Lords Sitting of 18 July 1856

MINUTE.
PUBLIC BILL.—1a Income and Land Taxes; Stamp Duties; Racehorse Duty; Coast guard Service; Corrupt Practices Prevention; General Board of Health Continuance; Militia Pay; Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer; Lunatic Asylums Act Amendment.
2a Courts of Common Law (Ireland); Unlawful Oaths (Ireland); Parochial Schools (Scotland).
3a Intestates Personal Estates; Incumbered Estates (Ireland); Metropolis Local Management Act Amendment (No. 2); Sherburn Hospital; Oxford College Estates; Prisons (Ireland); Commons Inclosure (No. 2).

STEAM-PACKET COMMUNICATION BE TWEEN HOLYHEAD AND KINGSTOWN.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONsaid, he was anxious that the Session should not close without some explanation from the Government on a matter which was of the greatest importance to the public. He alluded to the present state of the steam-packet communication between Holyhead and Kingstown. It was hardly necessary for him to remind their Lordships that, after the most minute inquiries on the part of practical men, it had been ascertained that the passage between Holyhead and Kingstown was the best, speediest, and safest between this country and Ireland, and that in consequence a railway had been constructed along the coast from Chester to Holyhead, crossing the Conway and Menai bridges. Yet that part of the passage which was most essential was in reality most defective. In the first place, the present steam-packets could not afford sufficient accommodation for the passengers who were perpetually passing and repassing; and, in the second, the time consumed in the passage was far greater than it need be, if steamers of proper horse power were placed upon the station. At present the passage was never under four hours and a half, even in the calmest weather, and if there was any head wind, it was often five hours and a half, and sometimes six hours. If steamers of sufficient horse power were employed, the passage could be made in three hours, and if they were 350 feet in length, there would be ample accommodation for the passengers. The noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) might not be aware of the inconvenience to which the public was subjected, but if he had often to cross over to Ireland he would see the necessity of some change. He (Viscount Dungannon) hoped that the mere question of expense would not be considered by a great country like this. He should therefore ask his noble Friend whether there was any prospect of an arrangement being come to between Her Majesty's Government and the Steam Packet Company relative to a line of larger vessels with increased horse power.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDESaid, he wished to ask at what hour the
1008
mail train from London would start? The noble Duke on a former occasion had stated that it would start at half-past seven in the morning—a most inconvenient hour.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, there was a very fair prospect of a satisfactory arrangement being made with the steam-packet companies; negotiations were not yet completed, but he hoped they would come to a speedy conclusion. With regard to the remark of the noble Marquess, he would observe that it was the clear duty of the department with which he was connected to accelerate as much as possible the passage of the mails, not only to Dublin, but also to the rest of Ireland. In order to carry out that object, in order to prevent other parts of Ireland from being sacrificed to the metropolis, it was essential that the mails should arrive at Dublin in sufficient time to allow of the departure of the provincial mails as early as they were now despatched. If they were allowed to be despatched at a later hour the arrangements for the distribution of the letters in the distant parts of the country would be seriously disturbed. He did not think there was anything very unreasonable in requiring passengers to start from London for Dublin at half-past seven in the morning.

FURTHER ARCTIC EXPEDITION.
LORD WROTTESLEYsaid, that the noble Earl (the Earl of Ellesmere) who had given notice of the question he (Lord Wrottesley) was about to put to Her Majesty's Government, was, unfortunately, obliged to absent himself through illness, and he had delegated his task to him. He had, therefore, to inquire whether Her Majesty's Government had returned an answer to a memorial relative to a further Arctic Expedition? He trusted he might be allowed to accompany this question with some remarks explanatory of the position in which the whole matter now stood, the rather that much misconception prevailed upon the subject. The tale of Arctic search and Arctic suffering was indeed a melancholy one, and awakened so many sad and painful recollections, that he greatly feared, lest in his sympathy for the sufferers he might exaggerate the merits of the case he had undertaken to plead. He should much regret such a result, for he was well aware that in taking this course he was incurring a grave responsibility. Through eight long dreary years the relatives and friends of

1009
