Lords Sitting of 22 June 1854

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1aCustoms Duties (Sugar and Spirits); Ecclesiastical Courts; Bleaching, &c. Works.
2a Incumbered Estates (West Indies).
3a Episcopal and Capitular Estates Management, 1854; Customs Duties.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDErose to call the attention of their Lordships to matters which involved a breach of privilege. He trusted that they would consider that he was justified in doing so before they went into the Orders of the Day. The breach of privilege was involved in a return which was ordered, on the Motion of Earl Grey, on the 7th of April. It would be in the recollection of the House that on the 7th of April Earl Grey made a very remarkable speech on the interesting subject of the administration of the Army, and concluded by moving for the production of certain returns. Their Lordships would also recollect that the noble Lord (Earl Grey) went into the subject very extensively, and that his speech attracted great attention, not only in this House, but throughout the whole country, and he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) thought that it might be said to have been a very useful and effective speech. But it appeared that this speech had given offence to certain subordinate individuals employed by the Government, and from this arose the irregularity in the return of which he complained. He apprehended that, when a noble Lord moved for a return of any correspondence or official papers, such a Motion must be naturally confined and directed to papers in existence when the return was ordered; and though, undoubtedly, there might be a difference in the cases in which, by Acts of Parliament, certain public bodies and functionaries were ordered to lay before Parliament, at stated times, returns, accounts, and reports, yet he apprehended that no deviation could be made in the case

479
of returns ordered to be issued from the office of the Secretary of State, so as to include anything beyond the date when the Motion was made. It would be impossible for the House to entertain such a Motion as that the correspondence of the Secretary of State for the future as well as of the past, should be produced to Parliament;—such a Motion would, he considered, be an encroachment on the prerogative of the Crown, and it would also be impossible for any Ministry to accede to such a Motion. It was perfectly clear that in this particular case, it was not the understanding or intention that the usual rule should be departed from, of producing those documents only having reference to the subject of Earl Grey's Motion, which were in existence at the time that Motion was made. The Motion of the noble Earl was an Address for a return of copies of any correspondence between the different departments of Her Majesty's Government, with respect to any additions which might have been made to the department of the Secretary of State for War and the Colonies; and, also with regard to any changes which had been made in the transaction of business relating to the administration of the Army. Their Lordships would perceive that this correspondence was under two heads, and the return had accordingly been so made. As to the first head, respecting the correspondence as to the additions made to the department of the Secretary of State for War and the Colonies, the return contained five papers, the last of which was dated on the 2nd of April, and this correspondence ended, very properly, at the time when the Address was voted by this House. He might regret that the return ended at this date, as the subject was very interesting to the House, and he hoped that they would soon have the whole of the correspondence laid before them which related to the office of a fourth Secretary of State and the division of business which had taken place with respect to the administration of the Army, consequent upon the establishment of a fourth Secretary of State; but yet it was right that the return had stopped with the correspondence dated the 7th of April. Their Lordships, would, however, be surprised to find, when they came to the second head, under which the return was made, to find that there were, in the ten papers of which the return consisted, no less than three of the most important dated subsequent to the day on which the return was
480
ordered; and that the whole of these papers, from the way in which they were numbered and laid before the House, were avowedly and declaredly, as well as in substance, an answer to the speech made by Earl Grey. He (the Marquess of Clanricarde) thought that it was contrary to the privilege of this House, contrary to decorum, and offensive to the dignity of the House, that a subordinate officer of the Government, when a return was ordered, instead of confining himself to his duty in preparing the return as ordered, should occupy himself in preparing an answer to a speech, and then deliver it in the way of a return to this House of Parliament. He knew that certain public functionaries, Commissioners, and others, frequently in their Reports noticed transactions and debates which had taken place in Parliament, with a view of correcting errors which might have arisen; but the debates referred to were those of past Sessions; but these being Reports made to the Crown on their duties, by those who executed them, were different to the case of a return ordered for a specific purpose, and limited to a certain object. He thought that he need not point out to their Lordships that this was a matter which might be a breach of privilege, and that it was not only in derogation of the dignity of this House, but that it might be very inconvenient as a precedent, if it were to be established as such. The House would be at once convinced of the justice of the complaint, if he read a few lines from the second return. The first paper under the second head of the return was the copy of a letter from Sir C. Trevelyan to the Duke of Newcastle. It was dated from the Treasury on the 9th of May, Lord Grey's Motion having been made on the 7th of April, and in it would be found the following statement—
"My Lord Duke,—The officers of the Commissariat feel that that branch of the public service has been unjustly dealt with in a recent debate in the House of Lords."
He thought it would be difficult for their Lordships to find any document so commencing introduced in any return to this House. The avowed intention of the noble Earl (Earl Grey) was to condemn the existing system by the exhibition of its pernicious results; so that, if any of their Lordships thought proper to propose a change in the Administration of the State, he must be prepared to have his speech answered, not by the Minister re-

