Lords Sitting of 14 March 1856

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Church Discipline.
2a Secretary to the Poor Law Commissioners (Ireland).

PROPERTY AND EARNINGS OF WOMEN —PETITION.
LORD BROUGHAM: I have had the honour, and I regard it as a distinguished honour, of being entrusted with a petition from above 2,000 of our fellow countrywomen, of various stations, and I now entreat the best attention of your Lordships to its statements and its prayer. They complain of the state of the law respecting women, of inconsistencies so gross, of defects so glaring, of iniquities so grievous, that I cannot suffer them to be called anomalies, and wrapt up in the convenient obscurity of the term not unfrequently used without any definite meaning. The petitioners complain of the law, and I denounce its state as a disgrace to a civilised, not to say a Christian community. The load, too, which the cruel, the scandalous injustice of our system imposes, the sufferings which it inflicts, fall upon the most deserving classes of the people, those in humble condition and of the middle ranks somewhat above them, who earn by their honest industry the means of their subsistence. I claim your attention to

121
their case, because it can never be your own, because your wives and your children are, happily for you, exempt from feeling the most grievous of the evils whereof the petitioners complain. But remember, I pray you, the lot of a woman toiling through days—not seldom nights too—of hard labour to support her own and her children's existence, whom an idle or a profligate husband has deserted, and doomed to see the little store which her exertions have gathered together swept away by that idler or good-for-nothing, in the exercise of his legal—I blush for our jurisprudence when I am compelled to admit his strictly legal—rights as a husband, the character to which his conduct has forfeited all claims, but with whose privileges the iniquity of our law has clothed him. Nor is it only our humbler countrywomen who have this cause of complaint; there are those to think of whose position is yet more painful—women of skill, and of accomplishments most admirable, as well as of industry above all praise—artists and authors, fitted to delight and instruct us by their works, and who are exposed to the hazards which I have faintly endeavoured to describe. From the tyranny of the law, and of him whom the law arms with the power of oppressing, they have no means of escape, unless they would pass the line that separates duty from guilt, and, even then, if thus defied, the husband cannot loosen the bond that ties them, unless he has a fortune sufficient to undergo the costs of the Consistorial Court, and afterwards of both Houses of Parliament. But for the wife there is no such remedy, even if she had the means of paying its expenses; while the husband may pass the bounds of the line I have referred to as freely as he may do any perfectly indifferent and innocent act, and the wife has no power of obtaining redress, much less of dissolving the tie, become now an intolerable burden. My noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst) last Session gave me a kind of pledge that he would apply his practised skill, his experienced understanding, to provide a remedy for evils so universally confessed. If I thought that he might after the recess redeem this pledge, it would be an unspeakable comfort to me; and if my present appeal to him is attended with this result, I shall feel satisfied that the petition of our countrywomen has not been intrusted to me in vain.

COUNTY COURTS.
LORD BROUGHAMbegged leave to repeat the expression of his thanks to his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) and the other members—his (Lord Brougham's) colleagues of the Statute Law Commission—for the manner in which they had examined his Religious Liberty Bill of last Session, postponed in order to undergo that examination. The result had been their proposing three Bills to repeal the statutes, or parts of statutes inconsistent with religious liberty, respecting the propriety of repealing which no question could arise. The objectionable, and, in some instances, obsolete enactments were fifteen in number, and the three Bills which he had presented to their Lordships repealed all these, including the penal clauses, hardly ever enforced, but which he had likened to torpid snakes, ready to be warmed at any time into noxious life by evil passions or misguided zeal. But of the 104 others, which his Bill of last year proposed to repeal, many could raise no more serious question than the fifteen—and the Commissioners had not at all considered that many more of them should be passed over. He wished once more to press upon his noble Friends opposite, and especially his noble and learned Friend, the great subject of law taxes, especially those affecting the County Courts. When he so often renewed his demands for the removal of this grievance, and trusted to the effects of reiterated attempts, of often times repeated blows—reminding them of the well-known line—
"Gutta cavat lapidem non vi, sed sæpe cadendo,"
he intended nothing like a comparison of his noble Friends to stocks and stones, long as they took to be affected by his feeble efforts—it was applying to himself the non vis, and not to his noble Friends the lapidem. However, he trusted that at length he might hope to find he had made some little impression upon them. The subject was of incalculable importance, and one in which the country took the greatest interest.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he would not renew his promise that it should be done, for it had already been done by the Bill which he had presented to their Lordships on Tuesday last, but without stating the nature of its provisions. It contained, among other things, the part required for the relief of the suitor in the

123
County Courts, but, of course, in the usual form of a suggestion to the other House, where the money part of the measure must originate.