those gallant men who had served their country only too well anxiously awaited, and awaited in vain, some tidings of their fate. During the first part of that distressing period, they expected with each returning summer or autumn to welcome those adventurous seamen returning home in triumph from a successful enterprise, crowned with civic laurels, and about to reap the well earned reward of their meritorious exertions. During the latter part of that period they hoped to receive some intelligence which might enlighten them as to the manner and the circumstances under which the little band of heroes had breathed their last—perhaps after much suffering removed, very far removed, from their cherished homes. Those who had experienced the misery of thus losing those who were near and dear to them in foreign lands, where the details of the calamity were necessarily imperfectly known, would remember how anxiously we desired to know all the particulars of the mournful event—the how, the when, and the where—each additional fact when learnt, added acutely to the sorrow; and yet there was a continual craving to know more and more; a thirst that could not be allayed. But in the case to which he alluded, to fill up the measure of sorrow, we had to add the agonies of suspense, since every day, every hour of each returning year might bring complete relief, or a confirmation of the worst anticipations. At last, in 1855, the crisis of the fate of these mariners arrived, and a cruel revelation was made, the particulars of which he should shortly detail:—Their Lordships were aware that, commencing with the year 1848, several expeditions, both by land and sea, were, with laudable zeal, sent out by the Admiralty, and even by our brothers on the other side of the Atlantic, to endeavour to ascertain the fate of Franklin and his companions. He would not weary their Lordships with the details of these exploits anterior to 1854; suffice it to say that, by some cruel fatality, they seemed all to have proceeded in every direction but the right one. Nothing was ascertained beyond the discovery, in 1851, of the graves on Beechy Island, the only effect of which was to send one of the best-appointed expeditions that ever left our shores in a wrong direction—to the north instead of to the south. He now came to the eventful year 1854; but before detailing the transactions of that year it was necessary, in order that their Lordships might comprehend
1010
his description of them and his comments upon them, that he should explain a few particulars relative to the configuration of the north coast of America. Three great rivers fell into the Polar Sea, flowing from the south. The Mackenzie River was that most to the west, the Coppermine River occupied the centre place, and the Great Fish, or Back River (the mouth of which was the scene of the events he was about to describe), flowing towards the northeast, occupied the most eastern position of the three. The general trending of the north coast of America was west and east, but opposite to the Coppermine River was situate, separated from the main by a narrow strait, a vast island extending through twenty degrees of longitude; similarly, opposite to the mouth of Back River, there was on the west a comparatively small island, very imperfectly explored, called King William's Land, and on the east there was a long tract of land consisting of a peninsula to the south and an island to the north. The peninsula and island were divided by a narrow strait, called after the gallant Frenchman who perished—Bellot's Strait. The peninsula was called Boothia, and the island was called North Somerset. Now, on each side of this long peninsula—and he begged their Lordships particularly to attend to this—there were two magnificent inlets or arms of the sea, running from north to south from Barrow's Strait; that to the west was called Peel Sound, and debouched on the south into Victoria Strait, at the southern extremity of which lay King William's Land and the estuary of the Back River; that to the east was called Prince Regent's Inlet, and it terminated in Boothia Gulf. In the year 1854, the Hudson's Bay Company sent Dr. Rae, one of their most intelligent and adventurous Arctic travellers to explore the west coast of Boothia Peninsula. When he arrived in Pelly Bay, which was near the bottom of Boothia Gulf, he obtained from various Esquimaux, whom he encountered there, certain particulars relative to the fate of Franklin and his companions. The story was to the effect that about 1850 a party of about forty gaunt and starving men ware seen dragging a boat over the ice to the north of King William's Land; that they went down the west coast of that island, and afterwards perished near a great river. Now, had not this story been confirmed by the circumstance that these Esquimaux were in possession of various

1011
relics of the expedition, which Dr. Rae brought home, it would have been placed, as it well deserved to have been placed, on a par with various other falsehoods told by these Esquimaux during the progress of this search. Not any one of these Esquimaux who told the story had seen any of the forty men. Dr. Rae was at one time within fifty miles of the scene of the alleged catastrophe; but being, as he states, then uninformed as to the precise locality, unhappily returned home without visiting it. Neither the Government nor public were satisfied, and it was an important point in the case that they were not satisfied. Another land expedition went out in 1855 under Anderson; they descended the Back River, but they could obtain no interpreter; they were only provided with birch-bark canoes, too frail to live in the open sea; and they were supported by no ship laden with supplies and able to overawe the natives. They returned with more relies, but with no additional information of importance, except that