Lords Sitting of 9 February 1857

MINUTE.
PUBLIC BILL.—1a Vexatious Litigation Prevention.
THE INCUMBERED ESTATES COURT (IRELAND).

  APPOINTMENT OF NEW COMMISSIONER.
  LORD BELPERhaving presented a petition from Robert Hulton, of Putney Park, complaining of delays in the Incumbered Estates Court (Ireland), and praying for measures to remove the cause thereof;
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he would take that opportunity of stating that the Government had had their attention called very recently to the state of that Court. The Government had hoped that

  329
  two Commissioners might be sufficient to transact the business of the Court; but from representations recently made to them they had come to the conclusion that, whatever might be done eventually, there must be a successor appointed for the present to the office vacated by Baron Richards, in order to wind up the business of which he had charge when he retired from the Court.

VEXATIOUS LITIGATION PREVENTION BILL.

  BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  LORD BROUGHAM,in presenting a Bill for giving a remedy against frivolous and vexatious law proceedings, said, their Lordships would be well aware that he should again, as he had done repeatedly—and, he grieved to say, without any success—make another attempt to recommend to their adoption that which in other countries had been found so beneficial and so effectual in preventing unnecessary litigation—he meant the system of courts of reconcilement. He knew that on that subject he had the misfortune not to have entirely on his side his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack. The Bill he was now about to introduce beside the provisions for the establishment of courts of reconcilement, such as he had twice before laid before the House, the enabling parties to go before the Judge without any legal advisers, state their case, and hear his opinion, it had now added a provision of great importance, on which he ventured to hope there would be no difference of opinion, as its absolute necessity could not for one moment be questioned—namely, to prevent, if that were possible, but at all events to mitigate, that most grievous abuse by which, as the law now stood, any person, not having a farthing in the world to pay in case he was defeated, might bring an action of the most frivolous and vexatious nature against any other person, and put him to the expense of £200 or £300; and by which, in the event of a verdict being found for the defendant, its effect was entirely destroyed and the defendant left utterly remediless, by the plaintiff taking the benefit of the Insolvent Act. He found from inquiry of the learned Insolvent Commissioners, whom he had seen within the last twenty-four hours, that the course of the court there, under strict construction of the Act of Parliament, prevented them taking into consideration the offence of a plaintiff
  330
  in having brought a frivolous and vexatious action, and only left them at liberty to consider the opposite case of a frivolous and vexatious defence. His noble and learned Friend, the Lord Chief Justice, had he been at that moment in the House, would have recollected a case which happened in their early days in the Court of King's Bench. On that occasion a learned counsel, at the very head of his profession, who held a brief for the plaintiff, did what was called opening a nonsuit, for so it plainly proved. He made a statement containing a flagrant attack on the character of the defendant. When the moment arrived for calling his witnesses, and one had been examined, Lord Ellenborough asked if he could carry the case no further; whereupon he turned towards his junior and his attorney in a mock consultation, and then turning towards the Court, said he was afraid he could not carry the case further. Lord Ellenborough, the Judge, took occasion to remark on what he considered the culpable conduct of the learned counsel in lending himself to the plaintiff or his attorney who were trying an action with so disgraceful an object; but the plaintiff accomplished his object nevertheless, for it was not in the power of the Court to prevent that; the defendant's counsel was left without the opportunity of urging one word in defence of his client; the speech of the counsel for the plaintiff, containing the most bitter attack against a mercantile man's character, went forth throughout the country on the wings of the press, without the possibility of a remedy, for the report, which was held to be a perfectly fair one of what had taken place on the trial, came not within the operation of the law of libel, indeed it could not be prevented even by the restriction sometimes suffered to exist as to exparti proceedings, for this was not such. Now, in the case referred to, the defendant not only had his character slandered, but probably obtained no costs for the plaintiff. The measure he was about to recommend proposed to remedy the evil which he had briefly described. In addition to the provisions for reconcilement, which he took from his rejected Bill of 1851—rejected by their Lordships—he had included clauses with the view of giving a remedy against actions of that description. Great care ought to be taken not to obstruct the access of the poor man to courts of justice, and therefore he gave a discretionary power to Judges