481
sponsible for the conduct of such a department, but by a letter addressed to the Minister by a subordinate in the department, to be laid upon the table of the House in a return. The letter to which he alluded might have formed a very good brief for a speech to be made by a Minister on a subsequent Motion; nor would there have been any objection to such a letter, a little corrected in its wording, being laid before the House; but he complained of its being included in a return ordered to be made a month before the letter was in existence. The letter went on to say that, since 1840, several improvements had been made in the Commissariat Department, and then it stated that—
"We think it hard to be held up to our countrymen as a helpless body in administering a department on which the success of the Army depends. I beg to be forgiven for giving the following instances in support of What I have stated."
He had read this to show the way in which the return had been framed in order to support the statements of the writer in answer to Earl Grey's speech—a purpose which was evidenced by the fact, that, though some of the papers were dated as early as February, the first paper given was dated the 9th May. The House must see that such a course was not only inconvenient, but wholly unjustifiable in the present instance; for, though he was not there to defend Earl Grey, yet he must say in that remarkable and powerful speech the noble Earl referred to every branch of the administration of the Army, and only referred to the Commissariat as a considerable branch of that service, and he commenced his speech by saying that he had not made an attack on individuals, but on the system; and he closed his remarks by saying that though many of the individuals under the system were eminent and praiseworthy men, yet it was impossible such a system could be well administered, however praiseworthy and eminent might be the individuals employed. If the contrary, however, were the case, it would be no excuse for the course pursued; for this was not a question between Sir C. Trevelyan and Earl Grey, but one between the House and the department of the Government bound to furnish the returns ordered by time Crown in consequence of an address from this House. He did not know how this matter should be dealt with, and would rather leave it to their Lordships to decide; but it seemed
482
to him that if such a case were allowed to become a precedent, it would be a very mischievous one, as well as derogatory to the dignity of that House.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that his noble Friend had objected to the return on two grounds—firstly, because it contained papers dated subsequently to the day on Which the return was ordered; and secondly, on the ground of a supposed breach of privilege of the House, by reference to the notice which had been taken of the debate that had occurred in that House. As to the first objection—as to some of the papers being dated subsequent to the day on which time Motion was made—undouhtedly, if they adhered to the strict rule in such cases, an irregularity had been committed; but at the same time he had reason to believe, though he had not had time to look back for precedents, that such a course was not without precedents in that House, and he was sure that it was not without precedents as regarded the other House of Parliament. This partly arose from the fact that returns would be very imperfect unless such a course were sometimes followed. The noble Marquess had referred to the first part of the return, which contained a paper of the 7th April, the very day the Motion was made, and observed that that was very proper; but supposing the Motion had been made on the preceding day, the 6th April—would it not have been exceedingly inconvenient that the letter of the 7th April, completing the correspondence, should have been omitted? Although the course might not be strictly correct, for the sake of convenience the rule was departed from, and he had reason to believe it was not of unfrequent occurrence. As regarded the second and more important objection, he was in a position to he enabled to state the whole of the facts with reference to that occurrence. The Parliamentary returns from the Colonial Office were, as everybody knew, very voluminous in every department, and much more so than Was desirable for the convenience of Parliament, with a view to its being read, or the economical expenditure of the public money. The officers in that department were consequently so over worked that it was impossible for them to keep up with current orders of this House during the Session. The order for this correspondence was sent to the Colonial Office, and in the Colonial Office the returns were made up; but, in consequence

483
of the press of business, they were not made up when ordered, but, speaking from recollection, in the following month of May. The clerk, therefore, who made the return, having collected the papers having reference to it from the various officers, put them all together for his (the Duke of Newcastle's) approval previous to their being laid before the House; and he would, therefore, take upon himself the blame and the responsibility of having allowed them to be presented in the return. The responsibility of having written these papers did not attach to but as far as laying them on the table he admitted his responsibility, and he admitted they contained matter of very questionable propriety. He would tell their Lordships the ground on which he had thought they should be laid on the table. He admitted that at the time it had appeared to him to be a matter of questionable propriety, for he at once saw that a reference to debates in that House was an irregularity. If these documents, therefore, had entered into questions of policy, or had attempted to refute the general positions of Earl Grey, or of any other Member of the House, he should at once, and without the slightest hesitation, have refused to place them upon the table, however aggrieved the parties must have felt themselves by that refusal. When he read the letters, however, from Mr. Flider and Mr. Weir, he perceived that they felt that the observations of Earl Grey reflected, not upon the system of which they had been the instruments, but upon themselves; and their Lordships would find that Mr. Filder and Mr. Weir wore the officers executing the particular duties in the Colonies at the time which was referred to by Earl Grey. The question, therefore, became one of a personal character; and, considering that those letters had been sent in by two gentleman who were absent from this country, and to whom, therefore, he could not express any suggestion that they should not be laid upon the table of the House, he had decided that, in justice to those gentlemen, it would be better, on the whole, that they should be laid before their Lordships. As a test whether Earl Grey had a right to complain, he had applied the case to himself, and had asked whether, if he had made a speech in that House accusing any gentleman in the public service, he would refuse to them the opportunity of stating their own case to the public, and he certainly had felt that he
484
could not have done so. No doubt, any reference to the debates in that House, either upon the part of individuals or of the press, was a breach of their Lordships' privileges; but he was sure that they would not forget that it was a breach of privilege carrying with it no moral offence, and that it was one which was committed daily in all quarters of the country, not only by the press, but also by individuals. When he said he should have taken the same course himself, he would state that a somewhat similar case had occurred to himself not long ago, when he answered a question which had been put to him by the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby), with respect to the name of the contractor who had supplied some bad hay to the troops going abroad. Having obtained the name from a friend at the bar of the House upon the instant after the question had been pressed upon him, he gave it. The next morning he received a letter from the gentleman whose name he had given, strongly, but most courteously and most justly, complaining of the injustice which had inadvertently been done to him by his name, which was not that of the real party, having been given. Did their Lordships suppose that he had told that gentleman that he had committed a breach of the privileges of that House by writing that letter to him? Certainly not; and yet that was as much a breach of privilege as had been committed in the present case by these gentlemen having addressed letters to Sir Charles Trevelyan. What he had done upon that occasion was this—he went down to the House the next evening, and stated that, to his extreme annoyance, he had given a wrong name, and he explained to the House all the circumstances. Those were the facts connected with this case. He did not at all pretend that there had not been a technical breach of privilege; but he thought the House would agree with him that it was a matter for serious consideration whether, in the case of two gentlemen who were absent on public duty, and felt themselves aggrieved, and who were entitled to address letters on the subject, he should have withheld these letters, pertinent as they were to the subject to which the Motion referred.
THE EAFL OF DERBYthought that the case of the hay contractor was entirely different from the present. Not disputing the hardship which might occasionally arise to individuals from their conduct being called into question in that House, when they

