, he believed, had never conferred a single medical degree, and if that University

1065
had been introduced, he was at a loss to understand bow the Scotch Universities, they being the great schools of medicine, ought to be omitted.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEwas understood to oppose the extension of this Bill to the graduates of the Scotch Universities. He admitted, indeed, that if the University of Durham were included in the Bill, that would furnish an argument for such a course. But he thought it would be undesirable to include the University of Durham, because no one could contend that it was, at present, a school of medicine. He hoped that before long a measure might be passed to establish a uniform standard of medical qualification; but, in the meantime, he did not see that any harm could be done by passing this Bill, which simply did an act of justice by giving the graduates of the London University the privileges which they had been entitled to expect since the foundation of that institution. It was indeed said, that there was danger lest, by an implication from an old Statute of Henry VIII., this Bill might be held to extend to the practice of surgery as well as medicine. He thought, however, that this might easily be provided against by the insertion of a few words in the Bill.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that what was wanted was that the graduates of the Universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow—the most renowned schools of medicine in the world—should have equal privileges with the graduates of the University of London, and they wanted no privilege whatever that was enjoyed by the graduates of other Universities. He could not understand why the privileges of other Universities should not be extended to those of Edinburgh and Glasgow.
After a few words in explanation from the Marquess of LANSDOWNE.
LORD WYNFORDsaid, he was not hostile to the present Bill, but objected to partial legislation on a subject of so much importance. What was wanted was, that every man who obtained the right to practise should bring with hint to the neighbourhood in which he settled some guarantee that he was a proper and safe practitioner. He recommended the Government to consider the general question during the recess, and to bring in a Bill next Session dealing with the whole subject.
THE EARL OF GALLOWAYthought, that enough had been said to show that it was desirable to postpone the first clause
1066
of the Bill, in order that the subject should be considered in all its branches. A measure might then be passed next Session which should, embrace everything desirable to be legislated upon in regard to this subject.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, his attention had not been directed to the Bill till he came down to the House that evening; but the conversation which had taken place was sufficient to induce him to agree with the noble Lord on the cross-benches that the House was hardly in a position to legislate on the subject. The subject of a licence to practise arising out of a degree granted by a University was one worthy of the consideration of the Government, and a measure on the subject ought not to be introduced into either House without their sanction. This measure had been introduced by a private Member; and he could say, in passing, that he believed that the University of London had better opportunities of being a good medical school, and therefore was more entitled to confer degrees, than either Oxford or Cambridge; and he did not believe that Oxford would exhibit any jealousy at such a privilege being granted to the London University. But this Bill was introduced into the House of Commons by a private Member; and another private Member said, if you give this privilege to the University of London, I claim it for the University of Durham; and the House of Commons having good-naturedly acceded to this claim, then came the noble Duke in this House, and demanded that the Scottish Universities should be put on a footing of perfect equality with the English Universities. Observe how that altered the whole character of the measure, which was now of far greater extent than when it was first introduced, and an entirely new question had been raised—namely, whether licences from the Universities in England, Ireland, and Scotland respectively should not give authority to those possessing them to practise all over the United Kingdom. He was not saying whether or not it was right to confer the privileges on one University or another, as Glasgow, St. Andrews, Aberdeen, or Dublin; or whether you should go on inserting these different Universities one after another in the Bill, or whether you should pass an exceptional Bill for the University of London alone. But what he thought was, that you should deal with the whole question in a great measure; and though the noble Marquess

1067
(the Marquess of Lansdowne) said that a grant of this privilege to the London University could not interfere with future legislation, he could not help thinking that practically it would so interfere, and that you ought not to confer on one University privileges which might tend to interfere with legislation hereafter. This subject ought to be dealt with as a Government measure, and not be left in the hands of individual Members, who dealt with it by putting in the claims of different Universities, which were allowed or not, not according to a definite or fixed principle, but according to the caprice of the House of Commons or their Lordships' House, as they happened to be worked upon by the case presented to them. He should not himself take the sense of the House on the question of going into Committee; but if the noble Lord on the cross-benches made a Motion to delay the Bill he should vote with him.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that the Bill was supported by the Secretary for the Home Department in the other House.
THE EARL OF DERBY: I said it was not a Government Bill, and that observation was cheered by noble Lords opposite; and yet my noble Friend says that it has been taken up by the Government.
