Lords Sitting of 20 July 1854

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—a Jamaica Loan;
Royal Military Asylum; Crime and Outrage (Ireland).
2a Highway Rates; Turnpike Trusts Arrangements.
Reported—Court of Chancery; Merchant Shipping Acts Repeal; Savings Banks; Marriages (Mexico).

NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND.)
EARL GRANVILLElaid on the table the Report, with evidence, appendix, and index thereto, of Select Committee on National Education (Ireland).
THE EARL OF EGLINTONsaid, he could not allow the Report to be presented to their Lordships without saying a few words upon it. As he understood that it was not competent for Members of that House to make a protest upon any subject connected with a Committee, he would take this opportunity of expressing his entire dissent from, and disapprobation of, the Report which his noble Friend had laid upon the table. It appeared to him that the fact that twenty-one Members of their Lordships' House, most of them men of considerable Parliamentary experience, and even official knowledge, having sat for forty-one days upon this subject, having examined some of the most intelligent witnesses who could be produced in Ireland, and having obtained evidence which he believed would fill larger blue books than had ever yet been laid upon their Lordships' table—the fact of such a Committee not having been able to come to any decision on a subject so important as that intrusted to their charge appeared to him to involve such a degree of absurdity, if not a total dereliction of duty, that he felt himself called upon to take this opportunity of washing his hands of the whole transaction. He could not conceive anything more unsatisfactory to Ireland, or less gratifying to the feelings of the Members of the Committee themselves, than the decision, if decision it could be called, which had been come to.
EARL GRANVILLEthought it rather an unusual course, on the presentation of the Report of a Committee, for a noble Lord who was one of the minority in that Committee to get up and state over again his objections to the conclusion at which the majority had arrived. If his noble Friend's opinion were so strong on this point, he was surprised that he had not moved certain Resolutions or recommendations in the Committee himself. And when his noble Friend said that the decision of the Committee would be unsatisfactory to Ireland, he (Earl Granville) begged to say that he believed the great majority of the people
440
of Ireland were in favour of the present system of national education pursued in that country; and he was convinced that they would rejoice to find that no Report had been made by the Committee subversive of that system.
THE EARL OF DERBYcould not but think that the noble Earl had made a most unjust attack upon his noble Friend; because, in point of fact, his noble Friend had brought down certain Resolutions which he intended to move in the Committee. He himself (the Earl of Derby) had also brought down certain Resolutions, not for the purpose of subverting the system, but of amending it in certain points; and the noble Earl opposite, who was Chairman of the Committee, brought down a string of Resolutions which it was expected the Committee would discuss, and to the great majority of which he (the Earl of Derby) was prepared to give his entire assent. He was, however, taken entirely by surprise, as were also most of the other Members of the Committee, by the announcement on the part of the noble Earl that, after having prepared something like thirty or thirty-five Resolutions, to the greater portion of which there was no objection, he did not intend to move any one of them, because certain Amendments of them had been given notice of. In consequence of suggestions from other noble Lords, the noble Earl withdrew his own Resolutions, and divided the Committee on the question whether his noble Friend (the Earl of Eglinton) or himself (the Earl of Derby) should be permitted to offer any Resolutions. A majority of nine to seven decided in favour of the noble Earl; and he thought it was rather hard, therefore, for the noble Earl to come down now and reproach his noble Friend with not having moved any Amendment to the Report.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, that the Resolutions of his noble Friend (Earl Granville) were mere suggestions, and not Resolutions. They were submitted in that sense to himself (the Marquess of Lansdowne) with an intimation that they were not intended to be moved as Resolutions unless they were likely to meet with the general assent of the Members of the Committee. It was subsequently found, however, on further consideration, that there was no prospect whatever of these Resolutions receiving general concurrence, or of their having the very desirable effect of reconciling divergent opinions upon this