485
had no opportunity of making a defence, he could not help thinking that the noble Duke would have done better if, instead of the course which he had taken, he had adopted that which he had pursued in the case of the hay contractor, and had gone down to the House, and, in his own character as a Member of the House, had stated that he had received explanations which, in his place in Parliament, he was ready verbally to communicate. Their Lordships would see that nothing could be more different than the case of such an explanation so given by the Minister, whose voice was the proper organ for their defence on the part of the person aggrieved, and the course which had been pursued in the present case, when private letters were in the first instance addressed to a subordinate officer of the Government—when that subordinate officer gave to those letters a public character by accompanying them with comments of his own—and by officially sending them in to a public department—and when he finally obtained the sanction of a Minister of the Crown to lay that correspondence, with comments upon a discussion which had taken place in that House upon their Lordships' table. The noble Duke had stated that this had been a matter of consideration with him, and that as it related to private individuals, he had thought it desirable to lay the documents upon the table, even at the risk, as the noble Duke had said, of "technically" violating the privileges of the House. He (the Earl of Derby) contended that this was more than a technical violation of the privileges of the House, and that it was one which, if sanctioned by the Ministers and not remarked upon by the House, would lead to the most serious inconvenience, and not improbably might greatly endanger the freedom of speech in that House, which was so essential to the proper discussion of matters brought before their Lordships' attention. The noble Duke treated it as a mere technical breach of privilege, the strict observance of which would have been attended with inconvenience; but that inconvenience might easily have been obviated by an oral statement. The return, in its present shape, was most objectionable, and he could not but regret that such letters should have been written, and still more that they should have been made issued in so authentic a form, and with the sanction of the Government.
EARL FITZWILLIAMagreed with the noble Earl who had just spoken that it was
486
not merely a technical breach of privilege, but a very serious one, if Her Majesty's Ministers, in giving what they professed to be a return, laid an argumentative paper upon the table proceeding from some inferior officer, and written subsequent to the return being ordered. He confessed, on looking at these papers, that he could not but entertain some little curiosity to see the letters to which those that had been published were the answers; because it was quite clear to him that these commissaries must have something else to do than to read the accounts in the Times of their Lordships' debates, and that they had not been made acquainted with those debates and with the speech of his noble Friend on the 7th of April merely through the medium of the public papers. It was quite clear that there must have been some other communication with those gentlemen, and he should be inclined to move for a copy of that communication, unless the noble Duke the Secretary for the War Department would acquiesce in the suggestion that the papers should be withdrawn from their Lordships' table, and the return placed there in an amended form.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that as this was a matter which entirely affected the concerns of their Lordships' House it was not one for the Government to take any course in; and if it were the general opinion of the House that the paper ought to be withdrawn, he could only say, upon his own part, and on the part of the Government, that he should not have the slightest objection to it. Perhaps his noble Friend would make a Motion that the paper be withdrawn.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: The noble Earl cannot make a Motion of that sort with respect to a return which has been presented in reply to an Address to the Crown.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that that of course was a matter of form which must be attended to. All he said was, on his own behalf and on behalf of the Government, and admitting the responsibility which attached to himself, that no opposition should be made to any Motion which might be considered desirable in order to vindicate the privileges of their Lordships' House. His noble Friend had stated that no formally personal attack had been made upon those two gentlemen. He readily admitted it; but that was a subject upon which those gentlemen must be allowed to feel for themselves, and it must be re-

487
membered that they were the gentlemen who had had the discharge of the public duties in question at the time of the transaction to which the noble Lord had referred, and that they felt, in consequence, that their characters were at stake. His noble Friend on the cross-benches (Earl Fitzwilliam) had stated that it could be distinctly seen that the letters from Mr. Filder and Mr. Weir were answers to communications which had been sent from home. All he (the Duke of Newcastle) could say was, that if they were as represented by his noble Friend, he knew nothing about it. He had never called for any explanation from any human being, and he had been no party to any such transaction, if it had taken place. He had seen nothing of them until they were communicated in an official form by the Treasury to the Colonial Office.
LORD PANMUREreminded their Lordships that he had taken part in the debate upon the 7th of April, when these returns were moved for, and had urged the Government to take some steps whereby the management of the Commissariat should be removed out of the hands of the Treasury and placed under the control of the Secretary of State for War. He thought that a most clear proof was now afforded that the sooner they did that the better, because it appeared from these papers that Sir C. Trevelyan was, de facto, the head of the Commissariat Department, while the real head of the Treasury did not appear to have anything to do with the matter. There was sufficient to induce their Lordships to ask the Government to arrange, without delay, for the new Secretary of State for War taking charge of those departments which belonged to the administration of the Army. If that were done, there would always be a high officer in the House ready to stand forward in defence of his subordinates if their conduct were impugned, and there would be an end to inferior officers interfering and commenting, as Sir Charles Trevelyan had thought proper to do, upon debates taking place in their Lordships' House, with which he had no concern.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that it was inconvenient, when they were dealing with a question of privilege that they should travel into the much wider and not less important question of what ought to be the duties of the Commissariat. He was of opinion that the proposal to withdraw the paper was a very proper one;
488
but it should rest with the noble Duke himself to withdraw it, inasmuch as it had been laid upon the table by him in reply to an Address to the Crown. It was a very important question as a matter of privilege, and the inconvenience would, he was convinced, be found to be very great if papers were presented as returns to an Address of a date subsequent to the date of the Address. If other papers should be discovered which had a bearing upon the subject, but which were of a date subsequent to the order, the proper course would be to make a supplementary order, whereby the whole object would be attained without being open to any objection. It would be extremely inconvenient, however, to admit, as a precedent, when papers were ordered relating to a particular department, that they should be altogether of a prospective character.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that as the feeling appeared to be so general, He had no hesitation in stating that he would, with the least possible delay, lay upon the table of the House an amended return in substitution of the present one.

INCUMBERED ESTATES (WEST INDIES) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read,
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: My Lords, in moving your Lordships to give a second reading to this Bill for facilitating the sale and transfer of Incumbered Estates in the West Indies, it is hardly necessary for me to call your attention to the fact that no new principle of legislation is involved the measure; but that, on the contrary, in proposing it, the Government are now only following out a measure which has been passed for some years, and has been extensively applied in another portion of the empire, and which I think your Lordships will agree with me has been attended with very considerable success. Soon after the seals of the Colonial Office were placed in my hands, my attention, as undoubtedly had been that of my predecessors, was directed to the misfortunes of many of the West Indian Colonies, to the causes of those misfortunes, and to such remedies as it might be in the power of Parliament to apply to them. In the course of the last Session of Parliament I had the honour of laying before your Lordships a statement with reference to the island of Jamaica and the measures which I thought it my duty to submit to the Legislature of that

