Lords Sitting of 24 July 1855

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Slave Trade (Sherbro).
2a Metropolis Local Management; Dissenters' Marriages; Stage Carriage Duties, &c.; Chinese Passenger Ships; Court of Judicature (Prince of Wales Island); Convention with United States; Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Acts Consolidation and Amendment; Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Continuance; Turnpike Trusts Arrangements; Lunatic Asylums and Regulations Acts Amendment; Militia Officers' Qualifications; Treasurers of Counties (Ireland); Sale of Spirits (Ireland).
3a West Indies Relief Loans Arrangement; Turnpike Acts Continuance; Public Libraries and Museums.

FIBRE COMPANY BILL.
Order of the Day for taking into Consideration Standing Order No. 176, in order to its being dispensed with, read.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKE THE EARL OF HARDWICKE moved, in pursuance of notice, that, in consequence of the proceedings upon the Fibre Company's Bill having been suspended, by reason of the introduction of a general measure upon limited liability, and as there was now little prospect of such measure passing in the present Session, it was expedient that the said Bill be allowed to be read a second time. He could assure their Lordships that he had no personal interest in the objects of the Company, and his sole motive for moving in the matter was a consideration of the public interests. The Bill in reference to which he was about to urge their Lordships had passed through the Commons, and was sent up to them so far back as the 10th of May last, only, however, to have its further progress opposed; first, through the interposition of the Standing Orders; and next, by the announcement of the Government, that the general measure as to limited liability, then about to be introduced, would render the passing of this Bill superfluous. Now, before proceeding to argue against the enforcement of the Standing Orders in the present instance, he would lay before their Lordships some facts illustrative of the increasing demand for paper, and the great deficiency existing of the raw material necessary for its manufacture, a deficiency which it was the object of this Company to supply. It was well known to their Lordships that the supply of paper had fallen off as the desire for its use had extended; and that the result had been an enormous increase in the price, and a falling off in the revenue in consequence of the diminution in the manufacture. The attention of men of science had been directed to the subject, and rewards had been offered for such improvements in the manufacture as would increase the supply of the raw material. The machines, however, for reducing that raw material to pulp were very expensive, and required a great deal of capital. As was very well known, the war with Russia had considerably interfered with the importation of hemp and flax, which mainly contributed the raw material for the manufacture of paper. Hence the Fibre Company had adopted a process of reducing to a pulp various fibrous substances out of which paper could be manufactured; and the plan
1326
having been, tested was found to be most efficient for its purpose. Indeed, he himself had already shown to their Lordships a copy of The Times newspaper, printed on paper made of pulp manufactured according to the process of this Company, and the specimen had been pronounced to be a very favourable one. Now, to show the increasing demand for paper existing in the present day, as compared with former years, he might mention that on the average of the five years ending 1834, which was prior to the reduction of the duty, 70,998,131 lb. of paper were manufactured in Great Britain every year; while during the average of the five years ending 1853 that quantity had increased to 151,234,175 yearly; and in 1853 the production was 177,633,000lbs., being 23,000,000lbs. or 10,000 tons more than in the preceding year; that, moreover, in consequence of the increased price of the article, and the increased demand for it, the amount paid for paper in 1855 exceeded that for 1853 by a million sterling. The price also of the raw material had been continually increasing; for, taking the two years, 1852 and 1854, he found that while in the first year the price of first-rate rags was only 26 s. the cwt., in 1854 it was 34 s. the cwt. Nor was that increase in the price of the raw material confined to England; on the contrary, the pressure was felt equally throughout all the European markets. The statistics of the consumption of paper by The Times newspaper might interest their Lordships. The Times published 60,000 copies of their paper daily. The weight of the paper upon which these were printed was nine tons per day, and if the copies were piled up in a flat surface they would make a column fifty feet in height. The Russian war had, however, cut off the great source of supply of the raw material from England; for during the three years—1851, 1852, and 1853—the quantity of hemp imported into this country from Russia was 172,759 tons, while that from other countries was about 21,000 tons. But in consequence of the war the price, which previously had been about 35 l. per ton, was now nearly double that, while the actual deficiency in the amount of the raw material was 119,118 tons. He would, therefore, ask their Lordships to consent to the supersedence of the Standing Order which requires that three-fourths of the capital of a Company should be paid up before obtaining permission to trade, in order that they might proceed to read the

