Lords Sitting of 20 July 1855

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Metropolis Local Management.
2a Merchant Shipping Act Amendment; Bills of Lading (No. 2); Turnpike Acts Continuance; West Indies Relief Loans Arrangement.
3a Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes; Lady Raglan's and Lord Raglan's Annuities.

GOVERNMENT MEASURES OF LAW REFORM.
LORD LYNDHURSTbegged to take this opportunity of asking his noble and learned Friend upon the woolsack for some explanation as to the delay which had occurred in regard to certain measures for the amendment of the law which he had introduced or promised to introduce. Last Session his noble and learned Friend had introduced a Bill for altering the law of divorce, and also for the purpose of transferring the jurisdiction from the Ecclesiastical Courts to the Court of Chancery. After that Bill had proceeded a certain length, part of the Bill was withdrawn by the voluntary act of his noble and learned Friend, and the other part, in consequence of some opposition to the Bill on the part of a right rev. Prelate. He stated as his
1190
reason that the Testamentary Bill had been thrown out in the other House; and his noble and learned Friend, in answer to the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, said that the Government would use their utmost endeavour to pass a Bill on that subject. It was a singular circumstance that that Bill went down last year from that House on the 7th of April, but not a single attempt was made by the law officers of the Crown to proceed with it. His noble and learned Friend also stated that the Government would be prepared to introduce in the present Session a large measure of reform, embracing the whole of the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts. He did not find that either in that or the other House of Parliament any attempt had been made to redeem that pledge. His noble and learned Friend had not even introduced a Bill of divorce, or any Bill relating to matrimonial cases. The Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill had gone down at an early period of the previous Session to the House of Commons. It was, therefore, perfected; but, not with standing this circumstance, and that Parliament met in December, the law officers of the Crown did not think proper to bring it forward until the end of May, and this Bill had consequently again fallen through and been withdrawn. These circumstances required some explanation. His noble and learned Friend might mention the war as the cause of the abandonment of this Bill, but he did not see that either his noble and learned Friend or the law officers of the Crown in the other House of Parliament had troubled themselves much about the complications of the Eastern question. From circumstances that had come to his knowledge, he believed that this mode of proceeding might be explained by some want of understanding or co-operation between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown. This opinion was supported by the fact that his noble and learned Friend had introduced a Bill for the registry of deeds, and for the purpose of shortening conveyances and simplifying titles. That Bill was fully considered and discussed in their Lordships' House, was referred to a Select Committee, and went down to the other House of Parliament with the approbation and sanction of his noble and learned Friend and of that House. But what happened in the other House? The Bill was immediately opposed by the law officers of the Crown. The Solicitor General said that what was wanted was a Bill, not for

1191
the registry of deeds, but of titles. The consequence was, that the Bill was referred to a Select Committee, and nothing more had been heard of it from that time to this. But that was not the only fact that showed the want of cordial co-operation between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown in the other House. His noble and learned Friend had issued a Commission for the consolidation of the Statute law. His noble and learned Friend was the President of that Commission, he sanctioned all its proceedings, and the law officers of the Crown also attended its meetings. The Report of that Commission was laid on the table. On looking at that Report he found it signed by all the Commissioners except the law officers of the Crown. He therefore took it for granted that they differed from the Lord Chancellor upon that Report. He relied upon this for substantiating what he stated—that there was a want of co-operation and good understanding with respect to law reform between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown. This had led to the greatest possible inconvenience, and it showed that without a good understanding between the legal authorities of the Government it was in vain to expect an amendment of the law. The result was that up to the present time, when they were going to adjourn for the holidays, not one single Government Bill for reforming the laws of England had been passed. This was a most unsatisfactory state of things and required explanation; and he had made these observations to enable his noble and learned Friend to make such explanations as he might think proper to offer to their Lordships.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the first complaint of his noble and learned Friend referred to the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill, and he truly stated that last Session he (the Lord Chancellor) had introduced that Bill. It was much considered by a Select Committee, and the Bill went down to the Commons, where certainly it did not receive approbation, and did not become law. The course that he thought it best to take in the present Session was, that the Bill should originate in the House of Commons, and, a great many objections in detail having been made to the Bill of last year, he consulted with the Solicitor General, who was to take charge of it, and adopted some Amendments likely to smooth the passage of the Bill in the other House of Parliament. He was not pre-
1192
pared to state the day on which that Bill was introduced, but he was certain his noble and learned Friend was mistaken in supposing that it was not brought in until the latter part of May. He believed it was brought in in March, but to this he could not pledge himself—at all events, it was prepared quite early in the Session, and it was introduced as soon as the state of public business made it possible to proceed with it; and although he should not fall back upon the war as a justification for doing nothing, he thought that the state of business arising out of the discussions about the war, which had taken up four-fifths of the Session, would explain why so dull a subject had been so little able to obtain a hearing. His noble and learned Friend ought to be the last person to express great surprise, and to make it matter of reproach that this Bill had not received the sanction of the Legislature, because the same thing had happened to him also when his noble and learned Friend himself adorned the woolsack. In 1843 a similar measure was introduced into the House of Commons and failed. In 1844 it was introduced into this House; again it failed; and the succeeding Chancellor again introduced it in the following Session. He hoped that the same course would be again adopted, and that the measure would be introduced next Session, and then the matter would be placed in the same position that it occupied during the Chancellorship of his noble and learned Friend. It was said that he had promised a comprehensive reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts. Now, the fact was this: He had been taunted with doing only half his duty in introducing a measure for the reform of the testamentary jurisdiction; he had been told that he ought to deal with the whole subject—namely, testamentary jurisdiction, matrimonial jurisdiction, and Church discipline jurisdiction; and he accordingly undertook to consider measures which would embrace all these matters. The Matrimonial Bill had been prepared, but the subject was so connected with the Testamentary Bill that it was impossible for him to introduce it until the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill had proceeded so far as to render it certain how the court would be constituted which might possibly have to decide upon both matrimonial and testamentary clauses. A Bill had been framed with great care upon the subject of Church discipline, and had been submitted