these forty men, with a large boat, had actually arrived within the estuary of the Back River and perished there. Such was the present state of the question, and since that time the Admiralty had been in vain importuned to finish the good work they had begun. Another expedition was advocated, upon arguments which seemed unanswerable to himself and others. It was said that the clue was now found of which we had been so long in search; that the danger was now slight, because the area of research was limited to a comparatively small district, situate between the 68th and 72nd degrees of parallel of latitude, and the meridians of 95 and 100 degrees west, a region almost wholly unexplored; that even now, late as it was, a ship might be got ready by the middle of August, which might be directed to enter either Peel Sound or Prince Regent's Inlet, according as the one or the other was most free from ice; and after she had penetrated as far south as possible, walking parties might be detached from her to the scene of the catastrophe, distant probably about 400 miles (and walks of 1,200 miles had been made); or that if the approach from the west was preferred, Captain Collinson had undertaken to take a ship within 150 miles of the spot by that route. It had been shown that only forty men out of 135 had been accounted for; that as the settlements of the Esquimaux were certainly reached, as evidenced by their possession of the relics,
1012
some of the men so unaccounted for might yet be living domesticated among these tribes; that nothing had been found but a few forks and spoons and other trifles; that the boat party had not been traced back to the ships; that the ships had not been found; that they remained possibly intact, frozen up and abandoned near King William's Land; but that, even if broken up, inasmuch as, by the invariable practice of Arctic voyagers, journals and scientific records were kept carefully in tin cases, at least some portion of these might be discovered. It was a great mistake to suppose that the interests of science were in no way concerned in sending out another expedition. In the first place, the scene of the catastrophe had been scarcely at all explored; and, in the next place, it was a great object to recover the magnetical records—for magnetical observations made within the Arctic and Antarctic circles were peculiarly valuable in reference to the theory of magnetism. Now, as a very perfect set of magnetical instruments was supplied to Sir John Franklin's expedition, and they were consigned to the charge of officers of high scientific attainments, who received a special training in their use, the observations made were likely to be very valuable. Then, supposing such an expedition on other grounds to be deemed expedient, what an opportunity it offered to some of those gallant members of the naval profession who had been thrown out of employment by the peace, and were disappointed that the war had yielded such few opportunities of distinction. In conclusion, the noble Lord said that a further expedition was recommended in a temperate memorial, signed by influential and well-informed men of almost every grade and profession, and advocated by distinguished Arctic navigators, who supported their opinions by facts and reasonings which carried conviction home to the minds of men accustomed to estimate the bearings of doubtful evidence—that such an expedition would furnish employment for gallant officers; that it might lead to the recovery of lost scientific records of great value; that it might gratify the longings of attached and mourning relatives, and especially of a widowed lady who had made great sacrifices on behalf of her heroic and lamented husband; and, above all, that it would carry out to its legitimate solution an important problem in which the honour of England was largely concerned, and

1013
which had excited the curiosity and interest of the whole civilised world.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, although nothing was more natural than that such should be the strong desire of the friends of all engaged in the expedition, which reflected so much honour upon those of whom it was composed, and upon the English name, and also of persons interested in the scientific results which might be expected from the recovery of the documents supposed to have been left by that expedition, yet other considerations must be taken into account before another Arctic expedition was despatched. His right hon. Friend at the head of the Admiralty was of opinion, that, at all events, it was much too late to entertain hopes of organising an expedition this season with any chance of success. His right hon. Friend was, however, fully disposed to take into his most serious consideration in the recess whether it was desirable that any further expedition should be sent out. But he (Lord Stanley) would submit to the noble Lord whether they ought to incur the responsibility of risking the lives of brave men for such an object. As long as any hopes remained of rescuing our brave countrymen from those inhospitable regions many strong reasons might be urged for fitting out another expedition; but when the only object was the obtaining further details of the fate of these unfortunate men and some further scientific information, it was matter for grave consideration before the Government undertook such a responsibility.

THE CRIMEAN BOARD OF INQUIRY— REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS— ADDRESS FOR.