  331
  —to thsse of the County Courts as well as to those in the superior courts—upon hearing the parties—regard being had to the nature of the action and also to the circumstances of the plaintiff—to make, if they thought fit, an order staying proceedings until security were found for the costs. As the law now stood, such a power hardly existed. A man might be a bankrupt, and not worth a farthing, and, whether he brought his action for either his own benefit or that of his assignees, certifying when it is brought for his own benefit, the practice of the Court now was in no event to call upon him to find security. At present the practice was to stay proceedings only in the case of the plaintiff being abroad, or being about to quit the country. In general, Bills were presented to their Lordships without any statement of the purport, a first reading being always given as a matter of course by the courtesy of the House. But he had deviated repeatedly from this practice in presenting to their Lordships Bills for the amendment of the law, because it was highly expedient that their object should go forth to the profession and the public, in order to its being well considered by those whom it concerned before proceeding farther in their Lordships' House. He took this course on the present occasion. The proposed system of reconcilement, he was convinced, would have a most beneficial effect, if carried one step farther, in relieving the community from the great grievances which formed a large part of the subject matters of deliberation brought before the recent Mercantile Law Conference, over which he had had the honour to preside. There was no one subject on which that Conference—including as it did delegates from all the great towns of England and Scotland as well as those representing the metropolis—was more completely agreed than in complaining of the evils from which mercantile men were now suffering, than the lack of proper tribunals before which their causes might be speedily decided. Liverpool with 400,000 inhabitants and millions of capital in trade, and constant disputes arising out of the transactions, had no facility whatever in bringing such disputes to trial and settlement. Five circuits only in the year brought the Judges to that neighbourhood. But making the circuits of the Judges more frequent would not remedy all the evil; what was wanted was the establishment of local tribunals, in which mercantile or profess-
  332
  sional men should act as assessors to the Judge. If this local jurisdiction with such addition were given to the great towns, it would give that kind of satisfaction which those desired, who were the most anxious for the establishment of tribunals of commerce, such as were found beneficial in other countries. He did not call upon their Lordships to adopt the measures propounded by these great mercantile bodies who were represented at the Conference, even when all of them were agreed in the proposition. But on one thing their authority must needs be decisive, he might say decisive without appeal—he meant the existence of the evil. For they were those on whom the defects of the law pressed, those who experienced its mischiefs. His Lordship them moved that his Bill—a Bill to prevent vexatious litigation—be now read a first time.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 1a.

THE WAR WITH CHINA—REGISTRATION OF COLONIAL SHIPS—QUESTION.

  THE TREATY OF PARIS—UNION OF THE PRINCIPALITIES—QUESTION.
  LORD LYNDHURST: I wish to ask my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he has any objection to lay upon the table of the House a copy of the colonial ordinance under which registers are granted to vessels by our authorities at Hong Kong; and I wish further to ask whether he will lay upon the table of the House a copy (if he has a copy) of the register which was actually granted to the ship Arrow? I have another question which I wish also to put to my noble Friend, of which I have given him notice, relating to a very different subject, and I am desirous of putting it at once in order to save him the trouble of rising a second time. My noble Friend has no doubt read an article which appeared in the Moniteur a few days ago, and (as I anticipate) has read it with some degree of surprise. I refer to an article which has certainly created a very strong impression on the Continent, and the more so as it appears that certain well-known individuals, Prince Stirbey, Bibesco, Soutza, and a young prince connected with the two Imperial families of Russia and France, whose name I do not know, are either now in Paris or have recently been there, and have not been altogether idle in that very intriguing city. The article to which I refer states that the Emperor from the