1193
to the right rev. Bishops; but there were great differences of opinion with respect to it, and the subject was attended with so many difficulties, that he had not been able to mature a measure which he could hope would secure the approbation of the right rev. Prelates, or, if they disapproved of it, of their Lordships, and the measure had not, therefore, been presented to the House. He had been assured by the Solicitor General that the Testamentary Bill was received in the other House with every prospect of success; but its attention had been so absorbed by subjects of overwhelming interest that it was found impracticable to pass it. With regard to the suggestion that there was not a cordial co-operation between the law officers of the Crown and himself, and the example adduced by his noble and learned Friend of the Registration Bill, which the Solicitor General did not support in the other House, he must say that his noble and learned Friend was labouring under a mistake. The Solicitor General thought the Bill did not go far enough, and it was referred to a Select Committee, of which Mr. Walpole and other Gentlemen besides the law officers were Members, which recommended the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole subject. He felt bound to issue such a Commission, and the Solicitor General had assured him that the labours of the Commission were so far advanced that in the course of the ensuing recess they would not only produce a Report recommending a better system of registration, but would also frame a measure which might be introduced next Session. His noble and learned Friend further complained of the slugglishness of the Government in not having introduced any measures of law reform during the present Session, He denied that accusation. A Chancellor or a Minister was not doing good by simply introducing measure after measure, which he called measures of reform; but if he found that anything was going wrong it was his duty to provide a remedy. The statement that no measure of reform had become law during this Session was certainly near the truth. [Lord LYNDHURST: It is the exact truth.] But early in the Session he had introduced a measure giving extended summary jurisdiction in cases of petty offences. That Bill had passed this House, and had been referred to a Select Committee of the House of Commons; and his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary had as-
1194
sured him, on Saturday last, that he had not the least doubt of its becoming law. It must, however, be remembered that at the present moment, in consequence of the provisions of one of their Lordships' Standing Orders, the House of Commons were more anxious to forward the Bills which originated with themselves than to proceed with those which had been sent down from this House. Another measure which would be of essential benefit to the mass of the community, although it might not excite a great deal of popular approbation, had been sent down to the other House. It was the Bill for getting rid of the necessity for private Acts of Parliament in dealing with settled estates; and the Solicitor General, who had taken charge of it, had assured him that he did not doubt that it would eventually be passed. It had been referred to a Select Committee, because there was a notion in the other House that it would have the effect of permitting the enclosure of Hampstead Heath. It had not the slightest reference to that subject; but the insertion of a clause had boon proposed, which would set at rest all doubts of that kind; and the Solicitor General had informed him that he did not doubt that the measure would become law during the Session. They had been told that the Charity Commission had done nothing since its appointment. He protested against the truth of that assertion, for the Commissioners had done a great deal of good in an unobtrusive manner, and he was satisfied that they would do more good if their powers were further extended. He had, consequently, introduced a measure extending their powers. It had been sent down to the other House, and he should be much disappointed if it did not become law this Session. He had also introduced a Bill for reforming the University of Cambridge. He therefore felt not guilty of the charge made by his noble and learned Friend, having introduced many important measures which promised to become law before the end of the Session; and he thought his noble and learned Friend would have done better to wait until the Session drew nearer to a close before making his complaint; but he supposed his noble and learned Friend was about to quit London, and that it was more convenient for him to make his complaint now than to wait for the three or four weeks which remained to the end of the Session. He much regretted that the Attorney and Solicitor Generals had not