LORD MONTEAGLE: It was taken up by them in the other House, and every Member of the Government voted for it.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, he could not believe it possible that the Government would support such a measure. He should follow the example of the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby), and, although he should not move the rejection of the Bill, if any noble Lord made such a Motion, he would vote for it.
LORD WYNFORDsaid, although he had no hostility to the measure, yet, because that he wished that the general subject should be taken into consideration before legislation took place, he would move that the House go into Committee on the Bill this day three months.
Amendment moved, to leave out "now" and insert "this day three months."
On Question, that "now" stand part of the Motion, their Lordships divided:—Content 17; Not Content 15: Majority 2.
Resolved in the Affirmative: House in Committee accordingly: words including the University of Durham struck out: Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received on Thursday next.

BURIALS BEYOND THE METROPOLIS BILL.
Bill read 3a (according to Order), with the Amendment. Further Amendments made.
On Motion that the Bill do pass,
THE BISHOP OF LONDONsaid, that before the Bill passed, he wished to say a few words in explanation of what had been stated by him on a former occasion. Their Lordships would probably recollect that in calling their attention to the evil resulting from the general closing up of burial-grounds in the metropolis he had made one statement, it appeared, not on sufficient authority; but he had made it on what he conceived at the time to be sufficient authority. The statement was to the effect that in a certain pool of water near the Eastern Counties Railway some bodies had been found, as well as some coffins, which it was conjectured had been thrown there to avoid the difficulty and expense of burying them in a parochial cemetery. He had found, however, from more careful inquiry, that it seemed to be doubtful whether any bodies were found, or any entire body was found, in that pool of water, or any more than certain fragments of coffins, and he believed some bones. It appeared likely that such remnants of coffins and hones had not been thrown in by any persons who were reduced to adopt that fatal measure by the difficulty of interring the corpses of their relatives; but that they were the remains of bodies that had been interred in unconsecrated cemeteries, and had been removed from thence to make room for others. The parish officers of Mile End seemed to consider dint the statement he had made reflected upon them, and he gladly availed himself of that opportunity of saying that he meant to cast no imputation whatever on those highly respectable parish officers. The statement itself as to the finding of bodies in that pool of water he found was one made on somewhat doubtful authority; but while he admitted that, he should add that all the other statements he had made were more than borne out by subsequent inquiry. The evils that existed from the general closing of burial-grounds were most appalling; the increased expense of burials had produced pauperism in many instances, and had led to the greatest neglect of common decency. A most respectable clergyman in the north of London had informed him that so many as forty or fifty cabs and other conveyances, bearing

1069
the bodies of dead persons, were waiting until their time came for admission at the gates of unconsecrated cemeteries, and the corpses themselves were interred in a most hurried and indecent manner. Frequently the undertaker, or one of the labourers of the burial-ground, puts on a surplice, and reads such part of the burial service as he thought fit. In the main roads leading to two or three of these cemeteries the most disgraceful scenes of intoxication took place on the part of those who conveyed the bodies to them; and the distress caused to poor persons who accompanied their deceased relations to their last homes was harrowing to the feelings of every humane spectator. It was not an unimportant matter, as affecting the public health, to know that cabs were now often used for carrying the bodies of dead persons—no matter whether they had died of contagious diseases or of any other complaint—to these cemeteries, instead of being decently conveyed in some of those cheap funeral conveyances which, cheap as they were, were beyond the means of these poor persons. He could not but express his deep regret that no measures had been adopted by Her Majesty's Government for putting an end to so indecent a state of things—a state of things revolting to the feelings of every pious and humane man—a state of things which created great moral evil, and which, if allowed to continue much longer, must also produce great social evil. He knew of but one effectual remedy for it, and he trusted that Her Majesty's Government would see the necessity of adopting it early in the next Session of Parliament. He meant the giving to the Secretary of State power to compel parishes whose burial-grounds had been closed by his orders to provide new cemeteries for the interment of their own deceased poor. He would again repeat the observation he had made on a former occasion, namely, that before such orders were issued, steps ought to be taken to provide fresh burial-grounds, so that no interruption might occur in the ordinary mode of conducting funerals with decency and propriety. It was very true, that the state of things in some of the existing churchyards was extremely disgusting, and prejudicial to the public health; but if an interval had been allowed for providing new cemeteries before the closing of the old, he believed that no serious detriment to the public health would have resulted. As one who was interested in the
1070
comfort of the poorest orders of the people, and as a minister of religion, knowing the mockery of religious services which was continually occurring at interments, he could not refrain from expressing his earnest hope that Her Majesty's Government would take this matter into serious consideration, and next Session bring forward a Bill empowering the Secretary of State, under certain circumstances, to require the parishes—the large ones separately, and the smaller in combination—to provide decent burial-places for the bodies of the poor.