1327
Bill a second time, and thus, through the agency of the Fibre Company, make good a great deficiency. The fact was, as it was quite possible to demonstrate, that Standing Order had been long dead, and he thought their Lordships ought to proceed forthwith to bury it, for it was a Standing Order that stood in the way of much useful and necessary legislation. It had its origin so far back as the year 1824, and no doubt at that time it was wisely adopted for the protection of bonâ fide and sound speculations, as opposed to the many wild and extravagant schemes then afloat. In process of time, however, the order was very much modified, and almost every year some exception was made to its application. And to prove to their Lordships how greatly they were in the habit of deviating from the order, he would remind them that according to its strict injunctions they ought in every case to refer each private Bill to a Select Committee, after having read it a first time; whereas they never did so until after the Bill was read a second time. But, again, he could show that this Standing Order was in direct contradiction of the law of the land. The Standing Order declared that no Bill should be read a second time until it was satisfactorily proved that three-fourths of the capital had been paid into the Bank of England in the name of trustees. Now, what said the law of the land? He held in his hand the Act for the Registration and Incorporation of Joint-stock Companies, and that Act ordered, that in all cases there should be a provisional registration of a Company, as the foundation on which it was to proceed, before coming to Parliament for a Bill, and under that provisional registration a Company was to be allowed to act for a period not exceeding twelve months, and with a capital not exceeding 10 s. per cent. Now the Standing Order was in direct contradiction to the Act of Parliament, for it especially declared that no less than three-fourths of the capital of a Company should be paid up before their Bill was read a second time. The provision in the Company's Clauses Consolidation Act, that capital should only be called up in small instalments was also inconsistent with this Standing Order. Another obstacle to the Bill was the Resolution of their Lordships that no private Bill should be read a second time after the 10th of July; but when in May he (the Earl of Hardwicke) introduced this Bill, on the 10th of May he was told by the Government that they were
1328
anxious to pass the Limited Liability Bill as soon as possible, and that then, as limited liability would be the law of the land, all difficulty with regard to the present Bill would be done away with. This statement induced him not to proceed with the present Bill; but the Limited Liability Bill had not yet passed—it had only gone into Committee pro formâ—and as far as he could see, there was no chance of that measure becoming law this Session. In conclusion, he believed that the rejection of this Bill would be a cruel injustice on the Company, which had expended a considerable sum of money in laying down the groundwork of their future plans, and at the same time prove a disappointment to the public, who desired cheap paper.
Moved, That the said Standing Order be dispensed with on the said Bill.
LORD REDESDALEopposed the Motion of his noble Friend, and defended the standing order, which, he said, had not become obsolete, but had not been put into practice of late years, because the Bills which had come under its provisions had not sought to obtain a limitation of liability. Their Lordships had never been accustomed to grant a limitation of liability to private trading Companies, and there was no reason why an exception should be made in the present case. Their Lordships were now asked to rescind an order altogether without substituting anything in its place, with the view of admitting a Company that would be subject to no restrictions securing that a single shilling of honest capital should be paid up. This Company had no claim whatever to any such exceptional advantage. It was all very well to say that this Bill, being unopposed, should be referred to a Committee; but it must be remembered that the general measure on Limited Liability was not likely to be carried through by the Government this Session on account of the difficulty of obtaining a concurrence of opinion as to the conditions to be imposed on trading Companies. Another reason why their Lordships should not suspend their standing order in this case was, that the very objectionable practice of privately canvassing individual Peers to support a particular measure had been adopted by the promoters of this Bill. This system had been pursued more than once before in the present Session, with the view of inducing Members of that House to prejudge questions relating to private Bills before they had heard the arguments on

1329
both sides; and it was therefore high time that their Lordships should discountenance such an irregular proceeding. On these grounds the suspension of the standing orders in this instance would be very unwise, particularly at that late period of the Session, and it was to be hoped that their Lordships would decidedly refuse to comply with such a request.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEhad no personal interest in the undertaking to which this Bill related, and was not acquainted with any one who had a share in it; he had, however, certainly been canvassed on the subject, but only so far as the placing in his hand a printed statement of the objects of the Company; and a consideration of the case had convinced him that he ought to support the present Motion. The standing order in question was first passed in 1824, and it was monstrous to say that it was applicable to the altered circumstances of the present time.
EARL GRANVILLEadmitted that he had recommended the postponement of the Bill until the Government measure on Limited Liability should have been brought before them. The Government had no intention of abandoning their Bill, although he was certainly not able to promise that it would be passed during the present Session. He thought that if a standing order was a bad one it ought to be repealed, but so long as they kept it on their books they ought to enforce it, unless good cause was shown to the contrary. On this ground he should certainly join the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees in opposing its suspension on the present occasion.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEbriefly replied.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, if his noble Friend pressed his Motion to a division he should feel bound to vote with him, for he thought that the Company had been very hardly dealt with. They were not responsible for the delay that had taken place; they had brought forward their measure in time, and had withdrawn it on account of the expectations held out by the Government as to the measure for Limited Liability. So early as February he (the Earl of Derby) had pressed upon the Government the importance of at once settling the question, or of allowing to particular Companies exemption from the law. Still the measure in question had been delayed so long that it had not yet passed through Committee in the other House, and their Lordships had arrived at
1330
a period of the Session at which they were not disposed to entertain any new measure not of a most urgent character. He was in favour of a measure for Limited Liability, but was not prepared to deal with it without an opportunity for full consideration. Therefore he was not disposed to induce their Lordships at this period of the Session to dispense with the rule he had referred to. Under those circumstances he should feel that the parties in this case were entitled to exemption from the general law. Still, after the strong expression of opinion on the part of the noble Lord (Lord Redesdale), the Chairman of Committees, probably his noble Friend would not divide.
Resolved in the Negative.