THE TWENTIETH REPORT OF THE INSPECTORS OF PRISONS.
THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY,in rising to bring under the attention of the House the Twentieth Report of the Inspectors of Prisons, said, that in these days, when so much stir was being made about the reformation of criminals, their Lordships were bound to take all possible care that our prisons and houses of correction were made as effective as possible for the reform of the persons detained in them. If, however, many of the prisons throughout the country were to continue in the state in which they now were, not only with respect to sanitary considerations, but likewise as to moral considerations, prisoners would issue forth from them in worse bodily health and in a more degraded condition morally than they were when they entered within their walls. It would, however, be found that, in many of these institutions, not only were the prisoners injured in health by the defective prison arrangements, but that they were greatly demoralised by their confinement. The first Report with which he would trouble their Lordships, was the Report of a most intelligent inspector, Mr. Perry, on the county gaol and house of correction at Brecon. Mr. Perry said—
"No steps whatever have been taken to remedy the demoralising evils, or to avoid the habitual violations of the law which have been so often alluded to in my reports as occurring in this prison from the very inadequate cell accommodation. There is not a single night in the year in which a large number of male prisoners are not lodged two in a cell, and even two in a
bed, and this, too, in defiance of repeated remonstrances from Secretaries of State."
The inspector then went to Carnarvon, and said of the county gaol and house of correction there—
"No change whatever having been made in this ill-constructed prison since the date of the last report, the numerous evils complained of in former reports remain in full force. Two male prisoners are constantly put in cells not large enough or airy enough for one; the palliation of this violation of the law being, that it would be impossible to put a third prisoner into them. The debtors still occupy a day-room, so placed as to admit of their obtaining opportunities of seeing and conversing with the female prisoners and officers."
124
The next county gaol was that at Cardiff—
"As the number of cells for male prisoners is only thirty, and those for females twenty-five, and as the number of prisoners in confinement at one time has amounted to eighty-five males and forty-one females, and even the average daily number to fifty-five males and twenty-eight females, nothing need be added to prove the inadequacy of the accommodation to meet the continual demand for room."
The inspector added—
"The prisoners were all associated together in the most demoralising manner, without any kind of employment; the law, which requires that prisoners not sentenced to hard labour shall be provided with labour not severe, being entirely disregarded, as well as that which requires that untried prisoners should be employed if they desire it. The untried prisoners being questioned by me, several of them declared that they would rather be employed than idle, but that nothing was given them to do. Another manner in which the provisions of the law are disregarded in this prison is in the putting together of untried and convicted prisoners. The excuse alleged for this is the want of room. This may sometimes be alleged with more reason than on the day of my visit, when I pointed out how it might easily have been avoided."
There could be no hardship greater upon innocent persons, and no practice more demoralising than putting together the tried and untried prisoners. [A noble LORD: It is against the law.] The inspector reported to that effect, but no attention was paid to his representations. Then, if he referred to New Radnor, he found the following remarks upon the borough gaol and house of correction at that place—
"This gaol was in a very filthy condition at the time of my last inspection, which I was the more sorry to see as the keeper had promised me at my previous visit that it should never again be in the dirty state I then witnessed. There were no prisoners in confinement, but two donkeys and a large hog were occupying the airing yard, which afforded the plainest proof that it was their ordidinary place of residence, although it was intimated to me that they had only been there for a few minutes. One of the two cells was used as a store-room for onions and all kinds of lumber. The cells were very dirty, the iron bedsteads in a ruinous state from rust and neglect, and the scanty allowance of bedding was so filthy and neglected that a cloud of dust was raised in moving it for my inspection. Having been constantly assured by the keeper that no prisoner is ever retained in this prison after he has been before a magistrate, but that all are immediately, removed to Presteign—a statement which seemed to be confirmed by the annual returns made to me, in which the number of prisoners committed for trial and of those summarily convicted is stated as nil—I have been much surprised to

125
learn from other sources of information that cases have occurred in the last year of persons summarily convicted having been retained there during an imprisonment of fourteen days, and that during the time comprehended in returns of the kind alluded to one prisoner at least has been there for two months."
So much for Wales. The inspector then passed to the city of Exeter, where he reported as follows, relative to the city gaol arid house of correction there—
"The prisoners, on being questioned, made no complaints. None of them were employed in any manner, with the exception of one man who was working at a hard-labour crank, but all were herded together, without any supervision, in small day-rooms, as described in every report upon this prison for many years past. In addition to the ordinary objections to this inappropriate prison, it may be mentioned that, the numbers confined being unusually high at the time of my visit, sleeping cells intended for only one prisoner contained no less than four. If the object and end of imprisonment were to foster and encourage the growth of crime, it would be difficult to invent a more efficacious system than that which prevails in this prison, and this within a few minutes' walk of one of the best prisons in the kingdom—the Devon County Gaol—in which there is sufficient room to receive all the prisoners of the borough, and where the appliances of a wholesome discipline might be extended to them, in place of the demoralising influences to which they are now exposed. As there is no prospect of this prison being rebuilt, and as the rebuilding of it would only involve a useless waste of money, when the prisoners could be better and more cheaply accommodated at the county gaol, it is my duty to repeat the recommendation so often made before, that terms should be made with the county magistrates for the reception there of the borough prisoners."
If the object were to foster and encourage the growth of crime it could scarcely be accomplished with greater certainty. He would not detain their Lordships by the reports upon the borough gaols of Bradninch and Dartmouth, and the last report he would advert to referred to that abomination the county gaol of Aberystwith. Many complaints had been made of its unfitness for a gaol, and special representations had been made to the Secretary of State, but these representations and the repeated remarks of the Recorder were quite disregarded. Notwithstanding its deficiencies, however, prisoners were detained in it for a great length of time, instead of being sent, as they should be, to the county gaol of Cardigan. One case had occurred in which a prisoner had remained in this pound for twelve months. The inspector said—
"At the time of my last inspection, on the 13th of October, the only person in confinement was
126
Sophia Jones, a mad woman, put there for safe custody, on account of her insanity, without any warrant or order of court charging her with the commission of any offence. Upon inquiry I found that this was not the only instance of the kind, two other cases having occurred since my last inspection of the prison in which it had been used by the borough as a lunatic asylum."
He could only bring these facts before their Lordships in the hope that the subject might attract the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, through whose great authority and influence a remedy for such abuses might be speedily brought about. If he were in order, he should move—
"That an humble Address he presented to Her Majesty for Copy of any Communication between the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Inspectors of Prisons with respect to the Twentieth Report of the Inspectors of Prisons."
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the House must be very much obliged to the noble Earl for having directed its attention to an object of so much importance. He was afraid, however, that in hardly any of these cafes had the Secretary of State for the Home Department the power of applying a remedy. He had no doubt, however, that the right hon. Gentleman would make the strongest appeal to the justices, and that he would exercise, as far as possible, the limited degree of power which he possessed to remedy these abuses. He knew that it was his right hon. Friend's intention to bring these complaints before the proper authority, but he was afraid the answer to any Motion for correspondence would be nil, since the Report had only been presented a few days ago. His noble Friend was doing a great public service by bringing his attention to bear upon these cases where the local authorities neglected their duty. If objections were felt, and perhaps properly felt, to giving greater power to a centralised authority, the only remedy was to give the greatest publicity to those cases where the local authorities failed to perform their duty.
THE EARL OF DEVONmade a few observations, which were inaudible.
LORD PANMUREsaid, that they ought to feel grateful to the noble Earl for bringing the subject under their consideration. He wished, however, to observe that they managed these matters in Scotland much better than in England; the machinery they had there was better than here. In Scotland they had not only inspectors of Prisons, but in every county there was a local board responsible to a

127
central board at Edinburgh; which board was again responsible to the Secretary of State, to whom a final power was given by the Legislature. The result of this arrangement was, that the prisons in Scotland, from being previously in the worst possible state, were now in a much more improved state than in England.
Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.

