Lords Sitting of 7 June 1858

MINUTES.
Took the Oaths.—The Lord Bishop of Limerick, Ardfert, and Aghadoe.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Oaths Substitution; Universities and College Estates; Jews.
3a Non-parochial Registers.

CASE OF COLONEL JOHNSTONE.

  QUESTION.
  LORD PANMUREwished to ask his noble Friend the Under Secretary for War a question relating to a subject in which he felt a very deep interest, as affecting the character of a military friend of his. It would be recollected that early in the history of the unfortunate mutiny in India a very considerable outbreak of Sepoys took place at the station of which Colonel Johnstone of the 87th Regiment was the commandant, and that he was generally accused throughout India of two very great derelictions of duty,—first, of not having in proper time disarmed the regiments that afterwards mutinied; and secondly, of

  1587
  having exhibited great remissness in following up the mutineers after they did mutiny. Colonel Johnstone, labouring under these imputations, communicated with him at the time he had the honour of filling the office of Secretary for War, but he informed him that it was not competent for his Royal Highness the Commander in Chief, or himself, to make any inquiry into the matter, or take any notice of it, as it must be investigated in India. Now, he believed that a full and elaborate inquiry into the accusations had taken place, first by the Deputy Judge Advocate, subsequently by the Judge Advocate General, and afterwards by the Commander in Chief, Sir Colin Campbell; and, as there were no possible means in this country of officially promulgating to the army the judgment that had been come to, he had thought it right to bring the matter under the notice of his noble Friend who was aware that there was nothing which an officer so highly prized as his military reputation. He had, therefore, to ask what judgment Sir Colin Campbell had formed of the conduct of Colonel Johnstone, and whether or not he had entirely acquitted that officer of the charges and insinuations that had been brought against him?
  VISCOUNT HARDINGEsaid, he was glad this question had been put to him, as it enabled him to do justice to a gallant officer. His noble Friend had correctly explained that certain charges were brought against Colonel Johnstone, and that the fullest inquiry had taken place. The result of the inquiry had been that the Commander in Chief, Sir Colin Campbell had expressed a strong and decided opinion that Colonel Johnstone had been most fully and honourably acquitted of all the charges against him, and freed from all the imputations cast upon his conduct. He was glad to have an opportunity of making this short statement, as he understood Colonel Johnstone was a most gallant and deserving officer, who had been very un fairly attacked.

THE ASSISTANT BARRISTER FOR THE COUNTY OF KERRY.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREarose to move pursuant to notice, to lay on the table certain articles of charge against Mr. William M'Dermott, Assistant Barrister for the county of Kerry, with the view to their being referred to a Committee of the Whole House. The noble Earl was under-
  1588
  stood to say, that it had always been a matter of just pride that justice was administered throughout the United Kingdom with an impartiality that was unrivalled in any other part of the world. One of the reasons of this, no doubt, was that the Judges were not removeable at the pleasure of the Crown, but held their offices during good behaviour, and could only be removed on an Address to the Crown by both Houses. In the first instance the Irish assistant barristers did not hold their offices during good behaviour; but in 1831 the office had become so important that it was thought desirable to put those magistrates in the same position with regard to the tenure of their offices as that of the Judges of the superior courts. When a gentleman holding the office of assistant barrister so conducted himself as to bring the administration of justice into contempt, the only course was to bring the articles of charge against him under the consideration of Parliament, and to move an Address to the Crown praying that he might be removed from his office. Originally the assistant barristers had only to render legal assistance to the courts of quarter sessions in Ireland, but were not necessarily chairmen of those sessions. They were now, however, by law, and had been for some years, chairmen of the quarter sessions, and of course were called upon to preside over the whole criminal business which came before those tribunals. They had also a jurisdiction in certain civil cases. Besides, the whole of the appeals against the poor rate valuations were decided by them. They were also the judges in all appeals relating to drainage and fishery questions, and had a certain amount of jurisdiction in insolvency matters. They likewise presided over the courts of registration of Parliamentary voters. The gentleman whose case he had now to bring under their Lordships' consideration had been assistant barrister of the county of Kerry since 1840. Circumstances in connection with this gentleman had since occurred which made it necessary for him on the present occasion to ask their Lordships to take a particular course with reference to his position as assistant barrister. Not long ago Mr. M'Dermott's name was brought unpleasantly before the public in connection with all imputation of his having sold an office at his disposal as assistant barrister, and of afterwards breaking his word to the purchaser and conferring the