1195
thought fit to sign the Report of the Statute Law Commission; but he had no authority to call upon them to sign it if they did not think proper to do so. He should be glad to be the means of introducing next Session measures which had failed in the present; but he thought that his noble and learned Friend's attributing blame to him because the House of Commons did not pass the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill was really attributing blame to him to which he was not obnoxious. In the course of the present Session he had received two Reports which he had anxiously considered. One of these Reports had reference to the County Courts, and would necessarily give rise to legislation; and, indeed, a Bill had been partly prepared, but he could not with any propriety have introduced it during the present Session, for it was impossible that it could have passed into law. The other Report was as to the state of the Encumbered Estates Court, Ireland. He was in hopes that he might have introduced a Bill on this subject this Session; but the changes recommended by the Report were so important, and, on the whole, so useful, that they would require considerable consideration. He might have obtained some credit for introducing this Bill, but he felt that it would have been obtaining credit under false pretences, for the Bill could not have passed this Session. He had also, at the suggestion of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), introduced a Bill, which had passed their Lordships' House, for additional sessions and assizes; the Bill, however, was objected to by the other House, and required more consideration than could be given to it this Session. He had, however, been in communication with the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and was assured by him that, should this Bill not pass into law this Session, the Royal prerogative would be brought to bear on the subject, and that the inconvenience which it was intended to remove should be provided for by the exercise of the Royal prerogative in the issue of several additional Commissions.
LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that his noble and learned Friend had replied to, him by a tu quoque; but this did not apply to his case, for when he held the office now held by his noble and learned Friend he did his utmost to pass the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill. His complaint was not that they had failed in passing Bills, but that they had let the last two Sessions
1196
pass without making any attempt to pass any Bills. His statement was, that not a single Bill for the improvement of the law which had been proposed by Her Majesty's Government had received the Royal assent. His noble and learned Friend had met this statement, not by contradicting it, for that was impossible, but by stating that a considerable number of Bills had passed their Lordships, and had been sent to the other House; and, though they had not passed a single Bill during the six months, yet his noble and learned Friend flattered himself that during the four or five remaining weeks of the Session they would pass these Bills. His noble and learned Friend was much more sanguine on this point than he was; for he took what had been done as a good picture of what was likely to take place, and had no hope that the Bills would be passed this Session.
LORD BROUGHAMtrusted that his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst) would, early next Session, apply himself to one of the subjects to which he had directed his observations—namely, to that of the Ecclesiastical Courts' jurisdiction, particularly with regard to the matter of divorce; for the state of the law with regard to this subject was in a most shameful and disgraceful state. His noble and learned Friend, among the many great and invaluable services which he had rendered to his country, could not render it a greater service than by taking up, with all the weight which was justly due to his authority in that House, the country, and the profession, the subject which had been referred to.
LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that he could not understand why there should be a difference between the law of divorce in the northern and southern parts of the island. He believed that in Scotland the law of divorce worked exceedingly well, and he saw no reason why it should not be extended to England.
LORD BROUGHAMwas convinced that if his noble and learned Friend would peruse the evidence and the Report of the Committee over which he (Lord Brougham) presided a few years ago, he would find abundant reasons for holding more firmly the opinion which, he had now expressed.