LIBRARY OF THE LATE LORD TRURO.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEthen rose to call the attention of the House to a letter he had received from Lady Truro. The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I am desirous, before the House shall separate for the holidays, to make a communication to your Lordships, which you will no doubt hear with much satisfaction. I allude to a letter which I have received from Lady Truro, the widow of our late noble and learned Friend, who for several years sat in this House, both as Speaker and Lord Chancellor. The terms of that letter I shall, with your Lordships' permission, read to the House—
"Eaton Square, 6th March, 1856.
"My dear Lord,—Lord Truro left a Library of Law Books, a Collection made during many Years with great Care. It is my Wish, in honour of his Memory and in remembrance of his legal Attainments, this Library should be preserved, and at the same Time be rendered useful to those who were familiar with his last Labours.
"Allow me therefore to request your Lordship to offer this Library to the House of Lords, trusting that their Lordships will, if they do me the Honour to accept it, direct it to be placed as most effectually to secure the Objects I have in view.
"I am, my dear Lord,
"With high Esteem,
"Yours very sincerely,
"AUGUSTA E. TRURO.
"The Marquess of Lansdowne."
My Lords, if I am asked, as it is probable I shall be, how it comes that this distinguished Lady has made me the channel through which this offer should be conveyed to your Lordships, I am desirous of making a few observations. I can only say, I must presume that it is owing to the circumstance of my having been for several years the colleague of that distinguished, learned, and noble Lord. During the time the late noble and learned Lord presided on the woolsack I was the leader in this House, though not certainly in another sense, of those with whom he was then politically connected. In that capacity I can do no other than bear the strongest testimony to the great impartiality, the great wisdom,
128
and the great justice which characterised him while he presided in this House. My Lords, I am also anxious to bear my testimony to that part of his character with which I became more particularly cognisant—I allude to that great spirit of justice and fair play with which he administered the patronage which was incidental to his high office, and so the careful discrimination with which he selected the persons to whom it devolved upon him to extend the favour of the Crown. To that portion of his character I am as competent to speak as any man; but there is another portion of his career of which I can only speak upon the authority of others. I allude to that portion of his character which undoubtedly gives the greatest value to the splendid donation which his widow is now prepared to make to this House. I believe I shall be supported by the authority of all those most competent to judge upon the matter when I say, that from universal report I have always learned that Lord Truro was, both as a lawyer and a Judge, one of the most painstaking, one of the most conscientious, one of the most industrious of men, whether we view him as regards the interests of his client while practicing as an advocate at the bar, or as regards the still larger interests of public justice while sitting as a Judge upon the bench. He never spared himself any trouble, and he felt that it was his duty to examine thoroughly into all the facts of the case with the view of arriving at a just appreciation of its character. I allude to these circumstances because I know I shall be borne out in the statement I have made by the testimony of those whose authority and experience are much greater than mine. Indeed, it is only within these few days that I received the authority of a most celebrated and eminent lawyer, who was examined before a Committee of this House, and who had practised before the late noble and learned Lord, and who stated that a more painstaking, industrious, and impartial Judge had never sat upon the bench. Now, I say that that fact bears particularly upon the value of the donation which Lady Truro has offered to make to us, because, in addition to, no doubt, the very valuable and extensive law library which Lady Truro is desirous of placing at our disposal. I am informed that many of those books have been largely commented upon, and contain extensive manuscript notes in the late noble and learned Lord's handwriting. Your Lordships

129
will no doubt agree with me in thinking, that this circumstance adds great value to the law library which is to be placed under your Lordships' roof. I will add no more to the statements I have made, because I know that I can refer to the unanimous testimony of others as to the merits of Lord Truro. If your Lordships will, therefore, permit this letter to be laid upon your Lordships' table with the view of referring that same letter, and the subject to which it refers, to the Library Committee, for the purpose of carrying into effect Lady Truro's wish and intention, I shall now conclude with a Motion to that effect.
LORD LYNDHURST: My Lords, I cannot resist this opportunity of adding my thanks with those of the noble Marquess to Lady Truro, for the valuable donation she proposes to make to this House. I know myself very well, that the late Lord Truro never spared any trouble or expense in his endeavour to complete his law library. The donation will be the more valuable, inasmuch as the library of this House, though extensive, is far from being perfect in this branch of learning. Nor can I let this opportunity pass, notwithstanding the eulogium expressed by the noble Marquess upon the merits of the late Lord Truro, without saying a few words. The late noble and learned Lord was profoundly learned in the law. He was a ripe and full scholar. But notwithstanding his extensive learning, in every case of any importance that came before him, either as an advocate at the bar or as a judge upon the bench, he was always influenced by a conscientious desire of performing his strict duty in the relative position in which he stood—he always paid the greatest care, attention, and indeed I might almost say unexampled industry, in the investigation of every fact. My Lords, Lord Truro was not originally educated for the bar. He began life as a solicitor; but conscious of his powers, and with a proper and laudable ambition, he felt desirous of leaving the profession in which he then moved, to attach himself to the superior branch of that profession. He was accordingly called to the bar. He soon acquired distinction, not only on the western circuit, but also in London. There was one curious fact connected with Lord Truro, which I am desirous of mentioning. The late noble and learned Lord had always experienced a great difficulty in pronouncing
130
certain words. Now, I have this fact from his Lordship's own lips. He had a great impediment which rendered it almost impossible for him to utter certain words. He, however, overcame this difficulty with that characteristic perseverance and ingenuity which corresponded with his general disposition. He framed, in the first instance, a list of words which he found it difficult to utter; and in the next, as many synonymes as he could collect; and when one of those words arose in his speech, and which he found it difficult to give utterance to, he on the moment dismissed it, and substituted a synonyme; and it is most remarkable that so great was the address and readiness with which he effected this change, that no interruption whatever took place in his discourse, nor could any person discover the infirmity under which he was labouring, unless he had been previously informed of the fact. After the usual time, the noble and learned Lord was created a serjeant-at-law, whereby he was placed at the head of his circuit, and also became a leader of the Court of Common Pleas. From that time, beyond all dispute, he had the supreme command of his circuit as well as of the Common Pleas, and in every case before either of these tribunals there was always a fierce competition amongst the suitors, who should obtain the advantage of his assistance as their counsel. I think it was in 1839 that he became Solicitor General, and in a year or two afterwards was appointed Attorney General. My Lords, I am told—for I was not a Member of the House at that time—that in every argument or discussion in respect to any question of law relating to constitutional privilege in the House of Commons, the late Lord Truro was remarkable for the clearness, great force, and extent of learning which he displayed. I remember the late Sir Robert Peel, who was perhaps as good a judge of merit as any man of his day, stating to me on more than one occasion the very high opinion which he entertained, in respect to questions to which I referred, of the talents and attainments of Lord Truro, and more particularly in respect to the manner in which he treated that most important question which had agitated the other House of Parliament for some time—I mean the question of privilege. When the Lord Chief Justice Tindal died, the late Lord Truro was raised to the bench in the Court of Common Pleas, and in about four or