THE BARONY OF FERMOY—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF DERBYwished to put a question to the noble Lord who represented the Government in that House, before they passed to the order of the day, on the subject of the creation of Mr. Roche as Baron Fermoy. Some time ago he brought under the consideration of the House the legality of that proceeding, and the point was ultimately referred to a Select Committee. He was then under the impression that the hon. Gentleman in whose favour the creation had been made would have taken the course which would have been at once most regular and most advantageous to himself—namely, that of claiming to vote for Representative Peers of Ireland, in order that the matter might be carried before a Committee of Privileges. The hon. Gentleman, however, had not taken that course, and now the Session being so far advanced, and the Judges being absent on circuit, it would be impossible to go on with the other Committee this year; but he begged leave to give notice, that unless the Government determined to take up the question themselves, or unless the hon. Gentleman in whose favour the creation had been made should assert his claim before a Committee of Privileges, he should at the very earliest period next Session move the re-appointment of the Select Committee. In the meanwhile he wished to ask the noble Earl the President of the Council whether he was prepared to give an assurance that no steps would be taken during the recess which could in any way prejudice the question as it now stood. The noble Earl was no doubt aware that the extinction of the Earldom of Mountrath had created

1331
other vacancies, and some steps might be taken in reference to those vacancies which would have the effect of rendering the present question more difficult of solution.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, considering that the noble Earl himself had been mainly instrumental in securing the appointment of the Select Committee, he had been under the impression, as it had been the full expectation of Baron Fermoy, that the noble Earl would have taken immediate steps to have the question properly brought before the Committee, Having however waited several weeks, and finding that the noble Earl did not do so, his noble Friend Baron Fermoy consulted him on the question of exercising his right of voting for the Representative Peers of Ireland; and so bringing his claim before a Committee of Privileges: he agreed with his noble Friend in the expediency of that course, but thought it right in the first instance to take advice upon the subject from his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack. His noble and learned Friend, without venturing any opinion of his own upon the question, said it would in any event be necessary to have the assistance of the learned Judges in coming to a conclusion upon it, and therefore he persuaded his noble Friend Baron Fermoy to postpone his claim until another Session, when he fully intended to bring it before a Committee of Privileges. With regard, however, to the question which the noble Earl had put to him, he felt some little difficulty in answering it, because to some extent it affected the prerogative of the Crown; but he thought he could go the length of stating that, until the Government had had sufficient time to consider the decision of a competent tribunal upon the question, they would not advise Her Majesty to take any step in regard to these dormant peerages.

METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD WODEHOUSE LORD WODEHOUSE moved the second reading of the Bill. He stated that the government of the metropolis, as regarded local affairs, was of the most complicated and unsatisfactory character. In the parish of St. Mary, Newington, there were two paving and four lighting Boards, besides five other Boards possessing powers with
1332
reference to various matters of local administration. In the Strand, between Northumberland House and Temple Bar, no less than nine paving Boards had separate jurisdiction. In the parish of St. Pancras there were twenty-seven local Acts, under which 427 Commissioners were appointed, and sixty-three officers employed. There were no less than 250 local Acts relating to different portions of the metropolis, and as many separate local bodies. Besides these there was the Commission of Sewers. Since 1847 there had been no fewer than seven different Commissions of Sewers, and they had incurred a debt of no less than 500,000 l., and the cost of management was as much as 28½ per cent on the expenditure. The object of the present measure was to simplify this system, and to put an end to this Commission, and of the numerous local bodies he had referred to. It was proposed to extend to all parishes the provisions of Hobhouse's Act, as regarded the election of vestries, and in the various parishes wards would be constituted. The parishes of the metropolis were divided by the schedule of the Bill into two classes, schedule A and schedule B, and they might be called parishes sole and parishes in union. These parishes were twenty-three in number. The rest of the metropolis was divided into fifteen districts, making a total of thirty-eight districts, each of which would elect a Board. To these Boards would be transferred the superintendence of paving and lighting, besides the management of the local sewers. As regarded the rating, it would remain as at present, the occupiers paying the paving and lighting rates, and the owners the sewers rate. It was also proposed that there should he what was called a Metropolitan Board of Works, which was to be composed of forty-six members. The central Board would have one most important duty to perform—namely, to consider a plan for remedying that which was becoming every day a more serious evil—the condition of the river Thames. They would have to devise some method of preventing any of the sewage of the metropolis from being poured into the river; and if that object alone were accomplished, a very great benefit would have resulted from this measure. The noble Lord then went through the different clauses of the Bill.
Moved, that the Bill be now read 2a.
LORD PORTMANregretted there was not time enough remaining this Session