THE EARL OF LUCAN THE EARL OF LUCAN rose to move—That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty that She will be graciously pleased to give Directions that the Report of the Chelsea Board of Officers be laid upon the table of the House. The noble Earl said that he regretted to find himself compelled to seek from their Lordships that justice which he could not obtain from the Minister of War; but he thought it was impossible to question this fact—that it was the fixed purpose of the Minister of War not to present the Report of the Chelsea Commissioners to Parliament during the present Session. The noble Lord began to be exceedingly entertained, and he could promise the noble Lord more
1014
amusement before he concluded. He believed that the fixed purpose of the noble Lord was to withhold the Report from Parliament and from the country; and such a course of conduct appeared to him (the Earl of Lucan) to be inconsistent with common justice. Indeed, it was difficult to understand the feelings that could have prompted that determination on the part of the noble Lord, or the boldness and assurance that could support it; but unquestionably it had been in every mouth for a long time past, that it was not the intention of the noble Lord to present this Report to Parliament this Session. The answers given in that House to questions put by him (the Earl of Lucan) to the noble Lord left it without a doubt that that was his intention; and his (the Earl of Lucan's) firm belief was, that unless he could prevail upon their Lordships that night to agree to this Motion, justice would be denied to the officers of the array by the withholding the Report. To satisfy their Lordships that he was not doing an injustice to the noble Lord, he should remind them that on the previous Monday week the noble Lord stated, in answer to a question put by him (the Earl of Lucan), that he believed the Report had not at that time reached Her Majesty, and that in consequence of the illness of the Commander in Chief, it was very doubtful when it would; and that after it had been laid before Her Majesty, it would have to be considered by the Government what course they should take upon it before it could be laid upon the table of the House. However, on a subsequent occasion the noble Lord admitted that he had been misinformed—that he had since found the fact to be that the Report had been laid before Her Majesty, but that up to that time (Friday last) it still continued in Her Majesty's hands, in consequence of no printed copy of the evidence having been forwarded with the Report to Her Majesty; and that it would remain with Her Majesty till She had an opportunity of comparing it with that evidence. He hoped to hear on the present occasion from the noble Lord that the Report had reached him from Her Majesty, Now he (the Earl of Lucan) knew not what object the noble Lord had in the statement to which he had just referred, but it appeared to him (the Earl of Lucan) that that statement might lead to the inference that Her Majesty was, to some extent, a party to the injustice which

1015
the withholding of the Report inflicted upon the officers whose conduct was referred to in it; but it was well known that Her Majesty's first care was to do honour to Her army, and that she had deeply sympathised in the sufferings which they had undergone in the Crimea; and, therefore, no one could for one moment suppose that Her Majesty would be a party to the doing of an injustice to any portion of that army. He would tell the noble Lord that it was upon him, and upon him alone, that the whole injustice of withholding the Report must be laid. The noble Lord had said that it would he necessary for him to read over every word of the evidence before he could advise Her Majesty as to what steps should be taken in reference to that evidence, and to the Report which had been founded upon it. In that case there would be little chance of the Report being laid before Parliament during the present Session. But what was the course which had been taken by the noble Lord with reference to the Report of the Crimean Commissioners? Let the House for a moment contrast the noble Lord's conduct with respect to that Report with his conduct with respect to the Report now asked for. In the case of the Report of the Crimean Commissioners there was so much precipitancy and haste displayed by the noble Lord, that he found it impossible to refer that Report for the consideration of the Commander in Chief; indeed, he went farther, and said that he had scarcely allowed himself time to peruse it before he laid it before Parliament. Undoubtedly, such a Report ought to have been referred to the Commander in Chief; but such was the haste to lay it before Parliament, that that course was not taken, and though the document was only signed during the last two or three days of January, it was on the table of their Lordships' House by the 4th or 5th of February. The contrast was not favourable to the noble Lord, who now showed himself so slow in repairing injustice by presenting an exculpatory Report. The noble Lord now smiled. [Lord PANMURE: No.] But he could assure the noble Lord that he (the Earl of Lucan) knew no more about the contents of the Report than the noble Lord himself. However, this he did know—he knew every word of the evidence given before the Commissioners, and having the greatest confidence in their honour and integrity,
1016
he felt sure that the whole of the allegations made against him (the Earl of Lucan) and other officers must be stamped by the Commissioners as totally unfounded. For himself he felt little concern, because immediately after the conclusion of the evidence Colonel Tulloch came over to him, and though he had never said a word or communicated with that gallant officer before, he (Colonel Tulloch) said he thought it due to him (the Earl of Lucan) to state that had he not been misled by the evidence given him in the Crimea, by Colonel Gordon and Sir Richard Airey, he or the other Commissioner would never have said a word to his (the Earl of Lucan's) disadvantage. After such a statement as that, taken in connection with the evidence given at Chelsea, he (the Earl of Lucan), thought he was fully warranted in assuming that the Report was, so far as he was concerned, an exculpatory Report. The Minister of War excused himself on the last occasion for not producing the Report, and stated that he was acting under the advice of the Judge Advocate General. He did not desire to comment upon the manner in which that learned Gentleman conducted himself on that inquiry, or he might say that he appeared to him. (the Earl of Lucan) to assume more the authority of the Board than the position of the legal adviser of the Board. What character the learned Gentleman assumed during the deliberations, with closed doors, he would not say, but he could not shut his eyes to the fact that he was a colleague of the noble Lord the Minister of War, and was, therefore, no doubt most unfairly, open to the suspicion that he might not he inure impatient for the drawing up of the Report than the noble Lord was for producing it. The noble and learned Lord Chief Justice shook his head; but that did not alter the facts, and he (the Earl of Lucan) could not regard the noble and learned Lord's shake of the head as an answer to what he was putting to the House.
LORD CAMPBELLhoped the noble and gallant Earl would pardon his interruption, when he said that he (Lord Campbell) could not hear any one in a judicial situation accused without what he considered any ground, and not express his dissent from the accusation.