  1589
  appointment upon another person. A memorial, signed by thirty-two magistrates of the county of Kerry, was presented to the late Chief Secretary for Ireland (Mr. H. A. Herbert) who was lord lieutenant of the county), complaining of the conduct of Mr. M'Dermott, and stating that it was impossible for them to continue to sit on the same bench with him at quarter sessions, of which he was chairman. There were several charges preferred against Mr. M'Dermott in the Petition: and these charges afforded the ground on which he asked the House to take the course of instituting inquiry; and if the charges should be substantiated they could not resist the conclusion that the gentleman in question was not fit for the office he held, and that it was necessary for the public interests that he should be removed from it. These were some of the charges in the petition:—That in 1853 Mr. M'Dermott became an insolvent debtor; and, though he swore to the truth of his schedule, he wilfully omitted the names of a considerable number of his creditors; that on an order being made for his discharge be promised to set apart £500 a year out of his salary for the payment of his debts, an engagement which he eventually broke; that an application was then made to the court for a conditional order for an attachment against him; that a process server of Mr. M'Dermott's own court served him with the order; but he induced the process server not to swear to the service, so that he might evade the order. These facts were embodied in an affidavit by the attorney acting in the matter, and the court made the original order absolute. That was in 1856; in the early part of the following year he was arrested, while presiding over his court at Listowel; but the officer consented not to remove him, but watched him in court, while he proceeded with the business. That disgraceful scene lasted for two days, and on the third day, Sunday, the officer removed Mr. Dermott to the gaol of the county over which he presided. It appeared also that Mr. M'Dermott was in the constant habit of borrowing money of officers and practitioners of this court, which of course gave rise to suspicion as to the impartiality of his judgment in cases where one party was represented by an attorney to whom he was indebted for loans of money. The most serious charge, however, remained. There was an officer attached to the court called an "interpreter," whose duty it was
  1590
  to translate the evidence of witnesses who gave their testimony in Irish. In 1850 that office became vacant, and it was charged that Mr. M'Dermott promised it to a man named Galavan, who gave him £37; but in spite of that promise the office was ultimately given to another person. Those facts came out some time after upon Galavan's insolvency; for be filed his schedule in Mr. M'Dermott's court, and in that schedule he put down this sum of £37 as having been paid to Mr. M'Dermott himself. Mr. M'Dermott did not deny having had the money, though he denied it was the price of an office. Galavan, however, asserted not only that he had taken the money for the office, but that he had broken the engagement and given the office to another person. There was also another charge against Mr. M'Dermott that he had sold another office for £20. He now thought he had stated enough to show their Lordships that he was justified in laying on their Lordships' table articles of charge against Mr. M'Dermott and in moving that they be referred to a Committee of moving Whole House; and also for the further motion to be made hereafter for an address to the Crown for the removal of Mr. M'Dermott from his office. The noble Earl concluded by moving, That the said articles of charge be referred to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday, the 21st of June next, to examine witnesses and to report thereon to the House; and that William M'Dermott Esq., have leave to appear personally and by Counsel before the said Committee.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, it must cause great pain to all who desired purity in the administration of justice to hear such charges brought against a judicial officer; but he thought the noble Earl was well advised in taking this step. He took the opportunity of remarking that the style of assistant barrister, in his opinion, was a misnomer, and led people to undervalue the importance of the officer, just as County Court Judges in this country were improperly called Judges of Small Debts Courts. He thought it would be a great advantage if one of the functions of assistant barristers in Ireland was extended to County Court Judges here—namely, the duty of presiding as chairman of quarter sessions.
  THE EARL OF HARDWICKEthought that by his observation the noble and learned Lord was doing an injustice to the magistrates of England; for it seemed to