1333
for the consideration of the details of this Bill, though he recognised its value and thought it most important that it should pass into law. He had some suggestions to offer for its Amendment. The great questions were, the division of the town into districts, and the mode of electing the district Boards. He thought it was hardly safe to invest a newly-created body with all the functions which had existed by virtue of some 250 local Acts of Parliament, which were now to be repealed, unless the House were better informed than it was at present of the nature and extent of those various powers.
EARL FORTESCUEsaid, he also intended to propose an Amendment in Committee. By this Bill four great London parishes, St. George's, St. James's, Marylebone, and Pancras, would continue for a time the election of their vestries in the present mode, being exempted so far from the obligation imposed upon other parishes and districts of adopting the mode of election prescribed by this Bill; and in the meantime all the new powers which were given by the Bill would be exercised by the old vestries, including the appointment of officers, fixing salaries, and deputing representatives of those parishes to the central Board. He considered this was objectionable.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYthought the Government had done well in attempting to improve the local management of the metropolis, but expressed some doubt whether this measure would prove more efficient for the sewerage than other metropolitan Sewers Commissions which had been created in vain. He recommended that, as in the case of the New Poor Law, this measure should be only a temporary operation at first, for a term of three or five years, so that its faults might be corrected by experience.
THE EARL OF CARNARVONsupported the objections which had been taken by Earl Fortescue to the 7th clause of the Bill, relating to four large parishes of the metropolis; he thought it involved not only a practical injustice, but almost a constitutional grievance, to empower bodies which had been elected for a different purpose to perform duties which neither they nor their constituents ever contemplated.
THE EARL OF DERBYconcurred in expressing his regret that this Bill should have come before their Lordships at a period of the Session when it was physically
1334
impossible for them to bestow sufficient attention upon it; but he frankly admitted the great importance of passing the measure, and the diligent consideration it had obtained from the House of Commons, as well as from the Government. He thought it improbable that he should be able to attend when it was discussed in Committee; but he felt confident that Government would readily consider any suggestions that might be offered. There was one feature of it on which he would make some observations—he meant the enforcement of a uniform system of voting in, and election of, vestries throughout all the different parishes. At present, only a very small proportion of the parishes in London were under the operation of what was called Hobhouse's Act. This Bill did not formally introduce that Act in all the parishes; but in effect it did the same thing; for while it repealed Hobhouse's Act, it introduced the provisions of that Act, extending them over all the parishes and thereby established single voting, and negatived the system of plurality in voting. Now, he thought there was a great deal to be said in favour of the system of plurality of votes, as enabling the persons who contributed most largely to the rates to exercise a proportionate influence over the expenditure. But many parishes had had this question referred to their own decision; and the very class of persons who by this Bill or by Hobhouse's Act would have the exclusive franchise conferred upon them, had resolved that they preferred remaining under Sturges Bourne's Act, which they thought was more conducive to the good government of the parish. Now, he (the Earl of Derby) was not advocating one principle more than the other; but he would put it to the Government whether, for the sake of uniformity in the mode of election in all the different parishes and districts, they would make it compulsory upon them to adopt a system which the parishioners did not prefer. He did not see why it should not be left to their option. No inconvenience would result from the central Board being composed of members elected by different constituencies, in different ways; for example, the Senate of the United States consisted of two representatives of each State, but elected under different state laws and by various constituencies. The working of the metropolitan system, constituted as he suggested, would afford a valuable illustration of the problem of the best mode of election,