489
island with a view of effecting such a reform in their constitution and in their mode of legislation, as I believed to be an essential preliminary to any other remedies which Parliament could devise for the evils under which that important Colony laboured. I am happy to state to your Lordships that before I left the Colonial Office I received from the Governor of Jamaica a despatch, sending home ordinances for confirmation by Her Majesty, which carry out, to a very great extent, that reform of the constitution which I had sugested—ordinances which, if they do not effect everything that could be desired, at least make such prudent alterations, and introduce so, novel and so amended a form of legislation, as lead me to hope that in subsequent years the Legislature of the island will be willing to co-operate with Her Majesty's Government and with the Imperial Parliament in passing those further measures which may be considered desirable. I stated at that time to your Lordships that it would be necessary at a future time to introduce other measures bearing upon the condition, of this island, and though I did not, I believe, mention the name of the Bill which is now before your Lordships, I certainly referred to it as a measure which I conceived to be essential to the prosperity of the West India Colonies. Before the date of the abolition of slavery, the immense value of West India property, the large production of sugar, and the general thriving state of most of the proprietors in those Colonies, had induced a state of things which has existed in other countries similarly situated—namely, heavy encumbrances elected by means of wills and marriage settlements, to say nothing of the encumbrances in the shape of mortgages, which were effected in spite of the large returns from the properties and the general prosperity that prevailed. Causes which have operated since the period of emancipation have, I am afraid, considerably increased the encumbrances—at any rate that class of them to which I have referred under the head of mortgages. Large advances have been made for carrying on the business of those Colonies by merchants and others, and the result is that many of the estates are heavily, and some of them, I fear, inextricably encumbered. I have been told that in the island of Jamaica alone nearly nine-tenths of the estates in the island are under heavy encumbrances; and it is hardly necessary to point out to your Lordships the withering
490
influence upon the industry and prosperity of the island which such a state of things must necessarily entail, more especially when we bear in mind the additional fact, that a large proportion of those encumbrances are for sums even in excess of the value of the estates. Under such circumstances, whatever may be the position of the proprietors of those estates, it is utterly impossible either for the purpose of the introduction of labour, for the purpose of drainage, or for any other object of improvement, to obtain further advances. Sales are obviously the only remedy for such a state of things; but these unfortunate proprietors are in many instances utterly unable to effect sales. In consequence of the extreme intricacy of the mortgages it is impossible to cake out an indisputable title, and unless some cheap and prompt mode of transfer can be devised, the remedy of sale cannot be carried into effect. Your Lordships might perhaps expect that I should not bring forward on the part of Her Majesty's Government any measure of this description without being strengthened by the opinions of those who, from their local experience, would necessarily be better able to form an opinion as to the propriety of such a measure than any Minister or any Government could possibly be. I believe I might, if I were inclined to weary your Lordships, quote plenty of authorities and opinions to strengthen my case. I will name only a few as a sample of the whole. Sir Charles Metcalfe, undoubtedly one of the highest authorities in all matters relating to the island of Jamaica, expressed, as long ago as 1841, his earnest desire that sonic, measure should be introduced to carry into effect these objects to which I have referred, and stated it as his opinion that no wiser or more important measure of legislation could be devised for imploring the condition of the West India Islands. I have been in communication also with the West India Association upon this subject; and I believe I am entitled to say that that body, comprising the principal proprietors and merchants connected with the West India Colonies, are most anxious that a measure of this kind—indeed, I may go the length of saving this Bill itself—should be passed by your Lordships and the other House of Parliament. Moreover, before finally deciding upon introducing this measure, I communicated with such officers of the Colonial Governments as I thought were competent to advise me. I had a letter

491
from Sir Henry Barkly, the Governor of Jamaica, strongly urging a measure this description, and similar communications have reached me from Mr. Stevenson, an eminent lawyer, for many years a Judge in Jamaica, and now President of Honduras; from Chief Justice Sharp, of the island of St. Vincent; from the Attorney General of Trinidad, and from the Governor of Tobago, all assuring me that Her Majesty's Government could not do anything more calculated to resuscitate many of the West India Islands, more especially Jamaica, than the introduction of a Bill similar to that which I have already stated has been so successful in Ireland. The objects of this Bill are, of course, sufficiently well known to your Lordships from the almost identical provisions of the Irish Incumbered Estates Bill. In the first place, this Bill may be compared, in many respects, to the existing law with respect to bankruptcy. It will undoubtedly operate, with regard to the land in the West Indies, in the same way as the bankruptcy laws affect the personal property of individuals. Another object of opal importance is to effect direct sales, and to distribute the proceeds among the parties entitled to receive them, in the simplest form, and at the cheapest possible rate. The third is a no less important object, and is one without which such a measure would be comparatively valueless—to confer an absolute and indisputable title; in as much as the intricacy of existing titles, in consequence of the circumstances to which I have referred, in many cases render the property entirely unavailable. This Bill has been founded upon the forms and precedent of two former Bills—first, and chiefly, the Irish Incumbered Estates Bill; and secondly, more particularly as regards the formation of the Commission, on the Slave Compensation Act introduced by the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby) into the other House of Parliament. I do not mean, of course, that this Bill follows the precedent of the Irish measure in all its details, but its principal provisions are the same, and the alterations which have been introduced are only such as were absolutely necessary in consequence of the difference in the tenure of property in that country and in the Colonies; and also because, though, undoubtedly, we have reason to regret absenteeism in Ireland, yet, as a general rule, we may say that the proprietors of Ireland are, as a class, residents in the country; whereas
492
the proprietors of land in the West Indies, and not the proprietors only, but the encumbrancers also, are resident in England. Noble Lords will at once perceive how different the legislation is which is required for such a case, as compared with Ireland. It is necessary that, instead of having, as in Ireland, a court established in the Country itself for the adjudication of these cases, you should have a Commission instituted, not merely in the Colonies, but in England also, in order to give an alternative to parties to proceed either there or here, and also to make the proceedings transferable from the one to the other. I have already stated that the form of this Commission is intended to be in many respects like that instituted by the Slave Compensation Act. It is proposed that it should consist of one Chief Commissioner and two Assistant Commissioners; the Chief Commissioner to be, under all circumstances, resident in England, and the two Assistant Commissioners either to act with him in England and to form a court, as provided by some of the clauses of this Bill, or to act under him in the Colonies, either alone, or, if necessary, with local Commissioners, whom it is proposed also to appoint in convenient localities. I hope and believe, however, that it will not be necessary to appoint local Commissioners, but that the Assistant Commissioners will be found sufficient to carry out the provisions of the Act. Another difficulty will at once strike your Lordships when it is mentioned, and that is, that the laws existing in the West India Colonies are not only not similar, but are frequently at variance with each other. As regards the most important of those Colonies, the island of Jamaica, the laws are in most respects assimilated to those of England; but other Colonies, in Guiana, Trinidad, Martinique, and St. Lucia, for example, the laws, so far from being similar to those of England, more resemble those of Holland, France, and Spain, respectively. It is, therefore, absolutely impossible, as your Lordships will perceive, that in a Bill of this kind distinct regulations could be laid down with reference to the proceedings of this Commission, which should be equally applicable to the varied circumstances of all these different islands. It thus became absolutely necessary to devise some plan by which, without any great violation of principle, due flexibility may be given to the Commission, so that the Commissioners may be enabled to adapt their mode of proceeding to the different laws of each colony.