131
five years afterwards he was placed upon the woolsack as Lord Chancellor of England. I think I may venture to say, in confirmation of what the noble Marquess has stated, that whether we view the late noble Lord as presiding in a court of common law, or in a court of equity—with which he was not so familiar as with questions of common law—he displayed the greatest patience, the greatest acuteness of intellect, and the greatest impartiality that it was possible to display in the administration of justice. Such was his care and circumspection in the preparation of the judgments delivered by him, both in the courts of common law or in equity, that they have been always considered master-pieces of learning and argumentative disquisition. My Lords, I can also state that the late Lord Truro was most disinterested in respect to pecuniary matters. It was very usual for him, when any case of special importance was entrusted to his care, to direct his clerk not to accept any other brief with reference to pecuniary emoluments, until he had made himself completely the master of the complicated questions involved in the particular case which he was considering. A remarkable instance of his disinterestedness occurred in reference to one particular case in which an intimate friend of his was concerned. He travelled to the uttermost part of England, in order to conduct the case for his friend, and refused to receive any remuneration for his time and trouble. His conduct in public life is before the House. He was anxious and zealous in the cause of justice, and he was also equally anxious to reform, as much as possible, what was amiss in the laws of the country. I am authorised, from the intimate acquaintance I have had with him, to say that he was a fast friend to the principles of the constitution. He was very candid and impartial in discussion. He was kind-hearted, benevolent, and generous, and kind to all around him. He bore a long and painful illness with great patience and fortitude, and, conscious that he had not lived in vain, he met his end with calmness and resignation. I trust, my Lords, I have not deviated from the question before the House, in addressing these few words to your Lordships upon the career and character of an able and an eminent man—one who not long since occupied so distinguished a position in your Lordship's House.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I feel
132
that nothing which I can say will add to the universal feeling of respect and sympathy which the noble Marquess has excited, and which the noble and learned Lord who just addressed us has confirmed. I merely rise to exclude an inference from my silence, that I do not acquiesce in what has been said by those noble Lords. Lord Truro, whom I was proud to number among my friends, was, I verily believe, one of the most conscientious men that ever lived. I never knew a man so entirely devoted to the interests of justice as Lord Truro; and I must add one observation to what I has fallen from my noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst), that, although Lord Truro was comparatively new to the doctrines of equity when he became Lord Chancellor, he devoted himself with characteristic assiduity to make himself master of the principles which guide the proceedings of courts of equity. He never allowed a veil to be cast, as it were, over his words, in order to conceal any imperfection, but always exposed his ignorance upon any particular subject, so that he might sift the matter to the bottom and make himself master of it before coming to a decision. There is one other point to which I must allude. Although my late noble and learned Friend was not so familiar with the doctrines of equity as with those of common law, yet it must be remembered that it is to him, or to his chancellorship, that we owe the great reforms which were carried out immediately after he quitted the woolsack. He issued the great Chancery Commission which led to those reforms; and, although I do not wish in the least degree to detract from the merits of my noble and learned Friend (Lord St. Leonards) under whose chancellorship the reforms to which I refer were I carried into effect, yet it was during Lord Truro's tenure of office that they were introduced. He devoted himself eagerly to the reform of the Court of Chancery; with the assiduity, patience, and perseverance which characterised him, he laboured to accomplish those reforms which have happily since been carried out.
EARL GREY: I rise to mention a circumstance in confirmation of what has fallen from the noble and learned Lord (Lord Lyndhurst) as to the remarkable disinterestedness which distinguished the late Lord Truro. The noble and learned Lord has referred to the great pains and ability displayed in the other House by Lord Truro, upon the celebrated occasion

133
of the question of privilege respecting the printing of papers. I had the honour, as a Member of that House, to he placed in the chair of the Committee to which it was referred, to consider the course which the House should follow; and I can say that, although I was in the chair of the Committee, the labour of conducting the investigation fell entirely upon Lord Truro, who devoted himself to the subject with an ability which it is impossible for me to describe; and I was told at the time, not by Lord Truro—but I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of my information—that in order to enable him to devote his whole energies to that task of public utility for which he received no pecuniary remuneration, he returned a very large number of briefs which had been before handed to him and which would have produced him considerable remuneration. I cannot but think that is a devotion to a sense of public duty which very few men indeed would have displayed. I thought it was a circumstance so honourable to Lord Truro, that when the noble and learned Lord opposite mentioned the subject, I thought it was my duty to state it to the House.
THE EARL OF DERBY: It would be a simple impertinence on my part if I were to add anything to what has been said, or to give any opinion upon the merits of the noble and learned Lord whose loss we so much deplore, after the statements we have heard from those who were better acquainted with those merits than the humble individual who now addresses your Lordships; and I only rise for the purpose of adverting for a moment to the Motion with which the noble Marquess concluded his observations. Of course, there is not, there cannot be, any difference of opinion as to the great value of and interest attaching to the gift which Lady Truro has so gracefully and liberally offered to be stow upon the country; but the Motion of the noble Marquess was simply to refer the letter to the Library Committee for them to consider what measures should be adopted to carry out the wishes of the noble lady, and it occurred to me that it might appear somewhat ungracious if, in making a motion of this description on such an occasion, there was no acknowledgment on the part of the House of the feelings entertained by it. I can only suppose the omission has arisen from some form of the House with which I am unacquainted; but, if that be not the case, I think it is an omission which should be supplied, and that
134
the acknowledgments of the House should be conveyed to that distinguished lady. If any forms exist which cannot be waved, then I think it should be known to be public that it is those forms which constitute the obstacle to the expression of those acknowledgments which might naturally be expected for a donation so valuable and so liberal. I would only suggest, if my supposition be wrong, that the Motion should be amended so as to convey those feelings of gratitude which the House must entertain for so graceful a donation.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: The reason why I did not propose to include in the Motion any acknowledgment to Lady Truro was not that I am aware of any positive rule on the subject, but because there is no precedent for such a course. It had occurred to me that the object would be attained by expressing those acknowledgments in the Report of the Committee, which, upon presentation, could be adopted by the House. At the same time, certainly see no reason why a precedent should not be created in the present instance. No doubt such an acknowledgment on the part of the House would be gratifying to the feelings of Lady Truro, and perhaps the Motion might be worded so as to express that acknowledgment.
LORD LYNDHURST: I understand that the Library Committee exchange with the library at Paris and receive books from the United States, and if they can exchange books in this way they can accept them as a gift.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: Perhaps, after all, it will be as well to leave the subject to the Committee. They can hardly make any suggestion in their Report without expressing to Lady Truro an acknowledgment of the gift, and that acknowledgment will, I dare say, be readily adopted by this House.
Ordered that the said Letter and the Subject thereof be referred to the Select Committee on the Library of the House, for the Purpose of carrying into effect Lady Truro's Wishes and Intentions.