THE EARL OF ABERDEENcould assure their Lordships that the statement made by the right rev. Prelate was most painful to hear, and one that undoubtedly required the attention of Her Majesty's Government. Indeed, the evils he had described were such as must harrow the feelings of every right-minded person. The practical difficulties of the subject, how-ever, were much greater than the right rev. Prelate imagined. It was not sufficient to authorise the Secretary of State to compel the parishes to provide new cemeteries, as he had proposed. But undoubtedly this question had been under the consideration both of the Secretary of State and of Her Majesty's Government; and every desire was entertained to meet the wishes of the right rev. Prelate. The state of many of the burial-grounds which had been closed was such as to compel. without delay, the steps that had been taken for that purpose. At the same time, he was far from denying that much hardship had been caused both to the clergy and to the poor by what had taken place. These were evils which, difficult as the task was, ought to be met; and he could assure the right rev. Prelate that every endeavour would be made by Her Majesty's Government to remove a state of things that was disgraceful to a civilised community.
Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

SPIRITS (IRELAND) BILL.
VISCOUNT CANNINGmoved that the Bill be now read 3a.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, he felt it a duty to call their Lordships' attention to the provisions of this measure, which he had no hesitation in saying was one which, in its present state, ought not to receive their Lordships' assent. The title of the Bill was not in the least calculated to call attention to its contents; indeed, the pro-

1071
visions entirely conflicted with the title; and he believed that his noble Friend who had charge of it had found it necessary to alter the title accordingly. The original title was "to amend the Acts for the better Prevention of the sale of Spirits by unlicensed Persons in Ireland;" but clauses of the utmost possible importance had been introduced, having no relation whatever to that subject, but to a much larger and more important matter. In consequence, and to comply with Parliamentary usage, the title had been altered for the purpose of including those particular provisions. This he stated in order to explain the fact that so little attention had been obtained for this measure either out of doors or within the Houses of Parliament; and, as was not unusual at that period of the Session, it had passed through its various stages in both Houses without exciting much attention, even on the part of the most active Irish Members, though, perhaps, if it had been de spiritualibus instead of de spirituosis, the case would have been different, and the Bill would have been more fully considered. Their Lordships were aware that there existed in Ireland a force called the constabulary, and he might fearlessly assert that there was not an individual who had been brought in contact with the administration of the law in Ireland, or with the Irish Government, who would not be ready to do justice to that force, as being one of the most valuable institutions in that country. This force consisted of 12,000 men, well appointed and well disciplined, supported at an expense of 500,000 l. annually, and originally established by the late Marquess of Wellesley for the exclusive purpose of preserving the public peace. In deference to that principle there were certain duties and functions from which, by law, the constabulary were excluded. They were excluded, for instance, from anything connected with the preservation of game, or the protection of fisheries, the collection of rents and tithes, and specialter excluded from the collection of the public revenue or the enforcement of the laws against smuggling. Successive Acts which had since received the sanction of the Legislature had repeated those exceptions. Their Lordships were now, however, called upon by the present Bill, which was introduced under another title, to repeal the wise provisions of all those Acts, and to apply the constabulary force of Ireland, for the first time, to the collection of the public revenue and the enforcement of
1072
its penalties. By one of the provisions of the Bill the Lord Lieutenant was authorised to declare certain districts in a state of insubordination to the Distillery Laws, and, thereupon, by virtue of this order of his Excellency, all the constabulary force in each proclaimed district were converted, ipso facto, into Excise officers. Let their Lordships consider for one moment what would be the effect of such an enactment. The Excise law, as everybody knew, was wholly separate and distinguishable from the ordinary municipal law, which the constabulary were hitherto called upon to execute. It was much more complicated and difficult, and required from those connected with that department duties of a very peculiar kind. It also conferred on those who administered it much greater powers. Excise officers were entitled to resort to very stringent authority, and, among other prerogatives, were entitled to proceed without the sanction of the civil magistrate, and to repel force by force by using the firearms which they held in their hands, and to fire, if necessary, in the execution of their duty upon any mob who might venture to oppose them. They had also