493
Therefore the 67th clause—a clause which is peculiar to this Bill, and which is one of the few for which there is no precedent in the measures to which I have referred—provides that in any colony where the laws and customs are different from those of England, the Commissioners shall be entitled to substitute for the provisions of this Act other provisions accommodated to the laws and customs of such colony. I need hardly inform your Lordships that a proviso is inserted that none of those substitutions or alterations shall be contrary either to the general law of England or to the spirit and intention of this particular Act. I am ready to admit that a sufficient safeguard is obviously necessary over a power of this description; but inasmuch as there are but two parties to be affected by the exercise of this power, I hope your Lordships will agree with me that sufficient protection has been afforded by the provision that, as regards the interests of the colonists themselves, any rule or regulation of this description shall be laid before the Legislature of the Colony thirty days before it can be confirmed, and that, as regards the interests of the English proprietors, an Order in Council shall be necessary to confirm such rule or regulation before it has legal validity. Now, I felt that, in introducing a measure of this kind for the Colonies, there was a great principle to be observed, upon which I dwelt in moving your Lordships to give a second reading to a measure relating to the Legislative Council of Canada; and that is, that we ought not, however we may be convinced of the propriety or advantage of any particular pleasure affecting the interests of distant colonies, to force upon them legislation which for many reasons may be at the time unpalatable to them. I am quite aware that if we, the Members of the Imperial Parliament, were to pass a measure of this description, without giving the parties whose interests are affected a voice in the matter, umbrage would necessarily be given to the Colonies, and we should receive remonstrance after remonstrance in consequence of that violation of a sound principle, to which I for one will never be a party. But if your Lordships will look to the first and last clauses of this Bill, you will perceive that by the joint operation of those two clauses the Bill is carried into execution without any violation of the rights of the colonists themselves, while at the same time we preserve that unity of action which is absolutely necessary,
494
and which could not be attained if you left to each individual colony the duty of passing a measure of this description for itself without regard to the different interests which might be affected by it. An Order in Council is necessary to bring this Bill into operation in any colony to which it may be intended to apply it; but that Order in Council cannot be obtained unless by an address passed by the Legislature of that colony, and until provision has been made by the Colonial Legislature for the whole expenses to be incurred in carrying the measure into effect. I have already stated that power is taken to appoint local Commissioners under the Act. I believe that they will probably not be required, except perhaps in the more important of the colonies; but the precedent of the Slave Compensation Act having been followed in this respect, I have every reason to anticipate the well working of such a Commission, as I believe no complaint was made with respect to the local Commissioners appointed under the Slave Compensation Act. A power is given in this Bill, similar to the power in the Irish Act, to the Commissioners to frame a code of procedure, to appoint persons to examine witnesses at a distance if necessary, and to prepare other provisions of a comparatively unimportant character, with which it is not necessary to trouble your Lordships, as they are all more or less familiar to you in connection with the practical working of the Irish Act. Those rules of procedure and other provisions of the Commissioners will have, under the 20th clause of the Bill, to be laid before the Queen in Council, who will have the power of refusing to confirm them if any reason adverse to them should exist. I will therefore pass over many of these provisions, which, if not re-enactments, are at any rate applications of existing enactments, believing that it is unnecessary, for instance, to go into any statement with respect to the provisions relative to partitions, changes, divisions, and charges. But I think it is right, more especially as a statement has been made to me upon the subject since I came down to the House by a former Colonial Secretary, that I should call your Lordships' attention to that part of the Bill which provides that neither the encumbrancer nor the proprietor can force a sale against the will of the Commissioners, who have power given to them to bring the property to sale only if they shall see fit. An appeal is given from the proceedings of the Commis-

495
sioners to the Queen in Council. which, as your Lordships know, is in reality an appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the best security that can be given against any injustice on the part of the Commissioners, at the same time operating as a check upon needless litigation and groundless appeals. The effect of this Bill, if it should become law, I hope will be that litigation will be to a great extent prevented; that as in Ireland so in these Colonies, fresh capital will be introduced by means of the good and indisputable title which will be conferred; that an increase will take place in the number of residents in the different islands—an advantage of no slight importance; and that there will be a corresponding diminution in the number of middlemen agents, attorneys, and others of that class, who at present consume a large proportion of the wealth of the Colonies. Another important effect of this Bill will, I hope, be the subdivision of those large and accumulated estates which, in some of the smaller islands as well as in Jamaica, have been considered by those competent to express an opinion as a very great evil, and one of the main causes of the present degraded state of the population. I hope the subdivision of these large estates will be accompanied by another subdivision, namely, that of the agricultural and manufacturing processes which are carried on at present by some parties on the same estate—a system which I am sure your Lordships will at once perceive is at variance with the best principles of political economy, and likely to end in loss and disappointment. I have no doubt that another result of this will be, that by the sale of these large properties, proprietors of small plots will spring up, and that the emancipated negroes and others, instead of continuing to locate themselves in the mountains, will be more likely to come down to the plains, where their labour will be more valuable, and where I believe there will spring up a class of small proprietors, such as have not yet been seen in any of the West Indian Colonies. I do not, of course, mean to say that this is likely to be an immediate result, or one carried to a very great extent, but I undoubtedly look to it as one of the elements of success in this measure. But this Bill will have another, though perhaps a not very immediate, effect. I stated last Session, in referring to the condition of Jamaica, that out of a population of nearly 400,000 persons, there were but 3,000
496
electors in the whole of the island. If the result to which I have referred occurs—namely, the creation of small plots of land—there will be this advantageous circumstance connected with it, that a body of electors will be produced of the best possible persons, those who, having a stake in the soil, must feel a deep interest in the welfare and prosperity of the island. With respect to the opposition with which I have been told the Bill is likely to be met by the legal gentlemen of the Colony, I am aware that due allowance must be made for their feelings in this respect; but I hope that those gentlemen will feel that in the prosperity of the island they are more likely to reap greater benefits than from the exclusive advantages which they have here-tofore possessed in the depressed and impoverished condition of the Colony. It may also he objected that, in the present depressed state of many of the West India Islands, the local expenses connected with carrying out the measure are such as ought not to be imposed on the Colony. I believe, however, that in some of the islands the expenses in this respect will be very small. Whatever may be the views entertained by your Lordships with respect to this proposal, it is absolutely necessary that the landed property of the West India Islands should be placed on a sounder and more unencumbered position than that on which it now stands. I do not know whether the House of Commons will consent to any extension of the system of "improvement loans;" but of this I am quite certain, that if these loans are to be rendered effective, they must be granted to individuals who will at least be in a position to pay the interest upon them. A measure such as this is essentially necessary before either any assistance can be given by the Government of this country, or before even any exertions of the occupiers of land in the Colony can be rendered useful and effective. It will be to me a source of great satisfaction in future years to see my anticipations realised, and to know that, before I gave up the seals of the Colonial Office, I was instrumental in launching a measure which I firmly believe will be attended with many of those beneficial results which have already tended so greatly to advance the interests and prosperity of another portion of the empire.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that he did not wish to oppose the second reading of the Bill, as he believed some measure of