LIMITED LIABILITY.
LORD MONTEAGLE,in moving for returns of Joint Stock Companies who have obtained certificates of complete registration under the Act of last year, said, that it appeared that Parliament was invited to consider two Bills with regard to the law of partnership which had been lately

135
introduced into the other House. They were now approaching Easter, and he should like to know whether the Government would endeavour to induce this House to pass those two Bills in the same unreasonable manner in which they were compelled to pass the Act of last year—namely, at so late a period of the Session that it was wholly impossible for the House to consider the subject with advantage? Last year it was the opinion of many of their Lordships that the subject was so difficult and so important as to deserve consideration in a Select Committee; but the Government had rejected that proposition. Would his noble Friend at the head of the Board of Trade agree to the appointment of a Select Committee when Parliament resumed its sittings after Easter? He made the proposition on the present occasion advisedly. Should the Bills to which he alluded come before their Lordships late in the Session, and the proposition for a Committee then be renewed, let it not be said that the proposal for a Select Committee then made was for the purpose of impeding their progress, such an accusation could not be justly made when it was recollected that he now prayed the Government thus early in the Session to allow an inquiry to take place. It might be said that there had already been a Commission on the subject, and that the propositions of the Government were based on the Report of that Commission; this was, however, the very contrary to the fact, the recommendations of the Commission having been most ungraciously cast aside. It was for their Lordships to take the question into their own hands: this House, with the legal information at its command, was, in his opinion, a fit and proper tribunal to consider what ought to be done upon a subject of such extreme importance as part of the commercial law of this country. As we were now in all probability approaching a time of peace, the very difficult commercial contingencies consequent upon peace rendered caution on the part of the Legislature more important than ever. We might in all probability expect a considerable return of gold, a fall in the rate of discount, and an excitement of all speculative actions. That great and sagacious man, the Emperor of the French, had felt this anticipation, and had cautioned his people against the difficulties which would be consequent on the peace, and might arise under the commandite
136
and partnership law of France. That which the Emperor denounced as a danger the proposed measures tended to stimulate. It might perhaps be said that no evil consequences had as yet arisen from the Bill of last Session. This proved nothing, as the circumstances of the times were peculiar, money was scarce, the rate of discount high, speculations were thereby checked, but peace would give rise to wild commercial enterprise and introduce a state of things widely different from that which had existed since the passing of the last Act, and, if a fever of speculation set in, he should examine with interest and anxiety the returns laid before their Lordships next year, exhibiting the number of bubble companies formed, if Parliament were so inconsiderate as to sanction this measure. But even the proceedings of the last year were not unimportant. If their Lordships were to turn their attention to the new projects started, they would see what absurd and rash schemes some parties were willing and ready to embark in. In the year of grace 1856 it was proposed to have a large joint-stock company, to be called the Universal Purveying Company, for the manufacture and sale of all descriptions of food, for the use of a metropolis containing two millions; another company was to be called a Laundry Company, and others had designations such as the Medicine Compounding Company, the Telescopic Fire-escape Company, the National Newspaper League Company. There were many others, some of which were of the most preposterous character. [The Duke of ARGYLL: Who is to judge of that?] Why, he took it to be a matter of principle that limited liability ought not to be granted for any commercial enterprise unless it could be shown that the enterprise was in its nature useful, and also that it was one which could not be carried out without the concession of that privilege. Upon this principle it was that the Board of Trade decided on charters to be granted to companies, and the Legislature determined on the privileges occasionally conferred by special Acts of Parliament. Such concessions ought never to be made till the propriety of conferring those privileges had first been carefully examined, and had in the judgment of an impartial authority been made manifest. The principle which the noble Duke seemed to advocate—namely, that the privilege of limited liability should be granted to every set

137
of individuals, who at their own will and pleasure chose to establish any commercial enterprise whatever—appeared to be one of a most dangerous character, wholly unknown to the law of England, and had, indeed, been rejected by his own Government when they framed their Bill last year. It was a principle which would excite speculation and gambling, and all that the laws had hitherto done to repress those practices would become inoperative by reason of the Bills now before Parliament. If the Noble Duke (Argyll) was disposed to reject this statement, he could refer to an authority which, as an economist and a Scotsman, he was bound to respect. It was the authority of Mr. McCulloch. What were the observations of that able writer on the former Bill: "you may prevent the formation of such companies, but you cannot prevent them, when formed, from degenerating into mere swindling engines." Such were the words of Mr. McCulloch in his last edition of the Commercial Dictionary, and he went further, and crushed to atoms that fallacy that would include in the principles of Free Trade the power to establish commercial companies with limited liability. He would conclude by reading the following extract from Mr. McCulloch, which he recommended to the attention of the noble Duke and the House—
"It was said that it was part and parcel of the principle of Free Trade, and that those who opposed it were friends to monopoly. To make any lengthened statement in reply to this, would be if possible, more absurd than the statement itself. The opponents of limited liability never said that A should not engage in this, or B in that employment. But they said 'you may undertake whatever you please, but you must abide by the result of that undertaking. You are, under no circumstances, to be allowed to get rid of the consequences of your own actions. If on the one hand you make large profits, you may use or abuse them as you please; but if on the other hand your speculation fails, and you incur debts, you must either pay them or become a bankrupt. These, which are the principles of plain common sense, are consistent alike with expediency and justice.' "
He wished now to ask his noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade whether he had any objection to appoint a Committee to consider this subject, after Easter? or, if not, whether he would at least give a pledge that the House should not be called upon at the close of the present Session, when the Peers were not in attendance, to pass a measure of this kind through the House? He would conclude by moving, pro formâ—
138
"That there be laid before the House Returns of the Number of Joint Sock Companies formed, or which have obtained Certificates of Complete Registration, under the Limited Liability Act, 1855, and of the Number of Applications not completed under the Act.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, there could be no possible objection to give the returns moved for by the noble Lord, as they had already been laid before the other House of Parliament. With respect to the questions put to him by the noble Lord—of which questions he had received no previous notice—he must say that it was highly inconvenient that these sort of discussions should be raised in their Lordships' House on measures in progress through the House of Commons. The noble Lord desired that their Lordships should not be urged to go into a discussion on the measure he had referred to at a late period of the Session. All he could say was, that he believed there was every reason to suppose that the measure would be brought up to their Lordships in good time, and if not, he should not wish to press it upon their Lordships' attention against their will, and after all, it would always be in their Lordships' power to deal with it as they might think fit. With regard to the appointment of a Select Committee, he thought it was the most inconvenient and the most extraordinary proceeding ever proposed, that one House should appoint a Committee to inquire into the details of a Bill under the consideration of the other House. That was evidently the intention of the noble Lord, for he stated that it would be no answer to say that there had been already a Commission of Inquiry; for that Commission dealt with the principle of limited liability and the law of partnership, whereas what was now wanted was an inquiry respecting a measure now before the other House of Parliament. This was a step entirely new and unprecedented, as the proper time for dealing with the question would be when the Bill was before their Lordships' House. He could not, indeed, expect to derive much advantage from discussing the details of the Bill with the noble Lord, who had declared himself hostile to every principle of it. The Bill of last year had been approved of by both Houses of Parliament, and further experience had only convinced him of the folly of the system of paternal legislation, which sought to guard people against the consequences of their own imprudence. They should leave men to the protection of the spirit of prudence