  333
  very first was desirous of procuring the union of the two Principalities; that every circumstance which has since occurred has confirmed him in that opinion; and it farther states that he anticipates that the other Powers who at present seem adverse to these views will ultimately adopt them. The writer also suggests, though he does not state it in very distinct terms, that the subject of the union of the two Principalities will be submitted to the consideration of the assemblies which are to meet under the firman of the Porte. I understand, however, my Lords, and I have understood it all along, that both Turkey and, I think, Austria have taken a different view of the subject, and are very reluctant to allow that question to come before the assemblies to which I have referred. Now, this is a question of very great importance; because the Principalities are the barriers to which Turkey looks as a defence in future against Austria on the one side, and Russia on the other; and if these Principalities are to be united in one empire, and a foreign prince is to be placed at the head of that kingdom, subject to the influence of other States, particularly that of Russia—if at one extremity of Turkey in Europe we are to see a kingdom influenced by Russia, and another kingdom at the other extremity, namely, the kingdom of Greece, influenced by the same Power—such a state of things may produce very great danger to Turkey, and would certainly excite great alarm on the part of the Turkish Government. The question I have to put to my noble Friend is this:—Whether it is intended that the assemblies which are to meet in the two Principalities under the firman of the Porte shall take into consideration and report upon the propriety of uniting the two Principalities; or whether that question is to be referred exclusively to the consideration of the Representatives of the great Powers at a future Conference to be held at Paris?
  THE EARL OF CLARENDON: With respect to the first question that has been addressed to me by my noble and learned Friend, I have to say that there can be no objection to lay upon the table the colonial ordinances under which the registers are issued in China. I do not, however, apprehend that the register furnished to the Arrow can be produced, because I do not believe it has been the custom to send home copies of registers given to such vessels. They are given in great numbers, and it would obviously hardly be worth while to transmit them to this country. I
  334
  will, however, inquire; and if the formal register granted in the case of the Arrow be forthcoming, it shall be laid upon the table. With respect to the other question put to me by my noble and learned Friend, I certainly did read the article in the Moniteur referred to by him, and (as he supposes) read it with some surprise. My Lords, I will confine myself, on the present occasion, to answering the question of my noble and learned Friend. There is no bar put to the discussion of the question of the union of the Principalities, or of any other question arising out of the Treaty of Paris, by the firman which has been lately issued. That has been a faithful compliance with the intentions of the Conference of Paris. They declared—and this was accepted by the Turkish Plenipotentiaries—that the people of the Principalities should be free to discuss any subject connected with the form of government to be adopted there; consequently, my Lords, the firman can not restrict the divans assembled under it from entertaining the subject. But, at the same time, the assumption certainly was that no determination would be come to or recommendation made by these divans that would interfere with the suzerainty of the Porte, or compel it to exercise that power in any way which would compromise the safety and integrity of the Turkish Empire. At the present moment I shall refrain from entering into any discussion on the subject, or from saying how far I agree in the opinions expressed by my noble and learned Friend; I do so, because there was an understanding come to between the representatives of the great Powers at the Conference of Paris, that until the divans had met, until the people of the Principalities had been consulted, until the report of the Commissioners had been received, and the Conference had met to consider it, no one of those Powers would do anything to influence opinion in the Principalities, or elsewhere upon that particular question. I think, therefore, I am only fulfilling that engagement, so far as Her Majesty's Government is concerned, if at the present moment I abstain from discussing the subject.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: I wish to recur to the first question put by my noble and learned Friend, relating to the Chinese papers, and to ask whether the noble Earl will have any objection to add to those papers some documents which appear of importance in elucidating the subsequent part of these transactions? The question