497
this kind to be absolutely necessary to the relief of the West India proprietors from their present state of depression. He thought, therefore, that no person could object to the principle of the Bill. He understood the noble Duke to say that in framing the Bill the Government had followed as closely as circumstances would permit the provisions of the Irish Incumbered Estates Bill. That measure was an exceptional piece of legislation, and, though its working had undoubtedly been attended with great benefit to the country, that good had not been accomplished, but at the expense of some hardship to individuals, especially in the earlier part of its operations. Some of the clauses of the Bill did not, however, appear to have followed the precedent set by the Incumbered Estates Act. As the Bill at present stood, their Lordships were legislating in the dark as regarded the localities to which it was to be applied; for while reference was made to a schedule in which the places were specified, no schedule was actually attached to the Bill.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEstated, that it was owing to a mistake on the part of the printer that the schedule was not annexed to the Bill.
THE EARL OF DERBY,in reference to the last clause of the Bill, which rendered necessary the assent of the Colony before the Bill could take effect, said, he considered that this provision would amply secure the interests, and independence, and rights of the Colony. He did not agree in the opinion of the noble Duke that the local expenses of carrying out the provisions of the Bill would be small; on the contrary, he thought they would entail a considerable burden on the Colonies. In the 23rd clause there was a most remarkable provision, which certainly did not appear to have been founded upon any existing legislation whatever; it provided that tee Commissioners should have the power of sending questions of law to the courts of common law or equity to be tried in this country, but it also provided that the Commissioners should not be bound to act upon such decisions. This was vesting in a body of Commissioners a power for which he could hardly conceive any legislative precedent existed, nor could he conceive what necessity there existed for giving power to apply to a court of law or equity for a decision upon a point of law, if that decision was not to be binding, and the Commissioners were to be at liberty
498
to set it aside, refer the matter to another court, or disregard it altogether. He was also afraid that, under the operation of the Bill, the proceeds of the sales would be materially affected by the circumstances attending their sale. In Ireland, in many cases, an estate might be brought into the market and sold in one lot, or advantageously subdivided. But in the West Indies, where there was an enormous amount of waste land, the value of the estate did not depend entirely upon that of the land, but upon the necessary works which existed for carrying on the cultivation of the estate. To separate, therefore, a large estate into a number of small fractions, would be to destroy completely the value of the estate. He doubted, therefore, whether the operation of the Bill would be to produce that influx of small proprietors which the noble Duke appeared to anticipate. The effect, indeed, of the subdivisions would be to leave very little of the proceeds of the sale either for the nominal owner or the incumbrancer. As he had already stated he did not object to the principle of the Bill, and trusted that its provisions, carefully considered, would tend to mitigate, to some extent, many of those evils under which the West India Colonies were now suffering.
LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he could not be supposed to object to the principle of an Incumbered Estates Act, but it was very important to consider in what manner it could best be applied to the Colonies of the West Indies. With respect to the objections anticipated by the noble Duke to arise from the legal profession of the Colonies, he thought that, however liberal the local bar alight be, they could hardly be supposed as willing to surrender ail their private interests without receiving some counter balancing advantage. Probably there was not a single plantation on some of the islands which was not deeply incumbered. Would the parties resident in the Colony submit to the administration and sale of their property in this country? and might they not fear that their interests would he sacrificed while absent in favour of those present? He feared that such would be the operation of the measure; and it so, it would tend greatly to retard its efficient action. He thought, in the case of Colonies governed by different laws—Dutch, Spanish, French, and others—that the better course would have been, to have prepared a separate measure adapted to the peculiar circumstances of each,