441
important question, and they were therefore withdrawn. Under these circumstances, he could not conceive how any other course could have been taken than that of reporting the evidence to their Lordships, and thus enabling the House and the public at large, both in England and Ireland, to form their own opinions upon the matter from the materials thus afforded to them.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, the course adopted on this occasion by the Committee was precisely the same course as that taken in 1837 by both Houses of Parliament on this very subject; and of the Committee of the House of Commons in 1837 the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby) was a member and an ornament—as he must be a distinguished member of any assembly to which he belonged;—and on that occasion the noble Earl himself was an acquiescing party in the decision of that Committee, which was to report the evidence they had taken to the House of Commons, unaccompanied by any specific recommendation of their own.
THE EARL OF DERBYexplained that he had no desire to enter into a discussion of the general question. He had only risen to complain of the unjust censure passed by the noble Earl (Earl Granville) upon his noble Friend (the Earl of Eglinton), whom he had charged with not bringing forward any Resolutions in the Committee, when, in point of fact, his noble Friend did come down with Resolutions, but was out-voted by an adverse majority.
THE EARL OF CLANCARTY said: My Lords, before this discussion closes I must beg, as a Member of the Committee by whom the evidence now upon the table of the House was taken, to say a few words, in consequence of observations that have fallen from the noble Earl opposite the Chairman of the Committee, and the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne) beside him. It was with the utmost surprise that I heard the noble Earl speak of the national education system in Ireland as being popular, for certainly there is nothing in the evidence to justify such a remark; but, on the contrary, much from which to draw an opposite conclusion. The Committee sat for, I believe, above forty days; the most competent witnesses from every part of Ireland were examined, and it is most due to the noble Earl to acknowledge the ability, patience, and unremitting attention he gave to the conduct of the inquiry, animated ap-
442
parently by a sincere and earnest desire, not only of eliciting facts and opinions regarding the actual operation of the education system, but also of examining suggestions for its improvement, and for freeing it from such well-founded objections as had hitherto hindered its acceptance with the great majority of the Protestants, and especially with the clergy of the Established Church. No one upon the Committee I should have thought could be more aware than the noble Earl how unsatisfactorily the system had worked, how little it had received of support from the educated classes in Ireland, and how much it was objected to, not only by those who had been restrained by conscientious motives from joining it, but also by many who had been most zealous in endeavouring to give it effect. In order, however, that there may be no mistake upon the subject, I beg to give notice that, unless the question be taken up by some noble Lord more competent to do justice to its importance, I shall early next Session move that the evidence and other documents now upon the table of the House be referred to a Select Committee to be reported upon with reference, among other points, to its acceptance by the people of Ireland, and the amount of support it has received at their hands, from whence your Lordships will be enabled to form some judgment of its alleged popularity. So far from being popular in the country, I know, and we have it in evidence from all parties, that the result of the labours of the Committee have been anxiously looked for as likely to be productive of important, modifications of the system; and well assured I am that the decision unfortunately come to of reporting evidence, unaccompanied by any expression of opinion, will be viewed with the utmost dissatisfaction by every well-wisher to the cause of national education in Ireland. The observation of the noble Marquess to which I wish to call your Lordships' attention shows the great practical inconvenience that may arise from the refusal of the Committee to consider the evidence, and to discuss suggestions that different Members had prepared as arising out of it. The noble Earl (the Chairman) had prepared and communicated to the several Members of the Committee a series of recommendations regarding details in the working of the system which it was reasonable to suppose would have been submitted for discussion, and in this expectation the Committee assembled at their last meeting on