  1591
  imply that their duties were imperfectly performed at present.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, it was by no means his intention to cast any aspersions upon the magistracy of this country. He simply meant to observe that they would in many instances be glad to have the assistance of professional men in the discharge of their important duties.
  THE EARL OF CARLISLEthought it would not be decorous on his part to anticipate the conclusion at which the Committee for which the noble Lord opposite had moved might arrive. He might, however, state that he had heard sfficient of the antecedent circumstances connected with the Motion to induce him unreservedly to subscribe to the propriety of the course which the noble Earl deemed it to be his duty to take.
  LORD CRANWORTHdeemed it some what doubtful whether the Committee ought to be called upon to inquire into those charges embraced in the Motion which were of an indictable nature—such, for instance, as the charge of perjury, and that of the sale of an office. It would, he thought, be expedient to omit those charges, more especially as there were others which afforded sufficient grounds for the course which the noble Earl desired to pursue.
  Motion agreed to.
  Articles of Charge against William M'Dermott, Esquire, Assistant Barrister for the County of Kerry, alleged by the Viscount Hutchinson, in his Place; laid upon the Table, and Ordered to be printed; and a Copy Ordered to be furnished to Mr. M'Dermott.
  Resolved—
  That the said Articles of Charge be referred to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 21st Instant, to examine Witnesses, and to report thereon to the House; and that William M'Dermott, Esquire, have Leave to appear personally and by Counsel before the said Committee.

BELFAST RIOTS—QUESTION.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNON, in rising to put a question to the head of the Government upon this subject, said, it was matter for considerable regret that Belfast had again become the scene of riot and disorder. The present disturbances in that town had, it appeared, their origin at a funeral of a member of the Roman Catholic persuasion who had been president of a political society, by a large number of the members of which his remains had been followed to a cemetery in the neighbourhood of Belfast. The persons attending the
1592
funeral, it seemed, bore in their hands green boughs, which were always recognized as party symbols; and on leaving the cemetery some females who were among the number thrust those boughs in the face of some members of the Protestant persuasion whom they met—a circumstance which caused much irritation and eventually led to a riot. The occurrence took place on a Sunday, and the riot was in the course of the evening suppressed. It, however, recommenced on the following day, and was again put down. But on the Wednesday it once more broke out with great violence, and the consequence was that great damage was done to property, although he was happy to say the personal injuries inflicted were only partial. The magistrates had done their utmost to quell the disturbance, and one of them—Mr. Lyons—received a severe blow from a stone, by which be was nearly thrown from his horse—in his endeavour to effect that object. Several houses were injured, all of which he believed belonged to Protestants with a single exception, which was the property of a Roman Catholic who it appeared had married a Protestant. Two persons who were not mixed up in the riot, but who happened to be passing were, he regretted to say, seriously injured, and, what was also much to be lamented, the police, although assembled in considerable numbers, were found insufficient for the dischage of the duty which they were called upon to perform. He had, however, observed with satisfaction that the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Lord Naas) had, in answer to a question which had been put to him in the other House of Parliament, declared it to be the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce a measure placing upon a more efficient footing the police in the large towns throughout Ireland, and he could from his own experience bear testimony to the fact that some such measure was needed; for if the police had done their duty in the first instance much of the mischief that had ensued would have been averted. He should not trespass further on their Lordships' time, but should conclude by asking the noble Earl at the head of the Government whether he had received any information relative to the circumstances which had given rise to the recent riots in Belfast.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, Her Majesty's Government had received from the Lord Lieutenant and the authorities in Ireland, such information with respect to