499
leaving it to the local Legislatures to give effect to such measures. The legislation proposed by this Bill was in effect something like firing a random shot at a hedge without knowing what you might hit. Much as had been the mischief caused at first by the operation of the Incumbered Estates Act in Ireland, still great good had undoubtedly resulted from the measure. At first estates were sacrificed for a very small sum; but soon larger prices were obtained, and upon the whole the Act had certainly worked well for the country. But was there in the West Indies any demand for property, such as that which existed in Ireland, and such as would ensure the sale of the property for anything like an adequate amount? He did not profess to know much of the condition of the West India Colonies, but what he did know had produced a strong conviction in his mind that purchasers could not be found for these estates except at prices utterly ruinous to the owner. He believed that many instances had occurred where estates were sold at a price utterly ruinous to the seller, and at the same time he believed ruinous also to the purchaser. He should certainly not oppose the second reading of the Bill, but he trusted that the details would be carefully considered in Committee.
THE EARL OF POWISwas understood to say that he thought considerable expense and delay would result in the carrying out of the Bill from a constant reference to and from the West Indies and this country. He complained also of the proposal in the Bill that the Chief Commissioner should have power to delegate to one Commissioner alone the power to proceed in any colony with the sale of an estate. He thought this was a power too great to be confided to any one person, whether acting in the colony or in England. He objected, especially to the power given to one Commissioner of summoning persons before him, and compelling them to produce their title deeds and other muniments in writing; such a power ought, he thought, only to be confided to a judicial tribunal. In Ireland, under the Incumbered Estates Act, the acts of two Commissioners were considered necessary, and in the Slave Compensation Act three Commissioners were required to make a quorum. Several other matters of detail would also require grave consideration before they were permitted to pass into law.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that, having
500
taken part in the opposition to the passing of the Incumbered Estates Act, he felt bound, in fairness and candour to the authors and framers of the measure, to admit that, though many of the difficulties he apprehended had attended the execution of the measure, it had been productive of great good to Ireland, and he entertained great hopes that the judicious extension of the principle to the West Indies would be attended with an equal measure of success. He confessed that he had not yet examined the provisions of the Bill, and his apology for not having done so was to be found in the excessive labour which he had undergone in connection with the morning sittings of their Lordships' House, and that was the sixtieth day in the present Session that he had attended the early sittings on appeals and writs of error. With respect to the objections to be anticipated from the local bar, he thought the objection might be removed if the colonial members of the bar were allowed to practise before the Commissioners in this country, though not of course in the courts to which appeals might be brought. He trusted that the operation of the Bill would tend in some degree to relieve the depression which existed in the West India Islands. With regard to the principle involved in the Bill, he highly approved of it; and although he did not think the circumstances of this country either called for or would admit of the adoption of such a measure, yet he hoped that some means would be taken, even in England, for improving and facilitating the sale and conveyance of land. He indulged the hope that, without applying the principle of the Incumbered Estates Act to this country, some great improvements would be made in the conveyancing and sale of landed property in this country.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, in explanation, that after mature consideration it was thought best that the seat of the Commissioners should be in this country, and not in the Colonies, as had been suggested. There was certainly something very captivating in another proposition that had been made—namely, that each Colonial Legislature should be recommended to pass an Act of its own to effect the objects of the present measure. He considered it would be absolutely ruinous to the Colonies for them to take such a step, and for this reason—that, although the land was in the Colonies, the proprietors were in England, and the mortgagees were

501
here, and those who would in all probability become the purchasers were here. It was, therefore, preposterous to say that the property should be sold in Jamaica, for instance, when they knew that all the transactions connected with the estates in that island took place in this country.
VISCOUNT ST. VINCENT(who was scarcely audible in the gallery) was understood to say substantially that he had no objection to take either to the principle or to the details of the measure, but he wished to remark that the proprietors in some of the West India Islands were so depressed that they were not able properly to cultivate the soil, and that they could not obtain the money from the mother-country or elsewhere to enable them to do so more efficiently on the security which the property in its present condition afforded.
On Question, Resolved in the Affirmative.
Bill read 2a accordingly.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (CANADA) BILL.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into a Committee read.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he was not present on the second reading of this Bill, but on that occasion he understood that a noble Friend of his (the Earl of Desert) urged upon the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Newcastle) that full time should be given for the consideration of this Bill, and that it would be desirable to postpone its consideration until certain papers relating to it should be laid on the table of the House. These papers had only been laid on the table within the last two days, and noble Lords could scarcely have had sufficient time to give them their consideration. If his noble Friend would consent now to postpone the Committee on the Bill, he (the Earl of Derby) would be ready to spare the House at that time from listening to the observations which he should otherwise feel it his duty to make in reference to the measure. Upon the second reading of the Bill, which was introduced towards the middle of the present month of June, for giving to the Legislature of Canada power to alter the constitution of that country. a noble Friend of his, formerly connected with the Colonies (the Earl of Desart), requested to know from the noble Duke what was the probable course which the Legislature of Canada would take in the event of the Bill passing into a law. In
502
consequence of this, after the second reading had been agreed to, the noble Duke !aid the papers in question on the table, from which it appeared that the intentions of the Legislature of Canada on the subject had been made known to the noble Duke so long ago as the 11th of July, 1853. Those papers involved propositions for the complete and absolute subversion of the constitution of Canada—he repeated that the propositions of the Legislature of Canada involved an absolute subversion of the present constitution, or in other words, a change from the present form of a limited monarchy into what would be practically an absolutely democratical Government. It might be right or wrong that such a change should take place; but he apprehended that such a change could not take place without the sanction of the British Parliament, and without the fullest opportunity being given for Parliament to discuss so great a measure, and to take into consideration the whole circumstances of the case. The intentions of the Canadian Legislature were known to the Government so far back as the 11th July, 1853, and yet the noble Duke took from that time till the 26th May, 1854, to consider what answer the Government should send to that representation. It was not, however, until after the second reading of the Bill, on the 15th of June, 1854, that Her Majesty's Government—and that not of their own accord, but pressed by the other side of the House—placed Parliament in a position to know what were the intentions of the Legislature of Canada on this important question. Now, before he went further, he would ask the noble Duke whether, that being the state of the information, or rather the want of information, he considered it decent that the Committee on this Bill—it being the first opportunity they had had of discussing any part of it since the intentions of the Canadian Legislature had been made known—should be gone into in a House consisting at that moment of some dozen Members; all those who had hitherto taken an interest in the measure, being absent from a full persuasion that the Bill would not be brought forward again without full notice? He would ask the noble Duke to postpone the Bill for a period of seven days, on the ground that a measure of this importance should not be passed without being fully and completely discussed. If the noble Duke would assent to that postponement, he (the Earl of Derby) would