  335
  of the Arrow and of the reparation required for the seizure of that vessel forms one part of the difficulty in which we are now involved. In the course of the correspondence which has been published, however, the main difficulty seems to turn upon a point of a very different character, which I cannot help thinking the Superintendent at Canton has rather sought for a pretext to introduce as between the two countries. I refer to his demand for the free admission of British subjects into Canton. It is quite evident that that is made the real subject of contention, and upon that subject the information afforded in the published correspondence is somewhat unsatisfactory. Will the noble Earl lay upon the table a copy of the communications which passed between Sir John Bowring and the Chinese Government in 1854 and 1855, and which do not appear in the papers already printed; and also any instructions issued to the Superintendent by the Home Government since 1849 connected with the pressing of the English claim under the treaty to admission into Canton? There must have been some correspondence on that subject since 1849, and it is important, for ascertaining the merits of the question, and for deciding upon whom the responsibility rests, that we should see this correspondence.
  THE EARL OF CLARENDON: There can be no objection to lay upon the table the papers referred to by the noble Earl, and I may say that there is no intention on the part of the Government to withhold the fullest information which can be given upon this subject. If I understand the noble Earl rightly, the papers he wishes to have comprise any instructions issued since 1849 as to the necessity of insisting upon the fulfilment of that portion of the treaty which stipulates for our entry into Canton. As I said before, there can be no objection to furnish these papers. It is unfair to attribute to Sir John Bowring the motives which the noble Earl has attributed to him; for, no doubt, the present quarrel arose exclusively out of the affair of the Arrow, although that quarrel has been at the same time rendered more general in consequence of the difficulties made in communicating with the Chinese authorities at Canton.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: I think that at a future period I shall be able to show that obtaining admission into Canton has for a long time been a prominent object in the mind of Sir John Bowring, and that he
  336
  has only waited for a favourable opportunity to effect that object.
  LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that the noble Earl (the Earl of Clarendon) had on a previous occasion referred to the opinions of the law officers of the Crown, as to the validity of the registers to which reference has been made,—would he have any objection to lay those opinions on the table of the House?
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, that the experience, of the noble and learned Lord would undoubtedly tell him that it would be unprecedented to lay before their Lordships the opinions of the law officers of the Crown.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he was aware that such a course was not usual; but he had once and again, after a refusal to produce such papers, seen them laid on their Lordships' table.
  LORD LYNDHURSTadmitted that it was not the ordinary course; but the noble Earl had placed himself out of the ordinary course by referring, in the course of discussion, to those opinions, and he hoped, therefore, that he would lay them before their Lordships.
  EARL GREYconceived that there was a difference between a formal Report of the law officers of the Crown on which a colonial ordinance obtained the confirmation of Her Majesty, and an ordinary opinion expressed by them in discharge of their duties; and there might be strong reasons for the production of a Report on which a colonial ordinance was confirmed. He hoped that the noble Earl would include an extract from the despatch of 1847, to which he had referred on a previous occasion, prohibiting offensive measures against the Chinese without express orders from the Home Government.
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, that that despatch would be produced, together with two or three other despatches upon which it was founded.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that their Lordships already knew substantially what was the opinion of the law officers of the Crown, and he had little curiosity as to the precise words in which that opinion was conveyed. He did, however, feel great curiosity to see what were the precise terms of the case laid before them; because, in the letter to the Imperial Commissioner Yeh, Mr. Consul Parkes did not state the case truly according to the facts which appeared on the face of the papers laid before the House.
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, that no particular case had been laid before the law officers of the Crown, bat they had been placed in possession of all the information which the Government had upon the subject.
  THE EARL OF DERBYasked whether the question of the validity of the Colonial Ordinance had been laid before them?
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONreplied in the negative. The question upon which their opinion had been sought was confined to the case of the Arrow.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that there was one letter about which he felt considerable curiosity, and from which be hoped the noble Earl would lay a longer extract before their Lordships, if he did not produce it in extenso. It was the letter in which the noble Earl, in certain terms, expressed his approval of the conduct of the Consul, the Superintendent, and the Admiral. In the papers before the House there were only about half a dozen lines from that letter. The letter was one in which the noble Earl acknowledged the receipt of the despatch of Sir John Bowring, and he believed was on page 105. He did not expect the noble Earl to produce any instructions which he might have sent for future operations, but he thought that he might produce with safety all that part of the letter which referred to past transactions.
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, he had no objection to produce any part of what he had written.
  LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that unless the noble Earl produced the case, together with the opinions of the law officers of the Crown, he should attach very little weight to those opinions in any future discussion which might take place upon the subject.

DISTURBANCES IN LONGFORD.

  RETURNS MOVED FOR.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIM,referring to a continued state of disorder which had existed in the county of Longford, moved Addresses for the following Returns:—Copy of the reports made within the last six months by the police stationed in the county of Longford relative to considerable numbers of men marching at night in that county; Copy of a letter addressed by the Earl of Leitrim on the 20th of December, 1856, to Sir Duncan MacGregor, the Inspector General of Police in Ireland, requesting information with respect to the marching of men so reported, and the cor-
  338
  respondence in reply to that letter; Copy of the recommendation upon which Mr. Evers had been appointed to the commission of the peace in the county of Leitrim, a statement of his qualification, and the correspondence relative to his appointment; and Copy of a letter addressed by the Earl of Leitrim to the Earl of Carlisle, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, on the 18th of October, 1856, complaining of the conduct of Mr. Dennehy, stipendiary magistrate, and the subsequent correspondence with reference thereto. The noble Earl asked whether the Government proposed to take any and what measures for the protection of Her Majesty's peaceful subjects in Ireland from the violence and intimidation of lawless mobs?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the Government could not consent to grant the first and third of the Returns moved for by the noble Earl; but to the second and fourth there would be no objection. As to the measures to be adopted by the Irish Government, he could only express a hope that they would persevere in those measures which had been so successful in improving the condition and advancing the prosperity of Ireland; for, according to the unanimous reports of all, nothing could be more satisfactory than the prosperous and orderly state of that country.
  THE EARL OF CLANCARTYremarked that the Lord Chancellor usually nominated magistrates on the recommendation of the lord lieutenant of the county, and if the usual course had been departed from in the case of Mr. Evers, he thought the noble Earl was justified in asking for some explanation.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORexplained that all the appointments of magistrates were on the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor, whether a recommendation came from the lord lieutenant of the county or not.
  First and third Motions resolved in the Negative; second and fourth agreed to.