139
implanted in their own breasts, and not seek to apply legislative securities, as substitutes for individual caution, which experience proved to be utterly useless, and indeed mischievous, as leading them to a fallacious confidence that the State was doing that for them which they alone could efficiently do for themselves. He could not consent to the appointment of the Committee, but he had no reason to doubt that ample time would be allowed for the consideration of the measure.
LORD OVERSTONEconsidered that the proposal of the noble Lord was most reasonable, that a question of such importance should be subjected to a preliminary inquiry before a Select Committee. The course of legislation which had been pursued on this subject was, in his mind, much more unreasonable and extraordinary than would be the preliminary inquiry to which the noble Lord objected. He would call their Lordships' attention to what had been done. Some time since the Government determined to issue a Commission to inquire into the law of partnership. The Commission in due time made their Report, and the Government introduced a Bill framed directly in the teeth of the recommendations of the Commission, and directly in the teeth of the evidence taken before them—even of those witnesses upon whose evidence the minority in the Commission rested their case. Limited liability, without accompanying safeguards, was not only in opposition to the Report and to all the evidence before the Commission, but in opposition also to the practice of all other countries into which the principle of limited liability had been introduced. Then, how was the measure of the Government introduced? He was absent at the time, but he was informed that it was carried through their Lordships' House during the last three days of the Session, without any sufficient opportunity being afforded for its discussion, and without the support of a single Peer who was not connected with the Government. [Cries of "Hear, hear!" and "No, no!"] Be that as it might, he would ask their Lordships to consider the protests that had been entered on their Lordships' Journals, and to judge whether a measure affecting such important interests ought to have been pressed under such circumstances and with such undue haste. If the Government had adopted the suggestion of withdrawing the Bill for further consideration, they would at least have
140
avoided the discredit of the subsequent proceedings. The measure was passed at the very end of the Session, and the very first day of the next Session the Government were obliged to announce that they intended to repeal this Bill and to introduce another. Six weeks had scarcely elapsed before the new Bill had been again withdrawn, and the representative of the Government in the department charged with this measure had declared that he must take the Easter vacation to consider in what form he would again introduce the measure. He made those observations under feelings different from those which operated upon the majority of their Lordships. It had been his fate to have passed the greater portion of his life in the active pursuits of trade and under the influence of the constant oscillations of commercial credit. On behalf of the interests of those engaged in trade and commerce, he protested against a subject of such vast importance being so lightly and inconsiderately dealt with. He said, "a subject of such vast importance," for he believed that in magnitude few questions of internal policy could be compared with it. If the Government were determined to alter the ancient principles of law, upon which all the commercial habits of the country had been established, they should at least have given the matter the most careful and deliberate consideration in the Cabinet, and come before Parliament with a measure by which they were prepared to stand or fall. It was not a question of subordinate importance; the views of the Government respecting it ought to be well considered, and, when once adopted, they should be consistently maintained. He could not withhold his surprise that the allusion of the noble Baron (Lord Monteagle) to the schemes which had been projected under the change of law should have been met with laughter on the part of the Government, Those schemes were but premonitory symptoms—the shadows of coming events; they are seed cast into the ground, which will remain dormant during a period of war expenditure and adverse exchanges. But let peace arrive, and the precious metals return to this country with as strong a tide as they were now flowing out, and the Government, instead of going into the market as borrowers, appear before the country with a surplus revenue, then these concerns will germinate and fructify, and the commercial world, like Nature under a

141
poisoned atmosphere, will teem with all monstrous things. When he found a reference to such symptoms as these met with ridicule, instead of with thoughtfulness and apprehension, he confessed he could not look without some alarm to the fate of our commercial interests under the proposed system of legislation. The history of our commercial and monetary progress during the last thirty years was full of instructive lessons, if we would only read them aright. He well remembered the catastrophe of 1825, when Mr. Huskisson said we were within a few hours of a state of barter; but he had no hesitation in saying that if at that time a Bill like that which the Government had now introduced had been law, a state of things would have been produced in which even that degree of confidence which is requisite for purposes of barter would have been destroyed, and all the ordinary transactions of trade between man and man would have been suspended. From 1825 to the present time this country had gone through a series of commercial crises; but if the President of the Board of Trade would examine the history of those crises, he would find that at each successive period the mischief and disturbance to trade and commerce had been continually decreasing. And why? Because we had from time to time amended our commercial legislation and the laws affecting our monetary system, with the view of applying gradual and judicious restraint to the spirit of speculation and the undue extension of credit. The result had been, that during the last six months, this country had gone through a drain of the precious metals the most severe, every intelligent and well-informed man would admit, which had been experienced in the memory of any living person. The country was now emerging from that crisis with alt its commercial and trading operations in a stable, sound, and satisfactory condition. It was a phenomenon, let him say, which it was the duty of Her Majesty's Government, and more especially the department of the Board of Trade, to understand. But what was the simple explanation of this phenomenon? Why, that since 1825 all our legislation had been based on the principle laid down by Mr. Huskisson when he said that the mischief of the grand crisis of that year arose from undue extension of credit and undue stimulus to a dangerous spirit of speculation, and that legislation should be directed to the gradual correction of
142
that evil. The ground of objection to the system of legislation now proposed was, that it reversed the principle from which all past beneficial results had accrued. This law of limited liability had a tendency to intensify the spirit of credit, and stir up the terrible demon of speculation. We saw some indistinct symptoms of this result already; but these were only the first footsteps of the advancing giant, to be hereafter developed in his full and formidable proportions. We were now asked to apply abstract principles of a most dangerous character to a complicated state of society, without due discrimination or those precautionary accompaniments which a proper respect for practical experience would dictate. The principle which it was now sought to introduce was the principle of saying, "You shall borrow without being obliged to repay; you shall take another man's goods without being compelled under all circumstances to return an equivalent." If their Lordships looked back into the ancient laws of this country, they would find that what we now call "credit" was described by our ancestors in its true terms, as borrowing another man's goods. Let it not be supposed that this is a simple question between A and B, between the borrower and the lender, and that these parties may be safely left to adjust the terms of their mutual relation to each other. The question was one of much wider import, and it involved much more extensive consequences. It necessarily affected the interests and well-being of the whole trading community. The introduction of concerns based upon the proposed principle, must tend to deteriorate the general tone of our commercial morality; it must relax the restraints and sharpen the stimulants to credit and speculation, upon the due equipoise of which depends the solidity and safety of the commercial system; it must, for the same reason, tend to produce more violent fluctuations in the range of prices, and to unsettle the steady, regular course of trading operations. It would foment the spirit of excessive enterprise during periods of prosperity and increasing confidence; and when the inevitable collapse took place it would render the calamitous results more widespread and more intense. Limited liability would generate dangerous concerns during the favourable season of growing confidence; but when the inevitable change and consequent pressure occurred, those concerns would break down simultaneously, and, by their fall,