power to break into any house at any time, by day or night, if they found such extreme measures necessary. Those who had looked practically into the subject—he referred, for example, to the clear evidence of that able and excellent public officer, Mr. John Wood, the head of the Board of Inland Revenue—had distinctly stated that the functions of the two classes of officers, the exciseman and the constable, were entirely distinguishable; that the power of the Excise officer in executing his duty was infinitely greater than the power of the Constable; and that the protection which the law afforded him was proportionally greater likewise. An exciseman, for instance, had power to break into a house without special warrant, and at any time upon any information he might receive; by one of the clauses of this Bill, which transferred the Revenue duties to the constabulary, any constable, or sub-constable, even a young man who was for the first time appointed to discharge this service, was empowered by day or night—for the words were, at all times in quest of illicit spirits, or of persons who had sold spirits without a licence—to enter houses and enforce the law. These were functions and powers with which he had never hitherto been entrusted. Now, he put it to their Lordships, whether it was within the bounds of reason

1073
that by an Act of Parliament of this description they would at once communicate to these persons the whole knowledge necessary to enable them to discharge the duties that would be required of them under the Excise laws? Could they by an Act of Parliament, instruct the whole constabulary of Ireland with what would be a miraculous knowledge of the Excise code? A Select Committee had, indeed, sat upon the Bill; but not one tittle of evidence had been given by any person in favour of the scheme which the Bill was intended to carry into effect—indeed, all the evidence was to the contrary effect. But more wonders were to follow. The constabulary being turned into excisemen by Act of Parliament, at once came under the control of the Board of Excise, who would thus acquire a jurisdiction that would necessarily conflict with that of the magistracy, and of the staff of the constabulary, who would no longer have the power of regulating the force for the preservation of the peace. What would be the consequence? Endless contradiction and confusion. When the men were required for the preservation of the public peace, they might be ordered by the Excise to scour the country for the purpose of putting down illicit distillation. When ordered out by the Excise, they might be required to suppress an Orange or a Riband meeting. But, he was told, that as soon as the constabulary in a particular district were turned into excisemen, it was intended to withdraw the existing revenue police, who really knew their business, and to leave it wholly to the care of the constables, who were wholly ignorant of these new duties. The distribution of the constabulary force wholly unfitted it for such duties. At present they were distributed in small parties over the surface of Ireland, though they were chiefly concentrated in those parts where the population was the densest. The revenue police, on the contrary, were stationed in larger parties, not where the constables were quartered, but in the mountains and bogs, where there was a thin population, and where peculiar facilities existed for violating the Excise laws. Thus the constabulary were now necessarily distributed in the most populous districts of Ireland, whilst the service they would be called upon to perform under this Bill was in the least-peopled and least-accessible districts. Who could reconcile these contradictions? Then what was this novel service? It was no other than what was termed in Ireland
1074
"still-bunting." The constables hereafter would be engaged in interrupting the profitable, though illegal, practices of a large portion of the population; and that could not be done unless they went with an armed force sufficient to render resistance unavailing. The force of opinion, which now made their strength, would be lost. The constables went about in twos and threes by day or night. But pass this Bill, and they could no more proceed, or venture to proceed, in the small parties in which they were accustomed to patrol the country, than they could fly; neither could their parties be augmented in numbers except by withdrawing the police officers from their primary duty of preserving the public peace. So that if they were required to patrol the roads, to attend the petty or quarter sessions, and execute their proper duties, what would become of illicit distillation? If, on the other hand, they were employed in suppressing illicit distillation, what became of the protection to property and the preservation of the peace? When the constables were employed in preserving the peace, the illicit distiller would be at work; when acting as Excise officers the robber and the housebreaker would go unmolested. He protested against a measure of this kind as dangerous to the public peace, and inconsistent with their Lordships' past and wise legislation. But it should also be remembered that there was a revenue police already in existence; it was well organised, and under admirable officers. If that force were insufficient, increase it, but do not take away the force which was neccessary for the general administration of the law. He believed that