THE EARL OF LUCANbelieved it to be repugnant to all sense of justice that, in a political inquiry a political partisan should

1017
be the officer to advise the court. A review of the proceedings at Chelsea made it clear that the administration of justice before military courts required consideration on the part of the Legislature, and, as he believed that consideration could not be given to it in a more fitting place than their Lordships' House, he hoped the next Session would not pass away without the attention of their Lordships being called to the office of the Judge Advocate General, the functions of that officer, his tenure of office, and the mode of procedure before military courts, which he did not hesitate to say was at present unnecessarily tedious and obstructive to eliciting truth. Well, the Report had, no doubt, been presented, and the evidence had been printed, for it was printed from time to time while the inquiry was being proceeded with; but something had been said about the appendix not being printed. Now, he could not understand how that could be, because some papers had been returned to him on the ground that they could not he received after the close of the inquiry, and if all the papers proposed to be printed were in the hands of the Commissioners when the inquiry terminated he could not account for the delay in printing the appendix. However, he did not think it necessary that the appendix should be printed before the Report was laid upon the table of the House, for the House had frequently received Reports and the papers which accompanied them volume by volume. On a former occasion the noble Lord the Minister of War stated that in the case of the Commission on the Convention of Cintra, the manuscript remarks made on the Report by George IV. were countersigned by Lord Castlereagh, after the Report was returned to the Government by the King, and that this was done before the document was presented to the House. Now, seeing that it had been stated that Parliament would be up in a week from this time, if the noble Lord intended to follow the precedent of the Cintra Convention Commission Report, he (the Earl of Lucan) did not think it likely that the Minister of War would produce the Report of the Chelsea Commissioners during the present Session, if the House did not express some opinion on the subject. He thought he could not be charged with any undue haste in bringing this question before Parliament. The Report had been signed fourteen days; eleven days had elapsed since it was laid before Her Majesty; this was the 18th of July; and in
1018
the course of another week, the present Session of Parliament would be brought to a close. Entertaining, therefore, as he did, the conviction that the Minister of War would not produce this Report to the House unless their Lordships expressed an opinion on the subject, he hoped he should not be considered unreasonable in calling upon the House to support his Motion. The noble Earl concluded by moving—
"That a humble address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that the Report of the Chelsea Board of Officers be laid upon the table of the House."
LORD PANMUREsaid, that after the speech of the noble Earl, in which he complained that it was his (Lord Panmure's) intention to withhold from him justice on this occasion, he thought that the very few facts which he (Lord Panmure) was about to state to their Lordships would show them the utter unreasonableness of the address to which they had just listened. Throughout the whole of his statement the noble Earl had told them of apprehensions which existed in his own mind, but for which, in his (Lord Panmure's) opinion, the noble Earl had given no reason whatever. Let him just trace the course of these proceedings; and let their Lordships mark the course which the noble Earl had pursued with reference to them. On the 7th July this Report was first presented to the Queen. On the 8th the noble Earl demanded to know when it would be laid before Parliament. He (Lord Panmure) said nothing on that occasion to justify the noble Earl in arriving at the conclusion that he was averse to laying the Report before Parliament. He (Lord Panmure) admitted the reasonableness of the anxiety felt by the noble Earl, for himself, and on the part of the officers whose case had been before the Commissioners at Chelsea; and all he claimed for the Government was time for the consideration of the Report before it was laid upon the table of the House. That Report was delivered to the Queen in manuscript on the 7th of July: every page of that Report referred to the proceedings which were not delivered to Her Majesty till the 9th. The 10th intervened; and late on the evening of the 11th he received that Report and those proceedings from Her Majesty, with an expressed desire that She should receive the advice of Her Cabinet on the subject. On the 12th he laid the Report before the Cabinet; the

1019
13th was Sunday; and the Report, which he had sent to be printed on the evening of the 12th, was delivered to him in a printed shape, occupying some thirty pages of close type, on the 15th. This was the 18th; and during the time that had intervened between the day he received the Report and that on which he received it in its printed shape he instructed the Under Secretary of State to state, in reply to a question which was to be put in the other House of Parliament, that it would be laid upon the table as soon as possible. His colleagues and himself had between the 15th instant and the present day perused the Report. They had not yet advised Her Majesty with respect to it; but between that day and Monday they would tender that advice to Her Majesty; and, therefore, he could not conceive why the noble Earl had arrived at the inference that the Report was not intended to be laid upon the table before the rising of Parliament. He could assure the noble Earl that it was his intention to lay the Report upon the table on Monday, and not only the Report, but the proceedings attached to it, and the appendix, which he could not understand why the noble Earl assumed was not printed. That appendix was printed with the rest of the proceedings, which he believed had been printed and published from day to day during the inquiry. So much as to the documents. Now, with regard to the whole proceeding, it seemed to him that the noble Earl had been trying to fix upon him some intention, personally, of withholding justice from him (the Earl of Lucan) and the other officers. He could assure the House that no such intention had ever existed in his mind; and in reply to the noble Earl's charge that the inquiry at Chelsea had been a political one, he (Lord Panmure) begged most distinctly and positively to aver that there had never been any proceeding more removed from the character of a political inquiry. That inquiry was a military-judicial inquiry, demanded by the officers themselves, and referred to officers of as high character as that of any officers in Her Majesty's service, without reference to their political opinions in the smallest degree. Nay, more, it was his conviction that if the political opinions of the Chelsea Board were inquired into, they would be found to be very much more in accordance with those of the noble Earl than with those of Her Majesty's Government. But because the Judge Advocate General, in his official