503
not say a single word more; but otherwise he should feel it his duty to enter into a full explanation of his views in reference to the important question involved in the Bill, and to ask their Lordships whether they would consent to a measure which proposed to establish nothing else than a republic under the thinnest of all disguises?
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, he could not help feeling that the noble Earl had said too much or too little, if his object was simply to effect a postponement of the Committee on this Bill. If the noble Earl meant really to obtain a postponement of the Bill, he might have asked him (the Duke of Newcastle) without the violent comments with which he had thought proper to accompany his request. The noble Earl had asked him whether he thought it decent that he should proceed with the Bill to-night, after having given notice that he should bring it on to-night. He would tell the noble Earl that he (the noble Earl) had, himself, every reason to believe that the Committee on the Bill would be taken to-night. He (the Duke of Newcastle) agreed on the evening of Thursday last to produce the papers hearing on the question, and he fixed the Committee on the Bill for to-night. On Monday last the noble Earl on the cross-benches (the Earl of Desart) came across the House to him (the Duke of Newcastle), stating that he was requested by the Earl of Derby to ask, whether it was his intention to proceed with the Committee On the Bill to-night. He replied to the noble Earl in the affirmative, and the noble Earl conveyed the message back to the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby).
THE EARL OF DERBYinterposed an observation across the table, that he had understood the answer of the noble Duke to be quite the other way.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, he had given the noble Earl (the Earl of Desart) clearly to understand that the Committee on the Bill would be taken to-night; and the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) having had that due notice, was it, he asked, fair or right that their Lordships should be called on to postpone a Bill of this kind? Again, why was the noble Earl not present on the second reading of the Bill? Why, the noble Earl was then at Ascot; and now, after calling on him to postpone the Bill, the noble Earl proceeded to denounce it, by stating that the Government had introduced a measure to change the whole constitution of Canada, and to
504
constitute that Colony a republic and a democracy. Now, precisely the same principle was involved in the constitution given to the Cape of Good Hope; and yet the Government of which the noble Earl was the head never objected to it when that measure was under discussion; the noble Earl said, then it was merely a question of time whether that constitution should be given to the Cape whilst the war was pending there, or whether it should be given after the war. Why did not the noble Earl last year, when they were sending that constitution out to the Cape of Good Hope, raise the objection which he had taken to-night, and say that they were sacrificing the monarchy in the case of the Cape, and constituting in that Colony a republic and a democracy? He (the Duke of Newcastle) did not know what could have induced the noble Earl to use the harsh language which he had employed on this occasion. What was the paper which the noble Earl thought he had not had time to peruse before the Committee was taken on the Bill? Why it contained only twenty-four pages, and was laid on the table of the House on Monday last; and, notwithstanding that, the noble Earl complained that he was taken by surprise, and that he had not had sufficient time to consider that document. Again, the noble Earl had made a complete misrepresentation, inasmuch as he had said that the papers which had been laid on the table were received in July last, and that the Government had taken from that time to this to decide whether they would adopt the measures of the Canadian Legislature or not. The noble Earl had entirely confused the dates. The document to which the noble Earl referred was received at the Colonial Office, not in July last, but in February last. This question was undoubtedly not taken up by the Government at the commencement of the Session; but was that any reason why the Government should not endeavour to pass a Bill on the subject before the Session closed? He would tell the noble Earl why it had been delayed. He (the Duke of Newcastle) was anxious to have the fullest concurrence of the Earl of Elgin, the Governor General of the Colony, before he recommended the Government to introduce a Bill of this kind. He was now in a position to state that he had that noble Earl's sanction to this measure; and he could not for a moment think that the Earl of Elgin would be a party to consent to the sacrifice of the monarchy of England, or to the constitution of Canada being

505
changed into a republic or a democracy. He thought it very unfair on the part of the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) to make the request for the postponement of this Bill in the terms and the manner he had done. It was obviously the intention of the noble Earl, in taking that course, to raise a prejudice against that Bill, for the purpose of taking the benefit of that prejudice on a future occasion. He (the Duke of Newcastle) felt the inconvenience of postponing the Bill at this time, but sooner than allow the noble Earl the pretence for afterwards saying that he bad pressed on the measure with anything like undue haste, he would, however unfair and uncandid had been the manner of the noble Earl towards him on this occasion—as indeed it usually was—consent to postpone the Committee on the Bill to that day week.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, the noble Duke had, with very considerable and, as he thought, unnecessary heat, responded to the request that he had made to postpone the Committee on the Bill. He disclaimed the use of any expression which the noble Duke could reasonably construe as being unfair and uncandid towards him. He admitted having said that the noble Duke was acting with indecent haste in pressing forward, after the very short time since the papers it; question were laid on the table, a measure of this importance, and when his intention to do so could have been known to only a small portion of the Members of either this or the other House of Parliament. He had read the papers through, and he did not feel that he was guilty of the misrepresentation which the noble Duke supposed. He did not say, however, that the noble Duke and Her Majesty's Government were in possession of the views of the Legislature of Canada, that they were made known to them in July last, and that it was not until June in the present year that those intentions were made known to this House. It was perfectly true, as the noble Duke had said, that the draft Bill was not received in this country until February last; but the despatches which preceded it must have been received long before that time.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, the despatches had been laid on the table of the other House of Parliament.
THE EARL OF DERBY: The noble Duke had said it was perfectly well known that he would bring forward this measure to-night. But he (the Earl of Derby) had
506
every reason to believe that it was not the noble Duke's intention to bring it on to- night. He instructed his noble Friend (the Earl of Desart) a few nights ago, to inquire of the noble Duke when he would proceed with the Committee on the Bill; and all that he (the Earl of Derby) heard in answer was, that it was not the noble Duke's intention to proceed with the Bill until the papers were in the hands of Members.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: I said expressly that I should bring it forward on Thursday.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he had a letter from his noble Friend, written on his going from this country to Ireland, stating that he saw with great surprise that the noble Duke had fixed the Committee for Thursday, assuming as a matter of course that he would not bring it on until after full notice was given to Members of this House. Upon a matter of this importance, would it have been too much that their Lordships should have been summoned to attend its discussion? Was this a Bill like the Public Statues Bill or the Vaccination Amendment Act? He (the Earl of Derby) said this was a great question. The proposed measure made a vast alteration in the constitution of the most important of our Colonies; and it was right and proper that it should be discussed in this House with full notice, with ample preparation, and with a full knowledge of what the consequences of their legislation on the subject might be. With respect to the constitution given to the Cape of Good Hope, and the charge made by the noble Duke that he (the Earl of Derby) did not object to that constitution, which contained a precisely similar principle to that involved in the Bill under discussion, the reason why he did not object was simply because an Act of Parliament had passed sanctioning that principle. But in the case of the constitution for New Zealand, which contained a similar principle, he would remind their Lordships that that principle was resisted, and successfully resisted, by the Government to which he had the honour to belong. He thought their Lordships would agree with him that this was a question which ought not to be discussed in a House of ten or twelve Members. He did not regret this short discussion, seeing that it might have a tendency to direct public attention to the subject before it came again under their consideration.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, he begged to remind their Lordships that some discussion did take place on the second reading, and that the noble Earl on the cross-benches (Earl Desart), who took part in that discussion, appeared entirely to discountenance the notion of opposing the Bill. He had, therefore, every reason to suppose that there was not the slightest intention of taking any division on any subsequent stage of the measure.
Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn; and House to be put into Committee on Thursday next.
House adjourned till to-morrow.