if there were a corrupting duty upon earth, it was that of the revenue service in a county or district where illicit distillation prevailed. The discipline of the British Army itself had broken down and crumbled under the temptation and influences connected with the manifold attempts to suppress illicit distillation in Ireland. A general order was issued that on no account whatever was any party to proceed upon revenue duty except under the command of a commissioned officer. Now if the British Army had been found to be incapable of executing those functions unless commanded by a commissioned officer, how could they think it possible that a much less disciplined force—the constabulary of Ireland—would, acting alone, be able to resist all the temptations which drink, bribery, and corruption would introduce into their

1075
body if Parliament permitted the Bill to pass in its present shape? If it be necessary, let the Government increase the number of the revenue police in Ireland to any extent; but, as they wished the peace of Ireland, let them not attempt to employ the constabulary on revenue duty. He had great confidence in the revenue police and its administration, and also in the constabulary, but he had no confidence at all in any double administration, such as would be exercised over a body acting as excisemen at one time and constables at another. Their Lordships were aware that the most hearty good-will was now generally manifested towards the constabulary by the people of Ireland. They could move by night or by day in districts the most remote without the apprehension of any attack being made upon them. Such was the confidence placed in the constabulary force in Ireland, that they are frequently made the depositories of information which the Government themselves could not obtain. But what would be the result if the force were in future sent out for the purpose of destroying the stills upon the mountains? They would lose that confidence and goodwill of the people, and a feeling of enmity and distrust would inevitably be engendered. He thanked God that Ireland was at present in a state of peace and safety. What was the result of such a state of things? Why, that within the last two months the Government had withdrawn twelve regiments, which formed as it were the heart of the garrison of Ireland. They had been ordered abroad to carry the glory of England into distant lands, and the duties hitherto performed by the soldiers were now in a great measure discharged by the constabulary force, which it was proposed to debase by this Bill. He, therefore, considered it peculiarly unwise to employ the constabulary at the present moment in the way proposed by this Bill. There were not now as many soldiers as there were constabulary in Ireland. Was this a time to employ the latter body in a service in which they would feel themselves degraded? Sir Duncan M'Gregor, the head of the force in Ireland, declared that no employment could be more odious to the constabulary than that which should bring them in connection with revenue duty. This Bill, if passed in its present shape, would infuse a spirit of discontent among the constabulary at a time when there was increasing difficulties in recruiting their numbers. Mr. Wood, the Chairman of
1076
Inland Revenue, expressed an opinion similar to that of Sir D. M'Gregor. Upon those grounds, and acting on the strongest convictions, he should, after the Bill had been read a third time, move the omission of those clauses in the Bill which sanctioned the employment of the constabulary on revenue duty.
Bill read 3a (according to Order) with the Amendments.
LORD MONTEAGLEthen moved an Amendment in section 2, the effect of which was to take away from "sub-constables" the right of breaking into houses for the purpose of discovering illicit spirits. These sub-constables were generally young men, and hence they ought not to be intrusted with these large powers. He thought that this and other clauses of the Bill showed that it had not received a very large amount of care in the other House.
VISCOUNT CANNINGsaid, that though no Member of that House had a better right to express an opinion on this subject than the noble Lord who had last addressed the House, still he (Viscount Canning) thought that he was justified in objecting to the view that the noble Lord had taken of this measure. With respect to what had been said as to the title of the Bill, it was true that when the Bill came up from the other House, the title had failed to express the provisions which were to be found in the measure, and when the discrepancy was pointed out it was remedied; and at all events the objection was one which was entitled to small weight. In order to prove that the Bill had received due consideration in the other House, he begged to remind his noble Friend that the clause at first inserted in the Bill, and which he (Lord Monteagle) supposed would put in jeopardy a large amount of revenue, had in the other House been omitted—the objections to the clause having been allowed to prevail, and when the Bill came up to their Lordships' House it contained no clause which could justify such an objection. Not only was the Bill amply discussed in the other House, but he begged also to state that, after considerable discussion, it passed without any opposition, excepting such as led to merely nominal divisions. The Amendment proposed by his noble Friend was brought forward on the ground that the sub-constables were young and inexperienced men, who could not be trusted with the delicate duties which would attach to them under this Bill. But none of these constables could