1335
and the representatives of each locality would try to rival others in good management.
THE EARL OF POWISthought the vestries of large parishes, like St. George's, were not suitable for the transaction of such affairs as would by this Bill be committed to them. He apprehended also, that the effect of the 1st clause would be, though unintentionally, to put an end to the burial boards, and to the commissioners of baths and washhouses. It was inconvenient to begin the operation of the Bill on the 1st of December, when the accounts of parishes were commonly made up at Easter or Lady Day.
LORD WODEHOUSEbriefly replied. With regard to the observations of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby), although Sturges Bourne's Act was a general Act applying to all parishes throughout the country, in the metropolis a large number of parishes had got special Acts; and there were scarcely two alike in the mode of electing their vestries. If the arrangement suggested by the noble Earl were adopted, he feared it would excite more heart burnings and jealousies than the application of one uniform rate.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD BROUGHAM LORD BROUGHAM moved the second reading of this Bill, which he stated to be for the purpose of remedying a great evil to which Dissenters were now subject. Under the Dissenters' Marriage Act of 1836, when a marriage between Dissenters took place by the registrar or by a Dissenting minister, it was necessary to give notice to the clerk of the Board of Guardians; and if the marriage was to take place without a licence, a notice was to be read at three successive meetings of the Poor Law Guardians of the district in which one of the parties lived. Many most respectable persons objected to this, and many were thereby deprived of the benefit intended by the Act of 1836. The object of the Bill was to substitute another mode of proceeding, and instead of notice being given to the clerk of the guardians, and the notice being read three times at different meetings of the guardians, the notice was to be given to the superintendent registrar, and be affixed in some conspicuous
1336
place in his office for twenty-one days. The measure was much considered in the other House by Gentlemen of all sects, both of the Church and Dissenters, and had come up to their Lordships' House with their full sanction.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

DISSENTERS' RELIEF BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD BROUGHAM, after expressing his reluctance to bring on the discussion on the Bill in the absence of all the Members of the right rev. Bench, stated its object. He said that when a person had taken holy orders, those orders were indelible, and no temporal power existed which could reduce such a man to the condition of a layman, and he was liable to all the secular disqualifications which attached to holy orders. When, therefore, a person in holy orders conscientiously dissented from the Church he remained liable to all the penalties which would be incurred by a clergyman for certain acts, and he remained under the superintendence of the Bishop in the same manner as if he had not become a Dissenter. Many instances of this kind had occurred; and it happened that many persons in holy orders had become Dissenters and Dissenting ministers, and if in the exercise of that function they taught or preached they were liable to be prosecuted in the Ecclesiastical Courts for schism and heresy. They were liable to all the disqualifications which holy orders carried with them in secular matters. For instance, such a person could not be called to the Bar, of which particular case the late Mr. Horne Tooke was a remarkable instance. The noble Lord, urging that the Church of England needed no such support as was to be obtained from penalties and disqualifications, said that this Bill would remove all those defects in that respect which existed in the present system.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
THE EARL OF DERBYcould not pretend, at a moment's notice, to enter into a subject of so much importance, and to agree to the principle of a measure affecting episcopal authority, in the absence of every Member of the episcopal Bench. The Bill permitted a clergyman of the Church of England, claiming to be a Dissenter,

1337
to be absolved from all episcopal authority. But suppose a clergyman had committed grave misconduct, which rendered him liable to ecclesiastical censure, was he, by claiming to dissent from the doctrines of the Church, to release himself from the penalties of his iniquities? The Bill proposed to permit such a person to take his seat in the House of Commons, or to go to the Bar. But suppose, after professing himself a Dissenter for three months, he came back to the Church, was he to retain his seat in the House of Commons, or would he regain his clerical character. The Bill proposed an entire alteration in the system of the Church of England, and he would oppose its second reading, if he stood alone. He did not bind himself to oppose the principle of the Bill in a future Session; but he protested against a Bill of so much importance being brought in in this hasty and hurried manner, and he should accordingly move that the Bill be read a second time on that day six months.
LORD BROUGHAMhad been most reluctant, in the absence of the episcopal Bench, to explain his measure, and should have been content that the discussion should he reserved until the next stage. No doubt he should find it difficult to pass his Bill this Session, even if their Lordships gave their assent to it. But his Bill did not take away the clerical character, and there was no inconsistency between the indelible nature of holy orders and the provisions of his Bill. The clergyman would remain a priest, but he would not be liable to the secular penalties for schism, &c., attached to that office. On the other hand, the Bill took away all the immunities and benefits incident to his clerical character.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, it was for his noble and learned Friend to consider whether he would press the second reading; but, if the Bill should be read a second time, he hoped ample time would be afforded for its consideration before the Committee upon it was moved.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, some of the most distinguished Members of the episcopal Bench felt the propriety of passing a measure of this kind; but at the present inauspicious period of the Session he would not press the second reading.
Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn: Then the said Bill was (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.
House adjourned to Thursday next.