THE SLAVE TRADE.
LORD BROUGHAM presented, pursuant to notice, a Petition from the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, complaining that the office of High Commissioner

1197
of the Ionian Islands is held by a slaveholder, and praying for measures to prevent the continuance of certain evil practices complained of in the Petition. His Lordship said, it was mainly owing to the exertions of this society during the last forty years that they were indebted for measures for completing the abolition of slavery, and for the ultimate measure for the emancipation of the slave. The petition stated that those in high employment, in high offices in this country, having foreign possessions, were owners of slave property in the West Indies. In the Dutch colony of Surinam, and in British Guiana, a proposition had been made to liberate all the slaves born of slave mothers after a certain date, but this proposition had been opposed by the planters. And here he must say, that the despatch penned on this subject by the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) while at the Foreign Office, had elicited his warmest admiration, and for its wisdom as well as its humanity did its writer the highest honour. Individuals, no doubt of great respectability, had succeeded by inheritance to estates in our Colonies, by means of which they were involuntarily made the owners of slaves; but it was very desirable that such persons should be made fully aware of the great delicacy of the predicament in which they, perhaps unconsciously, stood. They were legally entitled to hold slave property, but they must take care how they purchased slaves—an act which had been rendered felony. The existing laws relating to slavery enabled persons inheriting estates in foreign plantations worked by slaves to get rid of their slave property by sale; but the power of purchase was certainly not conferred upon them. These proprietors should, therefore, be warned against incautiously exceeding the exceptional provisions made in their favour by the Act of 1843, and by previous Acts. One of the warmest and most eminent advocates of the abolition of slavery used to complain bitterly that, being the proprietor of a life interest in a West India estate, he could not get rid either of the estate itself, or (while the slave trade was permitted) of the necessity for actually buying slaves for its cultivation and management. It must, however, be highly satisfactory to those who took an interest in the cause of the negro to witness the progress which it was making in other countries as well as in our own Colonies; and he trusted that the
1198
noble Lord opposite (the Earl of Clarendon) would be able to hold out some hopes that our attempts to induce Spain to restrain the most execrable crime of the slave trade, and to keep down the importation of slaves into Cuba to the lowest possible dimensions, would be more successful hereafter than they had heretofore proved. Within the last year of which we possessed accounts, the number of slaves landed in Cuba was no less than from 14,000 to 15,000. How different, happily, had been the conduct of the Government of Brazil in relation to this important matter! Within the last two years the slave trade in Brazil had been entirely extinct. Four years before this the number of slaves imported into that country amounted to 49,000 or 50,000; in the following year it stood at 23,000 l.; in the third year it had dwindled down to 3,000 some odd hundreds; and in the next the traffic had altogether ceased. The consequences of this policy had been most beneficial to the planters of Brazil. The 2,000,000 l. a year that were formerly spent in the purchase of slaves had, since the entire abolition of the traffic, been applied to innocent and also lucrative employment; and the accounts from that country indicated that Brazil had, within the last three or four years, made more progress in agricultural and general improvement than had been made for a quarter of a century preceding. These results reflected the greatest credit on the firmness and the wisdom of the very popularly-elected Government of the Brazilian empire. He was glad to say, too, that the tone of feeling on this subject in the Chambers at the present time was very different from that by which they were animated in 1842, when they declared their opinion that the abolition of the slave trade was impossible by human means. The abolition of the Brazilian Government, too, had not been confined to the abolition of the slave traffic; and the manner in which the coloured population was treated in Brazil contrasted most favourably with the infamous treatment they received in the United States. In Brazil a free negro, if he were a native of the country, possessed all the privileges of a citizen, and was eligible for the highest offices, civil, military, or naval; and he was informed that the most skilful physician in Rio, the Emperor's own physician, was a coloured man. He did not wish to speak harshly of the United States in this