1077
act unless he had a warrant specifically addressed to himself, and he (Viscount Canning) thought that he might confidently state that there was a large number of these public servants, who were by no means young or inexperienced, but who, on the contrary, had been many years in the service, who had been distinguished by good-service marks, and who, in the case of the illness or absence of a chief constable, were frequently trusted with the command of a station. He thought, therefore, that if it were left to those in authority to select from these men—who as a body were thought worthy of trust—the most worthy, no bad result could arise from the sub-constables being intrusted with powers given under this Act. If this Amendment were inserted, then the Lord Lieutenant, in not being able to avail himself of the sub-constables, would only, out of a force of 13,000, be able to employ 1,500, and this would by a side-wind have the effect of defeating the purpose of the 13th clause. He thought that his noble Friend was hardly, by the wording of the 13th clause, justified in saying that the Lord Lieutenant would have power of converting the constabulary into excisemen, which would degrade them and render them comparatively useless in the discharge of the more legitimate services, and he had quoted the authority of Sir Duncan M'Gregor as being hostile to this change. He must also demur to the description given by his noble Friend of the evidence taken before the Committee last year. He must admit that Sir D. M'Gregor, throughout his evidence, expressed Himself against any such general change as it was supposed would be effected by the present Bill, and it was perfectly natural for that gentleman, seeing how effective and well disciplined the force under him was, to desire to leave well alone. But Sir D. M'Gregor had, when pressed, said that he would undertake the duties which the proposed changes would require if they were imposed upon him, and he had also supported the evidence of others who had expressed an opinion that if the constabulary were employed in putting down illicit distillation, though this might at first create a sensation, yet after three or four months it would cease, and that the constabulary by performing these duties would not lose the good opinion and esteem of the people. With respect to the power given to the Lord Lieutenant under the 13th clause, it was not too much to sup-
1078
pose that he would, in the exercise of such discretionary power, try the experiment proposed by the present Bill, not in Donegal or counties where illicit distillation prevailed to a large extent, but rather in those counties where illicit distillation existed only to a small extent, and could be put down by the constabulary, even if they were so unfit for this duty as his noble Friend had stated. This measure would afford the opportunity of trying a safe and easy experiment, and even if it failed, limited to time as it was by the Act, it could not be productive of mischievous results; he therefore asked their Lordships to reject the proposed Amendments.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsupported the Amendment. He begged their Lordships to recollect that, although the whole revenue police of Ireland only amounted to 947, yet, by the regulations of that force, the execution of warrants was only intrusted to 151 officers; and yet by the Bill now before them they were called upon to grant to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland the power of authorising any one out of 13,000 persons to enter any dwelling in the country at any hour of the night. And although his noble Friend and relative (Viscount Canning) told their Lordships that the Lord Lieutenant would never exercise the powers which were given to him, he conceived that formed no answer to the objection; for if they were never meant to be used, why, he would ask, were they allowed to him? His more grave objection, however, to the Bill was founded on the employment at all of the constabulary in such service. He would say with confidence that there did not exist in any country of the world a police equal to that of Ireland. That force had been always regarded as a model force, even in this country; and when Sir Robert Peel wanted to make the London police perfect, where did he turn for a model, but to Ireland? He would therefore ask their Lordships, ought such a force as that to be distracted from its proper occupations—ought so gratuitous an injury to be inflicted upon it as this Bill contemplated, without the best possible reasons being shown for such a proceeding; and especially at a moment when, our soldiers being withdrawn, the whole maintenance of order depended upon the constabulary? But believing no such reasons had been shown, he should most certainly support the Amendment of the noble Lord.
LORD MONTEACLEsaid, it was not his intention to divide their Lordships on the present Amendment, but would take the division on the 13th clause.
Amendment withdrawn.
On Question, that Clause 13 stand part of the Bill, their Lordships divided:—Content 17; Not Content 11: Majority 6.
Further Amendments made.
Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

THE BOARD OF HEALTH—MOTION FOR PAPERS.
THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY: My Lords, in moving for the papers and correspondence of which I have given notice, I must take the opportunity of vindicating myself and my honour against a charge which has been made by another person in another place, seriously affecting my personal honour and character for veracity. I feel, my Lords, that it may be of little importance to the world at large what may be the character of so humble an individual as myself; but, as a Member of your Lordships' House, it is a matter of some importance that I should stand erect before you, and either refute the charge which has been made, or submit to the contumely which its confirmation would inflict upon me. I am able, my Lords, to give the flattest possible contradiction to every item of the charge which has been made. It will be within your recollection that some time ago I made a statement, in which I mentioned that, during the transactions of the Board of Health, a meeting was held at which a certain noble Lord was present, at which I myself was present, and at which other Commissioners were present—that the noble Lord made a proposal, and that that proposal fell. The noble Lord stated that it fell in consequence of not being seconded. My assertion was that the term "seconded" never occurred—that it never was seconded—that the term never was used—that the proposal was made, and that it was met by myself. In opposition to this, I heard a statement made yesterday by the noble Lord in these words—
"He had gone to the Board on several occasions; he went to them, for example, on the 30th of January, 1851, at the request of the Government in a special case. .. He went to the Board of Health on this subject. This was on the 30th of January, 1851 The Board read to him a long letter of seven pages, which they had prepared, and in which they argued the point with the Treasury. Thereupon, as the minutes recorded,
1080
—'Lord Seymour moved that a letter should be sent instead of the proposed draught, stating that the Board are ready to act on the suggestions contained in the Treasury letter. This motion not being seconded, Lord Seymour stated that he wished that the Treasury should be informed, when the Board's letter is transmitted, that he differs from it.' Now, as to this matter, Lord Shaftesbury, in his place elsewhere, had stated that the thing had not happened as he (Lord Seymour) had described it on a former occasion. Lord Shaftesbury, speaking upon his honour, spoke, it was to be remembered, upon the information of the secretary—not having been himself present on the occasion—whereas he (Lord Seymour), having been present, spoke from his own recollection."
Mark the words! This is the way in which the noble Lord strikes down another man's honour, and endeavours to erect his own. He solemnly affirms, in opposition to my former statement, that I was not present. In the first place, I give my word of honour solemnly, and in the most emphatic manner that a gentleman can do, and under the most solemn obligations of an oath, that I was present. I give my word of honour that I was the person who spoke upon the subject, and that my colleagues said not a word. The noble Lord has committed himself by specifying the date. It is possible that there might have been a day on which I was not present; but he specifies three times emphatically, that upon the 30th of January, 1851, he went to that Board—that he made a proposal—that I was not there—and that I, speaking on my honour, when I assert that I was there, have asserted that which is untrue. Now, I state first, upon my word of honour as a gentleman, that I was there. Hear next the evidence—and first the written testimony of two of my colleagues—
"The General Board of Health, Whitehall, "August 1, 1854.
"We declare most solemnly that we were present at a Board held on the 30th of January, 1851, the day on which it is recorded in the minutes that 'Lord Seymour attended and made a motion that was not seconded,' and we further declare that Lord Shaftesbury was present and made the proposition which was adopted. On our remembrance being called to Lord Seymour's allegation that he had been told that his motion had not been seconded, we declare that he was not so told by us, or by Lord Shaftesbury in our presence on that occasion; nor do we believe that he was so told on any other occasion whatsoever.
"EDWIN CHADWICK.
"T. SOTJTHWOOD SMITH."
Hear now the letter from Mr. Macaulay, the secretary, who was present at the time, and who writes to me to-day in the following terms—
"My impression is, that you were present at the meeting of the Board on the 30th of January,

1081
1851. The matter, however, can be placed beyond the possibility of doubt by reference to the fair and rough minutes of the 30th of January, where the attendances of each member of the Board are carefully recorded. "C. MACAULAY."
What say the minutes? I refer to the fair minutes—I refer to the rough minutes, and I find—
"Extract from minutes of Thursday, January 30, 1851. Present—Lord Seymour, M.P.; Lord Ashley, M.P.; Edwin Chadwick, Esq.; Dr. S. Smith."
And now I am to be told, in the presence of the country and of the House of Commons, that, speaking upon my honour, I have been guilty of a falsehood when I assert what I have done, not upon any single testimony alone, but supported by that of my two colleagues, of the secretary, and of the minutes, which cannot lie. Now, one more statement. He goes on to say—
"Lord Shaftesbury had made it a charge against him that he had never attended the Board; this was not the case, though it was the case that he had ceased to attend the Board when he had found by experience that it was to no purpose that he attended a Board where he was systematically overborne, while he could occupy his time to really useful public purposes in Ids own office. The noble Earl had added that he (Lord Seymour) had told him, in confidence, that he never meant to do anything that he was not compelled to do. He would not be so discourteous as to go into any discussion with the noble Earl as to the expression so attributed to him; all he would observe was, that if he had said this to the noble Earl in confidence, his confidence had been much misplaced."