143
extend alarm and greatly increase the destruction of confidence. In 1823 and 1824, the Joint Stock Companies, with a small amount of paid-up capital, were the ready instruments through which speculation spread through the community the poison of blind confidence and gambling operations; and in the following year, 1825, these same companies, by their simultaneous collapse and total rottenness, increased the panic and intensified the destruction of that confidence out of which they had sprung. Moreover, by combining strict limitation of risks with vague and undefined hopes of profit, it would force a gambling principle into the commercial world, and make trade more like a vast lottery wheel than that field of steady honesty and cautious enterprise which it ought to be the object of all our legislation to render it. The whole trading community must, in one way or other, feel the unfortunate effect of these tendencies; no prudence, no foresight, would altogether obviate this result—the whole commercial atmosphere would be poisoned, and all who breathe that atmosphere must be affected by it. The honest, steady, prudent tradesman would find himself irresistibly drawn from his course; drawn, as it were, into a dangerous whirlpool, in spite of all his efforts and his anxious desires to navigate his vessel in more tranquil waters, and through a safer track. For these reasons he must declare his serious protest against the principles of the proposed legislation. He believed it to be equally false in policy and in morality; and he was confident that a measure which was unsound in principle could never prove beneficial to the community. He asked the pardon of their Lordships for trespassing on their attention at greater length than he had intended; but he felt that he could not with propriety allow this discussion to close without deprecating the course which the Government had taken, and expressing his great regret that any resistance should be offered to the reasonable request that this subject should be referred to a preliminary examination by a Select Committee.
EARL GRANVILLE: I am quite sure that it is unnecessary for my noble Friend to make any apology for addressing your Lordships on a subject of this sort. I only regret, as he well knows, that since he has been a Member of the House, he has not taken a more active share in our debates, and I am almost reconciled to the warm and almost partisan feeling he has shown by
144
his having addressed your Lordships even upon a question with respect to which I have the misfortune to differ from him. I must decline to go now into the whole question of limited liability. I shall refrain from remarking upon the instances my noble Friend quoted to show the effects of limited liability, the crisis to which he referred having occurred under an exactly opposite state of the law. I shall not even ask him to explain how it can be contrary to Saxon morality to allow men to make what compacts they like between themselves, when they formerly possessed that power at common law, and it was taken from them by statutable enactments. It would be inconvenient to go into those questions in this thinly attended House; but there are one or two points to which I must advert. The noble Lord was not present at the end of last Session, but he alluded to the circumstances attending the passing of the Bill through this House. I admit that it was introduced at a very late period of the Session, and that, as a general rule, it is inconvenient that measures of importance should be discussed and carried within a few days of the prorogation; but I deny that there was no reason for taking that course last year with regard to this Bill. My noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade, following Mr. Cardwell, who had absolutely broken down under the difficulties attending the grants of charters of limited liability, had refused to grant any more of those charters; but companies continued to be formed and to apply for charters sanctioning their new schemes, some of which were of great public utility, the Government found that the other House of Parliament had decided by a large majority in favour of limited liability—and they felt themselves bound, under these circumstances, to introduce some course of legislation, if they could induce Parliament to sanction it. The noble Lord gave an exaggerated account of the state of the House, when he said that no Peers were present when the Bill was agreed to, except Members of the Government and noble Lords holding places connected with the Government.
LORD OVERSTONE: I said, that the only Peers who supported the Bill were those who were connected with the Government.
EARL GRANVILLE: When the House met—I am speaking of the occasion upon which the Bill passed through Committee—there were about sixty Peers present.