1593
the causes of the late disgraceful riots in Belfast as they had been able to afford. The only cause, in truth, for those occurrences which could be assigned was, that religious rancour and animosity which existed between the members of the Protestant and Roman Catholic persuasions in that locality, which was with equal justice to be attributed to the lower classes of both, and which had rendered Belfast notorious for the turbulence and violence of the proceedings by which from time to time it had been disgraced. A species of minor civil war, in fact, prevailed between the lower classes connected with the two religious parties, and the result of that state of feeling was, that the slightest insult or offence offered to a member of one party was at once taken up by the partisans of his side. Now, he could not help saying that it did not reflect much credit either upon the inhabitants or upon the local authorities of one of the largest, the wealthiest, and the most thriving towns in Ireland that such disturbances should take place unchecked by the local authorities, and should require the intervention of the police and the military from other districts to aid in putting them down. The town of Belfast had, in consequence of those disturbances been for several nights in a state of great confusion. The Lord Lieutenant had, however, taken every precaution in his power to prevent their recurrence. Fortunately, owing to the step which had been taken in connection with previous proceedings of a similar character, the greater number of the inhabitants were unarmed, and their weapons of offence were consequently confined to paving-stones and missiles of that description. It had, nevertheless, been found necessary to collect a very large force of police and military, with cavalry and infantry, which was now stationed in the town, which was divided into four distinct districts, each of which was placed under the superintendence of a resident magistrate. The town, he might add, was regularly patrolled by night; and he was happy to learn from the accounts which he had received, about an hour or two before he had entered the House, from the Lord Lieutenant, that at the latest date to which the information related tranquillity for the time had been restored. Taking into consideration, however, what had occurred last year in Belfast, and the causes which had led to the disturbances in question, the Lord Lieutenant had decided to keep up a very considerable force
1594
in that quarter, at all events until after the 12th of next month. Belfast itself, of course, must to a considerable extent, bear the pecuniary consequences of the injuries which had been done, as well as of the additional number of constabulary which had been collected there owing to those disturbances. His noble Friend in the course of his observations had adverted to the inefficiency of the police at Belfast, and he feared there was much truth in the expressions which had fallen from him on that subject. He would, however, assure their Lordships that it was the intention of his noble Friend the Chief Secretary for Ireland to introduce at the earliest opportunity in the other House of Parliament a Bill, the provisions of which had, he believed, met with general approval in Ireland, and the object of which was to improve the character and condition of the police in the large towns by incorporating them with the police of the country at large, than which there could not be a finer or more effective force, In conclusion, he had simply to say, that nothing would be omitted upon the part of Her Majesty's Government to put down the riots in question; but he must at the same time state it to be his opinion that, however the Government might from time to time succeed in quelling similar disturbances, it was extremely expedient that the inhabitants of Belfast as well as the municipal authorities should exert themselves to prevent their recurrence.
THE EARL OF CARLISLEsaid, he should be unwilling to say a word which would foment the religious discord existing already too extensively in Ireland; as, however, the subject had been mooted, he must be allowed to make one or two observations upon it. The recurrence of these unhappy and most disgraceful riots in Belfast, only served to strengthen his conviction that the Irish Government last year, acted in consonance both with their duty and with the strictest policy and prudence in taking the only step which it was in their power as a Government to take, to show their disapproval of exclusive religious societies and organization, by refusing any fresh appointment of Members of the Orange Society to the office of magistrate. That course was made the subject of censure and of some sharp attacks, though not, as far as he could remember, in either House of Parliament. It was, however, the identical course which had been previously adopted in 1836, and was