1020
capacity, was the adviser of the military Board on that occasion, the noble Earl gave that as a reason, forsooth, why that Board should assume a political hue. There was one answer for that—namely, that there was not an officer on that Board who, whatever might be the position of a public servant brought in connection with him in the discharge of judicial duties, would allow political opinions to bias him in respect to the conduct of the inquiry. The noble Earl insinuated that during the time the doors of the Board-room were closed, and while the public was excluded, the Board might have received some advice or other from his (Lord Panmure's) right hon. and learned Friend the Judge Advocate, which might have delayed the production of the Report in the first place to Her Majesty. Now, on a former occasion he (Lord Panmure) had stated that in the inquiry at Chelsea, while in most respects following the precedent of that which took place in 1808 with reference to the Convention of Cintra, in some it was deviated from, so far as allowing a fuller examination of the matters in hand, so as to assist the Commissioners in arriving at a conclusion. He found, on referring to the Report in the Cintra Convention case, that the Report was delivered to the King on the 22nd of December; and as far as he could gather from the order made by the House of Commons for the printing of the document, it was not laid before Parliament till the 31st of January. He did not know whether Parliament had been sitting before that date, but his impression was that it had been, for in 1808 Parliament assembled at an earlier period of the year than it now usually did; but it was clear that a very considerable delay had taken place in the delivery of the Report to the House from the time it was presented to the King. He did not, when before speaking on this subject, say that that Report was not signed by the Secretary of State; but what he said was, that the remarks made on that Report by His Majesty were countersigned by Lord Castlereagh as Secretary for State. The noble Earl had contrasted the time which had elapsed since the Chelsea Report reached the hands of the Government with the immediate production of the Report of the Commissioners from whose statements the late inquiry had emanated. But the Report from the Commissioners sent to the Crimea was made under a very different state of circumstances. The Commissioners who

1021
were sent to the Crimea to inquire into allegations which had been made by other sources were sent by the Government; the Government announced to Parliament that they had sent them, and gave Parliament distinctly to understand that as soon as the Commissioners reported, their Report should be laid upon the tables of both Houses. He would again repeat, that, so far from there being any intention on the part of Her Majesty's Government of withholding the result of the present inquiry, it was his (Lord Panmure's) intention to have presented the Report to both Houses of Parliament on Monday next; and under those circumstances he could see no necessity whatever for the noble Earl's Motion.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that after the assurance given by the noble Lord, his noble and gallant Friend would not of course press his Motion for an Address to the Crown for the production of the Report; and he had no doubt that had such an assurance been given to his noble and gallant Friend at an earlier period, he would not have thought it necessary to bring forward the present Motion. The language, however, of the noble Lord opposite on the two occasions upon which the subject was mentioned was, as he understood—not having been present on either of those occasions—such as to lead his noble and gallant Friend to suppose that there would be considerable delay in the production of the Report.
LORD PANMURE: I did not use any such language.
THE EARL OF DERBYcould only say what he had heard was the language of the noble Lord. It was such as to leave his noble and gallant Friend under the impression that it was not the intention of the noble Lord, on the part of the Government, to bring forward the Report previous to the recess. On the first occasion to which he referred, the noble Lord had erroneously stated, as a ground for delay, that the papers had not then been presented to Her Majesty. The noble Lord, it appeared, was in error in that statement. And on the second occasion of the question being asked, the noble Lord stated that the papers were not received back from Her Majesty, and that when She did send them back it would be necessary for the Government to review them. [Lord PANMURE: No, no!] He could only say what he had heard was the nature of the language used by the noble Lord—
1022
that it was not likely the papers would be produced before the rising of Parliament; and certainly those conversations had left his noble and gallant Friend under the impression that it was not likely an opportunity would be afforded to their Lordships for a consideration of the Report before the recess. That being the case his noble and gallant Friend was naturally anxious for the production, as soon as possible, of the Report which so materially concerned himself and other gallant officers. His noble and gallant Friend was, therefore, quite justified under such circumstances in giving notice of a Motion for an Address to the Crown on the subject. But now, whether the production of the papers on Monday should be considered as the spontaneous act of the noble Lord, or the result of this Motion for an Address to the Crown, the result was such as to render a perseverance by his noble and gallant Friend in this Motion unnecessary.