145
A long discussion took place—I spoke I do not know how often—and the Peers gradually left, as we went on repeating the same arguments one after another until a very late hour. It is, therefore, quite true, that very few Peers were present at the end of the debate; and I explained the state of the benches opposite, by saying that it was not caused by the difficulty of obtaining the attendance of Peers at that period of the Session, but by the unwillingness of a large portion of the Opposition to oppose a Bill which, in their hearts, they thought a good one. The fact that every single Peer belonging to the opposite side has now left the House, notwithstanding the notice which the noble Lord placed upon the paper, except one noble Lord who has taken his seat since last Session (Viscount Dungannon), shows that my explanation was correct. My noble Friend, with some warmth and injustice, has attacked the Government for having, as he says, thrown ridicule upon a most important statement made by the noble Lord who brought forward the subject. We threw no ridicule whatever upon it; but the noble Lord threw ridicule upon certain companies which had established themselves for commercial purposes under the new law. When persons have united themselves for certain commercial purposes, I do not think it is very justifiable for any Peer to characterise as unfit the objects for which they have associated themselves, and to create a prejudice against them. When the noble Lord mentioned the objects of one or two companies which had been formed, we merely remarked that there was nothing extraordinary in them. He mentioned, among others, a newspaper company—I do not know whether joint stock companies are good for carrying on a newspaper, but it certainly appeared to me to be most legitimate that people should avail themselves of that mode of enlightening the public. In no single way are the Government obnoxious to the remark that they have treated this subject in a spirit of levity. The whole question is this—whether the Government ought to pledge themselves to ask for an immediate Committee to inquire into this subject, and to give a pledge also as to the time when the Bill now before the other House shall be brought before your Lordships? I think the Government cannot be fairly charged with delay. The Bill was brought in on the first day of the Session; it has been read a second time,
146
and no opportunity has been omitted of pressing it forward. I happen to know this for a fact, having gone to the right hon. Gentleman who has the charge of this Bill to impress upon him the necessity of letting us have the Bill in this House as early as possible, in order that we may have an opportunity of discussing it. But, as to giving a pledge that the Bill shall be in this House by a particular day, that would only be to offer encouragement to those who might be disposed to interpose delay as a means of obstructing the progress of the Bill. The Government, therefore, would not be justified in making such a pledge. With regard to the Select Committee proposed, it would be inconvenient for such a Committee to go into the general question, and highly irregular if the Bill were discussed before that Committee while it is being considered in the other House, and before it reaches your Lordships. At all events, I cannot give a precise answer to the question put to me by the noble Lord without notice. I can only say that my noble Friend is wrong, if he supposes the Government are treating this question with levity. He thinks it desirable that both Houses of Parliament should fully consider the principles and details of a Bill of a most important character, and in this I fully agree with my noble Friend. He speaks as representing the whole commercial community; but I must be allowed to say, that this Bill has been brought before Parliament at the pressing instance of the commercial portion of the community.
EARL GREY: Nothing can be more reasonable than that the Government should not pledge themselves at this moment to grant a Committee on this subject, but it is not less reasonable that the House should expect Her Majesty's Ministers to abstain from calling upon it hastily to pledge itself against the appointment of such a Committee. But, while I willingly recognise the propriety of the Government taking time to consider whether they will consent to submit to a Select Committee of this House the important principles of commercial law involved in the Bill now before the other House, I must say that I concur in every word of the most able speech of the noble Lord on the bench behind me (Lord Overstone), and having listened to that speech with great attention, I agree with him in thinking that this House will do very wrong if it does not institute a deliberate inquiry;

147
and I hope that, after the recess, if the Government do not themselves originate a Motion for a Select Committee on the subject, some other noble Lord will make a Motion to that effect. We are told that it will be a very inconvenient and unusual course for this House to institute an inquiry by a Select Committee into the provisions of a Bill before the other House of Parliament. My Lords, I never heard any one propose that a Bill before the other House of Parliament should be referred to a Committee of your Lordships' House, but I am sure that, after a very short search of your Lordships' Journals, there would be found cases in which subjects of great importance that appeared likely to require legislation in the course of the Session have been considered by a Select Committee in anticipation of a Bill that was coming up from the other House of Parliament. It is quite certain that inquiry ought to take place, and I trust the Motion will not be rejected by the House. The Government itself had changed its views more than once upon the subject within the short space of twelve months; this was the third version of their plan, and all were in the very teeth of the Commission appointed by themselves. I agree with my noble Friend, that in this state of the House it would be undesirable to go into a discussion of this question; but my noble Friend (Earl Granville) has quite misunderstood the argument of my noble Friend behind me (Lord Overstone), who referred to the panic of 1825 as conveying a caution that ought to make the House pause before it embarked in rash legislation on this subject. My noble Friend behind me quoted the panic of 1825, and then my noble Friend (Earl Granville) got up and reminded him that neither in 1825 nor in 1845 did the principle of limited liability exist, and, therefore, that any argument arising out of those two panics was inapplicable to the present Bill. But my noble Friend behind me did not say that the panic of 1825 had been created by the existence of a law of limited liability. What he said was, that the frightful panic of 1825, that caused so great an amount of misery, was mainly caused by the abuse of credit; and argued that if such panics arose, even as the law then stood, from the undue expansion of credit, how much worse they would have been had they had the stimulus of limited liability. And he said that the aim and intention of this Bill was to stimulate credit to the
148
utmost. [Earl GRANVILLE: I think, just the contrary.] My noble Friend behind me thinks, and I agree with him, that the intention and object of this Bill is to facilitate and stimulate credit—but I will not argue the question now. The creation of joint stock companies was a symptom of 1825, for just before that period Parliament had been full of projects—of equitable loans, of pearl fisheries, and every manner of project. At that time there were dozens of these joint stock companies, yet there was some check then upon the formation of such companies; but now the object of this Bill is to take off such restraint, and to allow every man to create a joint stock company, and with a limited liability, to briny dupes to join him in the most absurd projects. The principal discussion upon the Bill of last Session no doubt took place upon a second reading, and on that day there was a considerable attendance, because, as was well known, the Government had had a severe "whip" for the occasion; but it was impossible to study the Bill during the limited time allowed for the Committee. For my own part, I did not profess to be able to move all the Amendments that ought to be carried, but I thought it desirable to adopt those precautions which had been taken in other countries in which the principle of the Bill had been adopted. I, therefore, moved the adoption of some of the securities, which the Commissioners in their Report stated were taken in the State of Massachusetts. Some of my Amendments were carried, and others were rejected. We were engaged for a long time in debate, but I remember the feeling of the House was so decided against the Government, that in one of the principal divisions, not one single Peer, except those in the Royal Household, or holding places in the Government, voted with the Ministers; and one Peer who had been brought up from a great distance to vote with the Government voted with the minority. In all the former history of this House there can he found no case of such a gross abuse of that power which the Government ought to possess. For the sake of obtaining a momentary popularity from persons who had not considered the subject, the Government sacrificed the dignity and character of this House of Parliament, which must be the consequence of their indecorous, hasty, and ill-judged legislation.
THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, he

149
rose for the purpose of setting his noble Friend right with regard to the object of the Bill. His noble Friend misrepresented the object of the Bill in saying that it was to give increased facilities for obtaining and extending credit. The object of the Bill was not that, but to give greater facilities for the employment of capital. The question whether it would lead to greater or less caution in the application of capital was open to argument and discussion. He thought there could be no doubt that it would induce greater caution on the part of those who dealt with Joint Stock Companies, and therefore greater caution in the use of capital; but he protested against its being said that the object of the measure was to extend credit. There were in this country a great number of small capitalists who complained that they had not that facility for the employment of their capital which the great capitalists had; and they pressed Parliament to give them facilities to club their small capitals, so that they might compete with the larger capitalists. To enable them to do this was the object of the Bill, and not to extend credit.
LORD OVERSTONEsaid, that if the real object of the Bill was to facilitate the employment of small capitals, the Government ought to compel the companies to pay up the whole of the capital. That would test the doctrine.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE,
Motion agreed to.
House adjourned to Tuesday, the 1st of April next.