COMMUNICATION WITH IRELAND

  QUESTION.
  VISCOUNT DUNGANNONasked the Postmaster General whether any arrangement had been come to by Her Majesty's Government relative to the steam-packet communication between Holyhead and Kingstown, what was the nature of such arrangement, and when likely to be carried into effect. He had brought the subject before the House on more than one occa

  339
  sion in the last Session of Parliament, and at the close of the Session the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) had held out hope that some definite arrangement would be come to with the Dublin Steam Packet Company. But he (Viscount Dungannon) was subsequently informed that these negotiations had been broken off in consequence of the noble Duke insisting on the journey from Euston-square to Dublin being made in eleven hours, irrespective of the state of the wind or of the weather. He understood that an agreement had been recently signed, by which the steam-packet company were to build a larger class of vessels for the traffic from Holyhead to Dublin. At present the accommodation was by no means satisfactory; neither was the speed. He hoped the noble Duke would be able to give a satisfactory answer on the subject, as it was his (Viscount Dungannon's) intention to bring the matter to an issue in the course of this Session.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he was glad of an opportunity of explaining the position of the question as far as the Post Office was concerned. The noble Viscount had referred exclusively to the accommodation of passengers; but, however important passenger accommodation might be, that was not exactly the question for the consideration of the Post Office. It was his (the Duke of Argyll's) duty to guard the interests of the public of this country and Ireland as respected the transmission of the mails. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Clanricarde) had suggested, last Session, that the question was not a postal question; but all he (the Duke of Argyll) could say was, that if the noble Marquess could devise any scheme for the purpose of increasing the passenger accommodation without impairing the service of the Post Office, he should only be too happy to adopt it. The noble Marquess, however, would find, that though Parliament had made it a point to facilitate the intercourse between England and Ireland by encouraging the passenger traffic, the main ground for large grants of the public money was always the transmission of the mails. In 1853 the Committee of the House of Commons which sat on the subject had treated the question throughout as a question of postal accommodation, the passenger accommodation being treated as secondary. The result of the inquiries of the Committee was, that, after examining many persons Connected with the steam-packet companies in England and Ireland, and some of the
  340
  most competent officers connected with the great English railway companies, they arrived at the conclusion that the communication from this side—that was, from London to Dublin—might be easily reduced to about eleven hours; and if the noble Viscount would peruse the evidence he would agree with him (the Duke of Argyll) that the Committee were fully justified in coming to that conclusion. Amongst the witnesses was Captain Huish, the manager of the London and North-Western Railway, who had spent considerable time in Ireland, making inquiries upon the subject, and who put in a detailed plan that the united companies were prepared to act upon for completing the communication between London and Dublin, not in eleven hours, but in ten hours and forty-one minutes. Soon after the Committee sat, negotiations were opened between the companies concerned and the Government. But in order to explain the difficulties that had arisen, he must first explain the existing arrangements. At the present moment there were now two mails daily from London to Dublin, one leaving at 5.0 in the afternoon, and the other within four hours after—at 8.45. Of course the interval between the two mails would appear to be an unnecessarily short one, and it was perhaps natural to suppose that almost any arrangement which would provide one morning and one night mail would be an improvement both for postal and passenger communication. Accordingly all the plans which had been suggested, and which were founded upon the report of the Committee, had involved this consequence, that the present 5.0 mail should be abandoned, but the 8.45 p.m. mail retained, and that for the 5.0 mail a new morning mail should be substituted to reach Dublin the same night. But observe the consequences which would result to the Post Office from the adoption of such a scheme. At present the 5.0 mail from London carried the letters to Dublin sufficiently early for the next morning's delivery and transmission into the Irish provinces by the morning mails, and if they gave up that mail they would have to insist upon it that its functions should be performed by the 8.45 mail. They could not do without it. The postal service of Ireland would not only receive no acceleration, but be immensely damnified by the plan unless those conditions were fulfilled. On the other hand, if a morning mail were established, it must reach Dublin in sufficient time for