EARL BEAUCHAMPbore his testimony to the impartial manner in which the whole inquiry was conducted.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that as the noble Earl had made a charge against the Judge Advocate, imputing misconduct during the investigation in question, he (Lord Campbell) thought it his duty to say that he was sure no one could have conducted himself more honourably or impartially during the trial than that distinguished functionary.
THE EARL OF LUCANdenied that he had ever made any such imputation against the Judge Advocate General. He certainly expressed an opinion on the fact of the Judge Advocate acting as adviser to the Board in a political inquiry; and he thought that it was just possible that the Judge Advocate would have shown no more anxiety in the drawing up of the Report than the noble Lord opposite had done in the presentation of it to the House.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, he was of opinion that the Judge Advocate had conducted himself with the utmost possible impartiality.
Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE,in moving the third reading, expressed his

1023
opinion that the object of the measure was of a most useful character. As a person connected with Ireland, and aware of the difficulties which this measure had had to encounter, he wished to state that nothing could exceed the zeal, ability, and personal courage with which these Commissioners had executed the important task intrusted to them. More had been done by this new Court in six years than had been effected by the Court of Chancery during the space of half a century. One ninth part of the whole country of Ireland had changed hands without any blemish or fault in the proceedings, unless it were in one case only, where the value concerned was £25. Not less than £18,000,000 of money had been awarded, out of which sum £15,000,000 had been actually received. As an Irish proprietor he felt deeply indebted to the Commissioners for the manner in which they had discharged a great public duty.
Moved, that the Bill be now read 3a.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that he viewed the Bill with great regret. He did not deny that the law which the Bill was intended to continue had done great good to Ireland; but that was the very reason why the Court should not be continued for two years, and for two years only. Laws such as those should not be allowed to continue exceptional and temporary, but should be incorporated in the permanent legislation of the country. If this could not be done, it would be better that the law should cease altogether. There was nothing now exceptional in the state of Ireland; it was in a state of great order. It was time to arrive at a state of normal law with regard to the property of the country. It was not right that men who had not overencumbered their estates should be placed at a disadvantage with those who had. What he could have wished would have teen a different Bill—one to enable the present Court to wind up its business, which it would take only one or two years to settle, and not to allow any further petitions to be received by it. There ought to be some explanation as to the continuance for two years. He did not blame the Government in the matter—the Bill was founded on the report of Commissioners and arose from the contests of legal men, who had prevented the Government from carrying out its intention. This exceptional court ought to be suspended, and they should come to a
1024
fixed measure, not only with regard to the incumbered property, but with regard to all the property of Ireland. The Bill affected not only land but mortgages. He knew that one-third of the property bought in the Incumbered Estates Court had been paid for by borrowed money, and there were some cases in which the purchaser had not paid a single shilling, and some in which they were giving eight per cent for the money they borrowed. If this were so, it clearly defeated the object which the Bill was intended to accomplish. And there was, moreover, this consequence—that any one with an incumbered estate, who wished to raise money, could not do so, without paying enormous interest. With respect to the practice and procedure of the Court itself, he admitted that on the whole the Court and those who presided over it deserved the thanks of the public; but he could not agree in the unqualified approbation which had been expressed by the noble Marquess who had just sat down. There were not wanting instances of considerable importance to prove that the Court was not altogether faultless; while in matters of minor details there had been an irregularity and uncertainty—not to use the more popular expression, caprice—which were perhaps incidental to a Court so hastily and so imperfectly constituted, but which nevertheless were much to be regretted. The fact was that the real estates of Ireland required a permanent law and a permanent Court to deal with them, and he hoped that the Government would give an assurance that at as early a period as possible they would introduce a measure of that nature.