443
Monday last; some of the noble Earl's suggestions it might have been desirable to recommend for adoption, but some, I do not hesitate to say, were both objectionable in policy and at variance with the bearing of evidence. The Committee, however, had no opportunity of discussing them, for the noble Earl never moved their adoption. "But," says the noble Marquess, "they will not be thrown away, for they will be communicated to the Commissioners of National Education, who will, no doubt, give immediate attention to them." Now, I protest against any such course being taken. The noble Earl, as a Member of the Government, stands in a position of some authority with the Commissioners, and, having had the chief conduct of the late inquiry, his recommendations would, of course, have peculiar weight with them; but it would be a most unfair proceeding to give, as an ascertained result of the late investigation, suggestions that the Committee have not bad opportunity of discussing, some of which, I again affirm, are neither justifiable in policy nor consistent with the evidence that is upon the table. I, therefore, hope that no proceedings will be taken until the evidence shall have been analysed and fully considered. I agree with the noble Earl the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in lamenting that this duty was not performed by the Committee, and that the just expectations of the public upon a subject so important to the interests of the population of Ireland must, for the present, be disappointed by the miserable and impotent conclusion of an inquiry upon which so much labour and expense had been bestowed. I yet hope, however, that as the evidence will now go before the public, and its publication will be accompanied with an analytical index, the work of the Committee will not be altogether without beneficial results, for, if read, the evidence cannot fail of removing much of that prejudice, by which the system of national education in Ireland has been so long upheld in the minds of the English people, and of commending to the sanction and adoption of Parliament and of the public such modifications as may render it, what it is not at present, just, efficient, and comprehensive.

COURT OF CHANCERY BILL.
On Motion that the House go into Committee on this Bill,
LORD BROUGHAMdesired to state for their comfort and encouragement, a circum-
444
stance which had taken place in the morning, at the time of the transaction of judicial business. His noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, himself, and a noble Lord whom he did not see in his place, had before them a cause which illustrated the bad state of the law as to the Court of Chancery before the recent amendments were made in it, and they were thus enabled to judge of the salutary effects likely to be produced by them. It appeared that a Bill was filed in 1803, and now, at the end of fifty-one years, the suit was not finished; for whatever might be the result of the appeal in hearing which their Lordships had been engaged that morning, the suit must go back to the Court of Chancery for some, he hoped but a short, time. In the course of this suit persons bad gone to India, and had come into existence, and had ceased to exist. It appeared that two persons had been born into the suit, and that one, at least, of them had died. Though debts had been paid, yet their Lordships had been unable to discover that during the fifty-one years any of the parties to the suit had ever received a farthing, while 7,000 l. or 8,000 l. had been paid to professional persons engaged in the proceedings. If the late improvements of the law had not been so long delayed, a great portion of this protraction of litigation would have been avoided. If the Masters' Office had been abolished, and other improvements made concurrently with that abolition had been effected, he would not say that the whole mischief would have been prevented, but a considerable mitigation would have taken place. The Bill now before their Lordships had for one of its objects the prevention of delays, arising from the abatement of suits. Had its provisions been in force, much of the delay in the suit to which he was referring, and in many other suits, would have been avoided. He thought his noble and learned Friend on the bench behind (Lord Lyndhurst) would be ready to state, that in his second Chancellorship, he had to deal with an order which had been made by his predecessor, Lord Hardwicke, and he (Lord Brougham) had himself to deal with an order made by Lord Kenyon when Master of the Rolls. He thought, in what he had stated, their Lordships would see reason for proceeding with the amendment of the law; but he should not deal fairly with them, did he not state that he was firmly convinced that there could be no effectual remedy for the evils

445
incident to the Court of Chancery until the practice of taking evidence vivâ voce was introduced into that Court, in which we had at present a most inauspicious division of labour. Political economists had doubted whether a division of labour had the effect of producing the amount of goods produced; but no one had ever doubted that it improved the quality of the work. The division of labour in the courts of equity, however, which gave to one man the office of hearing and seeing the witnesses, and to another that of deciding upon their testimony, might increase the quantity of work done, but it made its quality essentially bad—it made it absolutely very nearly worthless.
THE LORD CHANCELLORconfirmed the statement of his noble and learned Friend as to the circumstances of the case to which he had referred, and added, that he rejoiced to think that it was perfectly impossible that anything of that sort could now occur.
House in Committee.
Bill reported, without Amendment: Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
House adjourned till To-morrow.