  341
  the evening delivery and the transmission of the letters to the provinces by the evening mails. These were conditions which were essential for the efficiency of the postal service between this country and Ireland; but the companies had not hitherto assented to a plan by which these conditions should be fulfilled, and it was a fact that if, from any circumstances, the mails were thrown out, the people of Belfast, of Galway, and other distant parts of Ireland would not only receive no advantage from the system, but be materially injured; in short, that the commercial advices from Liverpool and the West of England—say, for Belfast—would be thrown Out from twelve to twenty hours. This being so, he (the Duke of Argyll) thought he was acting not only in the interest of the department in London, but in the interest of the Irish people themselves and of the commercial public in the great cities of Ireland, when he insisted that the conditions of the postal service should be such as to secure a regularity of communication as good, at least, as that which at present existed. He could assure their Lordships that there was no blame attributable to the Post Office here, although he had been informed that the Irish people were under the impression that, but for the Post Office, some great national good would be conferred, and that conditions were insisted upon which were unreasonable and unnecessary, and having reference solely to the departmental convenience of the Post Office in London. He wished to explain, however, that in insisting upon the conditions referred to, the Post Office was really guarding the interests of the Irish public themselves, and not by any means exclusively the interests of the department in London. The duty imposed upon him was to point out the conditions which were deemed to be essential for preserving the efficiency of the Irish mail communication, and also to see that those conditions were complied with. As to the class of steam vessels employed, and the rate at which they performed the passage across St. George's Channel—by the evidence given before the Committee it appeared that during a period of three years the Banshee had performed the passage in tolerably smooth water at the rate of eighteen miles an hour, and that her average speed was 16¾; miles an hour. If larger and more powerful vessels were employed, perhaps the passage by sea might be accomplished in as short a time as three
  342
  hours and a quarter. In conclusion, he begged to assure noble Lords connected with Ireland that he was as anxious as they to have such conditions complied with as would secure alike a better postal service and a better passenger communication between the two countries.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that the passenger communication between England and Ireland was at the present moment disgraceful, though he believed the House of Commons would not grudge a liberal sum in order to place it upon a decent footing. He viewed with some alarm, however, these propositions for attaining such enormous rates of speed. In binding down the proprietors of steam boats to perform the passage at a high rate of speed it was necessary to bear in mind that such things as fogs and thick weather had to be encountered; and if they were compelled to drive the steamers at the rate of eighteen miles an hour, they would not be able to stop them within a mile or three-quarters of a mile from the moment of reversing the engines. Thus they would risk life and property to a fearful extent by insisting on a speed being maintained to perform that which was certainly a wonderful Post-office service. Of course, it was only with the postal service that his noble Friend had to deal; but the efficiency and safety of the passenger communication were matters which did not the less demand the care and attention of the Government of which the noble Duke was a member.
  VISCOUNT DUNGANNONexpressed himself satisfied with the answer of the noble Duke, as well as with the turn the debate upon the subject had taken; but he still hoped some measure would be adopted for affording considerably increased convenience to the passenger traffic between this country and Ireland.

THE CHARITY COMMISSION—

  QUESTION.
  EARL POWISwished to ask the Lord Privy Seal what course it was intended to take as to the committal of Bills confirming schemes of the Charity Commissioners? The subject was one of considerable importance, as there was no doubt that within two or three years some cases connected with charities would be brought before Parliament, and the course adopted in future by the Charity Commissioners would be very much guided by that adopted by Parliament. In consequence of the

  343
  changes which had taken place in modern society, it was necessary to modify the constitution of many charitable institutions, to suit them to the requirements of the times (especially such as were lay-ecclesiastical foundations), without deviating any more than was absolutely necessary from the wishes of the founders, and it was necessary that the Commissioners employed to devise schemes for carrying that object into effect should have a clear course of action open before them. He would himself suggest that they should be all referred to some one Select Committee.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that the noble Earl's suggestion was a very good one, but he thought it would hardly meet the evil. He thought, himself, it might be desirable for the schemes of the Commissioners to be laid upon the tables of both Houses of Parliament before they were adopted; but that the matter was one which should not be dealt with without mature consideration.
  House adjourned till To-morrow.