1199
respect, because he was inclined to hope, from what he had lately heard, that a better state of things was about to arise there. Nothing would rejoice him more than to see that law of Carolina abolished by which every free negro landing in the State was liable to be punished with imprisonment the first time, to be whipped the second time, and the third time to be sold as a slave. The Federal Government had no power to repeal this law; all that it could do was to use its influence to persuade the State Legislature to repeal it. He hoped, however, that his noble Friend opposite would be able to say that his last communications with the Federal Government afforded some prospect of this law being abolished, and that he would be able, too, to give some indication of a speedy decrease in the Spanish slave trade.
THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, he had no doubt that the warning addressed by his noble and learned Friend to those who were so unfortunate as to possess estates in British Guiana would be carefully attended to. With regard to Spain, he feared that it was not in his power to say to the noble and learned Lord anything of a very satisfactory character, though he was happy to say that he could afford him some little comfort on the subject. It was true that in the year 1853 a large number of slaves had been imported to Cuba, during the governorship of the late Captain General; but in the year 1854—the returns for which year had not as yet been laid upon the table—there were symptoms of a decline in the traffic. The number of slaves imported during that year was stated to be 7,000, and allowing one-third for unreported landings, there were probably about 10,000 imported—a large number, certainly—but a diminution of the importations during the previous year. Notwithstanding the great temptations which the lucrative nature of the slave trade enabled those who pursued it to hold out to the Spanish authorities in Cuba, and of which those authorities were generally so unscrupulous as to avail themselves, some Captains General had displayed the most praiseworthy determination to discountenance this most horrible traffic. The Marquess de Ribeira, who was Captain General in 1832, published some severe ordinances against it, which were rigidly enforced, and several were punished under them. The late Captain General, Concha, had also set his face very decidedly against the slave trade, but
1200
—whether it was carried on with greater secrecy than before—his efforts did not appear to be attended with any very great success. The conduct of the Brazilian Chambers in the matter of the slave trade, he concurred with his noble and learned Friend in regarding as most creditable. The slave trade might be said now to have entirely disappeared from the Brazils. And what was very remarkable was the briefness of the period within which this happy result had been attained. In 1848 there were 60,000 slaves there; in 1850, the number imported was 23,000; in 1852, it had fallen to 1,500; and during the last two years not one slave had been imported. It was satisfactory to think that the embarkation of slaves on the coast of Africa was something less. With regard to the Carolina law, he need not say that it was a delicate and difficult matter to interfere with any foreign country on such a question; but he hoped that the progress of enlightened opinion in the country itself would lead to the establishment of a happier state of things than at present existed there.
Petition ordered to lie on the table.

BURIALS BILL—CONSECRATION OF CEMETERIES.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
THE EARL OF MALMESBURYcalled attention to the inconvenience which was caused in some parishes by the Act providing that two chapels should be built in every cemetery. The noble Earl mentioned one very large and populous parish, where it was thought desirable to provide three cemeteries, but the parish could not possibly afford to erect six chapels. It was proposed that two chapels should be built in one of the cemeteries, and that the three grounds should be consecrated; but this the Bishop of the diocese, no doubt from conscientious motives, refused to do. There were some differences of opinion among the right rev. Prelates themselves upon this question, and he believed it would be an advantage to the Church to make it obligatory upon them to consecrate. He therefore proposed the insertion of a clause to provide that parishes should not be bound to erect any chapels in any cemetery, except the principal cemetery of the parish; and the absence of a chapel in such places, provided that a sufficient building stood there for the shelter of the clergyman, and the fune-

1201
ral, should not be a reason for the Bishop of the diocese refusing to consecrate the ground.
THE BISHOP OF LONDONobserved, this was the first time any attempt had been made by the Legislature to compel Bishops to consecrate either churches or burial grounds; and that was a matter which had always, more than any other, been left to the Bishops' discretion. He must protest against such an invasion of their rights as Prelates. No Bishop would refuse to consecrate a burial ground without good and substantial reasons, and he was sure his right rev. Brother of Winchester, whose refusal had been alluded to, would not do so. There was a part of the service which could only be read in a church; and although in some parishes it had been customary, in the case of the burial of poor persons, to read only the other part of the service, that was a very objectionable distinction between poor and rich, and was acutely felt by the poor, who were entitled to the full service of their Church. He hoped their Lordships would not sanction the clause proposed.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEsupported the clause, which was only intended to meet extreme cases. No one denied the right of the poor to have the whole of the burial service; but for the want of such a provision as this clause provided, some of the burials in this metropolis were of a lamentable and disgraceful description.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he thought there was some weight in the observations of the right rev. Prelate, as to the novelty of putting such an obligation on the Bishops; and as for the case mentioned, they had only heard one side, and the Bishop of Winchester was usually liberal in matters of this kind. He hoped the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury) would not press the clause. He (Earl Granville) should propose as an Amendment, that where a representation was made by three-fourths of the ratepayers of a parish to the Secretary of State, he might dispense with the obligation of the law to build the second chapel in a cemetery.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDthought the Amendment of the noble Earl (Earl Granville) would remedy, to a considerable extent, the inconvenience which had been complained of, without causing the evils which might be expected from the clause proposed by the noble Earl (the Earl of Malmesbury). There was not such difference of opinion between the Bishops as
1202
had been stated to exist; but they acted according to the circumstances of each case; and only last week he himself consecrated a large cemetery without any chapel, having first ascertained that it was within an easy distance of the parish church, for the body to be removed.
LORD REDESDALEhoped the noble Earl would not press the clause now. He had prepared a clause which he thought would meet the object in view, which he would move on the third reading.
Amendment, by leave of the House, withdrawn: Further Amendments made; Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.
House adjourned to Monday next.