THE LORD CHANCELLORconcurred with his noble Friend that the principle of having an exceptional Court was extremely objectionable. On that account Her Majesty's Government, at the commencement of the Session, introduced three Bills, the great object of which was to make the Court perpetual—not confining it to incumbered estates, but giving it jurisdiction with regard to the sale of estates generally. Those Bills were introduced in the other House of Parliament, and were subsequently referred to a Select Committee. Great difference of opinion prevailed in the Committee, and the result was that they disapproved of the establishment of a permanent tribunal, mainly, he believed, because the Judges were named Vice-Chancellors, there being a vulgar prejudice

1025
against anything connected with the Court of Chancery. The Commissioners, however, reported in favour of the continuance of the Incumbered Estates Court. He confessed it would be much more satisfactory to his mind that that Court should be made a permanent institution of the country, and not be treated as an exceptional Court. He was happy to find that there was nothing in the present state of the landed property of Ireland to render any exceptional legislation of this kind justifiable. Although he could not exactly pledge himself to any particular course, he might say that the Government would be actuated by the same feelings as he had expressed, and that the matter would not escape their attention and consideration. It was, he thought, marvellous that so few errors had been committed during the progress of the transactions of the Court. There were only one or two cases in which the decisions of the Court had been called in question, and whether rightly or wrongly was yet to be ascertained. But even if the Court were wrong in those two cases, he thought that they could hardly express a greater tribute of praise to the proceedings of any court or tribunal than to say that in the course of its seven years of business, involving transactions amounting to £18,000,000, there were only one or two cases in which the decisions of that Court had been called in question. If their Lordships assented to the third reading he would suggest an Amendment, which would make the Act to expire contemporaneously with the next Session of Parliament, instead of the 28th of July.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 3a accordingly, and passed.

PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Bill read 3a (according to order) with the Amendments.
On Motion, That the Bill do now pass,
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHcalled attention to the Amendments made in that Bill against the wishes of the Government, and said he was very anxious to know what the Government intended to do in relation to the clauses struck out of the Bill.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he thought it quite possible that the other House might reinsert in the Bill the clauses which had been struck out of it at the instance of the noble Duke.
LORD CAMPBELLhoped that nothing would be done that could endanger the passing of the Bill.
THE EARL OF GALLOWAYsaid, he trusted the Government would use their influence to prevent the reinsertion of those clauses.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he could undertake to give no pledge as to what course the Government would pursue in the other House with respect to the new clause which had been inserted by their Lordships. On a subject of the kind, there ought to have been mutual concessions. Nevertheless, he must remind their Lordships that all the concessions made had been on the part of the Government, while upon the side of the majority in that House there had positively been none. The question at issue should be settled definitively one way or another; for certainly the subject of which the Bill treated ought not to be dealt with as a mere continuance Bill. The measure, therefore, must be left to its fate, and he would warn their Lordships that the opinions of a large proportion of the representatives of Scotland were not to be overlooked.
THE EARL OF HADDINGTONdwelt upon the hardship which would be inflicted upon the schoolmasters if this Bill were not passed. In that case they would be rendered dependent on the charity and benevolence of the heritors, and this certainly should not be the case.
LORD PANMUREsupported the Bill, and stated that all Government desired was, that while they reserved the control of the schools to the parish ministers, the children of other parties besides those belonging to the Established Church should be admitted to the benefits of them.
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHremarked that the Scotch Members in the other House who supported the measure were the representatives of the boroughs, in which parochial schools were not all required, while of the county Members they were as two to one against it. The subject had been taken up by the counties of Scotland at their meetings, and, with the exception of the county of Banff, they were all decidedly opposed to the present Bill. The noble Duke had stated that no concession had been made by the noble Lords opposed to the Bill; but, for his own part, he considered that he had given way considerably. What he most objected to was the interference of the inspectors, not in the inspection of the schools, but in other repects, and he did trust that Government would seriously consider the objection.
THE MARQUESS OF BREADALBANEcalled upon their Lordships not to be misled by the so-called expression of opinion of the great county meetings in Scotland. These annual gatherings could always be got to pronounce against reforms of every description. Look at their conduct with reference to the reform of the constitution of the other House of Parliament. Why the county meetings were for upholding the old disgraceful system when representation was a mockery, and they were as completely opposed to the Reform of 1832 as they were to the measure now under consideration. His belief was that if the people of England and Scotland were to be debarred a proper system of national education through ecclesiastical interference and nice religious distinctions, the sooner they severed the connection between the Established Church and education the better. Why should the clergy of the country have the control of the schools? In former times it might have been different, because then the clergy alone were educated; but it was to be hoped that now-a-days others besides the clergy were equally able to administer the work of education, and the sooner the exclusive power of the clergy was got rid of the better.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONwas sorry to hear such a declaration as that which had just fallen from the noble Marquess, because it implied that the noble Marquess thought the time was come to establish a system of education in which religion was kept out of sight.
THE MARQUESS OF BREADALBANEexplained that he did not say the system should be one in which religious principles were not inculcated. What he said was, that the exclusive control should be taken from the clergy.
Motion agreed to.
Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
House adjourned to Monday next.