Hear what I did say,—I asserted that he stayed away, not because he was opposed, but because he had predetermined not to come, and I proved it by his statement to me a few days after he took office, that he could not attend, by his allowing sixty-eight Boards to be held between his first and second attendance, five between the second and third, ten between the third and fourth, and ninety-four between the fourth and fifth, when for the first and only time he met with a difference of opinion. I say that this completely proves that he never intended to come to the Board; and when he says he did not come because he was constantly overborne, my simple reply to him is, that he never did intend to come. Again, he says that he told me in confidence that he never meant to do anything he was not compelled to do. I never said that Lord Seymour had said to me in confidence that he would not do more than he was compelled to do. Lord Seymour never said it in confidence to any one; he said
1082
it to myself, he said it to my colleagues, he said it to Lord Ebrington, and he wrote it to the Board on the 14th of January, 1851, in these words—
"It is not in my power to attend the meetings of the Board of Health without neglect of my duties here."
Further on, speaking of the period when the powers of the Board of Health as conferred by the Act were about to close, the noble Lord said—
"This was precisely the time when the Legislature was properly called upon to review the operation of the measure, and nothing could be more unreasonable than the proposition of a noble Earl elsewhere—the non-official member and patron of the Board (Lord Shaftesbury)—that such review of its proceedings was an unhandsome attack upon absent individuals."
I never said that, nor anything like that. I said that for any gentleman to speak of men like his then colleagues, and to say that they "could be made to do their duty only by fear of losing their salaries," was an indecent and cruel charge which ought not to be made against absent men—against men to whom no notice had been given, and who, therefore, had no means of denying what was said. That is what I said, and what I most emphatically repeat, for I think that a charge made in such a tone and temper and manner against gentlemen as good in every respect as himself was an act of gross and intolerable indecency.
"In order," he says, "that such objectionable proceedings might not occur again, he had sent to the Board of Health requiring copies of all the minutes of their proceedings, so that he might see what was going on, it being impossible for him at that time—the Board of Works and the Board of Woods being then united—to attend at the Board of Health, who were in the habit of holding Boards every day for some three or four minutes per diem."
Now, anything more unwarrantable, and, I say again, more cruel, towards those meritorious and hard-working men, I never yet heard. I will undertake to prove that the average attendances at that Board were five hours a day at least—sometimes six or seven hours; and, when the cholera was raging, and in times of great pressure, as much as ten hours a day. Almost every night, also, business was taken home by the two Commissioners, on which they had to occupy themselves during the night, in order to prepare themselves to receive deputations or to transact important business on the following morning. The noble Lord went on to say—

1083
"He must express the opinion that the jobbing of the Board of Health presented an amount of dirt which must be very startling to the clean party in question. The whole thing was perfectly monstrous."
Here, again, is a charge of corruption which he knows well he cannot prove! This he calls, no doubt, "a review of the Board's proceedings;" without inquiry, without power of reply on the part of the accused. Is it wise, is it just, is it safe that any body of legislators should proceed to act upon such evidence as this? These are samples of the whole speech; there is hardly an assertion that might not be met by as flat a contradiction. They show the spirit of the man, the character of his charges, and the whole system of the attacks on the Board. He was pleased to reflect very contemptuously on myself and all my public actions and opinions. Partly through indifference, and partly through inability, I shall not endeavour to make any reply. It may be an infirmity, or even a vice, but so the fact is, that I do not much care for the opinion of my contemporaries, and nothing at all for the opinion of posterity, What I do care for is the conviction that I have, by God's blessing, "done my duty in that state of life to which it has pleased God to call me," and that conviction cannot be taken away either by Lord Seymour or the House of Commons. The noble Earl concluded by moving—
"That there be laid before this House, Copies of any Correspondence from Local Boards of Health in reply to Inquiries from Towns where the Application of the Public Health Act was under Consideration; and also of any Communications from Chairmen or Officers of Local Boards on the opposition made to the Continuance of the General Board: And also, Copy of any Memorial from the Clergy of the Metropolis in relation to the Metropolitan Interment Act."
On Question, agreed to.
House adjourned to Thursday next.