1595
then stamped with the approval of the other House of Parliament, and of His late Majesty King William IV. A subsequent abatement of religious animosities had led to the suspension of that prohibition; but the events which occurred last year made it plain that it ought to be immediately readopted, and the occurrences of this year to which their Lordships' attention had now been called made it plainer still. He was happy to think that the present Government had not, as far as his knowledge went, made any objectionable appointment to the office of magistrate, and he trusted that the scenes now being enacted at Belfast would serve to confirm them in this wise abstinence. He need not dilate on the mischievous and wanton character of these tumults. It was an undoubted fact that last summer, at the very moment when reinforcements were most urgently required for our army in India, the movement of regiments was interfered with and delayed, because one set of persons in the great town of Belfast were keeping it in a state of chronic alarm by shouting "To bell with the Pope!" and another set of persons by shouting "To hell with King William III!" Now, the utter childishness and folly of all this, and above all its entire anachronism, would be simply ridiculous if it did not lead to such serious results. The town of Belfast ought, in many respects, to be the most civilized and well-ordered place of residence in Ireland; whereas it certainly now might be considered the least so. He believed in all these tumultuous proceedings it would generally be found that the blame might be pretty equally divided between both parties. With respect to a remedy, he feared much that the complete allaying of these ebullitions of religious hatred (and what two words those were when coupled!) could not be achieved by any Government; but he was happy to think that a material though partial improvement might be effected by putting the town police of Belfast on a better footing. He was glad to learn from the Government that such a course was in contemplation. It was intended to be proposed to Parliament by the late Government, and he had no doubt it would be proposed in an equally satisfactory manner by the present; nor did he doubt that they would take every step in their power to soften and arrest those religious rivalries which were the main source and spring of all the mischief.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONmust protest
1596
against the noble Earl's statement that the Belfast riots had proved the wisdom of the course taken by the late Government in refusing to appoint to the magistracy any gentleman belonging to the Orange body. It remained to be seen yet that any gentleman connected with that body had anything to do with the Belfast disturbances; yet indirectly the noble Earl, though he said that both parties were pretty equally responsible, laid the whole blame one one. Now, as a proof of the feeling which animated them, he might state that the Grand Orange Lodge had issued a monition to the Orangemen, desiring them to refrain from display or party procession on the 12th of July, and to act strictly in accordance with the laws of the land. He could not think, under the circumstances, that the noble Earl's insinuation was either just or called for.
THE EARL OF CARLISLEsaid, he could not quite understand the logic of the noble Viscount, who admitted that he had said that the blame was equally divided, and yet in the same breath accused him of throwing the whole blame on one party. If a Riband magistrate could be found, he (the Earl of Carlisle) should equally desire his removal.
THE EARL OF CLANCARTYprotested against the rule laid down by the late Government for the exclusion of members of the Orange Lodge from the magistracy.

THE EARL OF KINGSTON'S QUESTIONS.
THE EARL OF KINGSTON, who had placed on the paper a notice of his intention to put nine distinct Questions to Her Majesty's Government, with reference to various subjects, including the appointment of Mr. Sullivan to the mission at Lima, the resignation of General Ashburuham, and the conduct of Rajah Brooke, expressed his desire to postpone the questions to a future evening.
EARL STANHOPEobserved, that in some of these notices the conduct of a most valuable public servant, Rajah Brooke, was referred to in most unbecoming and improper language; and, as the notices had now been upon the paper for some days, he now called upon the noble Earl either to withdraw them, or at once to bring them forward.
THE EARL OF KINGSTONwas understood to say, that his questions were founded upon statements contained in the bluebook, according to which a number of men,

1597
women, and children had been destroyed as pirates under the order of Rajah Brooke; and also on his conduct on the occasion of the Chinese outbreak at Sarawak in 1856. He thought the subject was one which deserved inquiry.
EARL GREYobserved, that there could be no objection to a discussion as to the conduct of Rajah Brooke, for every one who knew that gentleman would be convinced that the more the subject was inquired into, the more clearly would be demonstrated the wisdom and humanity with which he had acted on all occasions. With reference to the old charge that Rajah Brooke had treated as pirates, persons who were not pirates, a solemn inquiry had been instituted, which terminated in the complete and triumphant acquittal of Rajah Brooke from every charge that had been preferred against him. It was well known that, almost by a miracle, Rajah Brooke escaped from a cold-blooded attempt on the part of the Chinese to murder him by surprise, and that in self-defence he entered upon a war, in the course of which a great number of Chinese were killed. Whenever the noble Earl (the Earl of Kingston) thought proper to bring these questions forward, there would be no indisposition to discuss them if they were brought regularly before the House. What his noble Friend (Earl Stanhope) objected to, and what he (Earl Grey) also objected to was, that charges contained in language which was quite unusual in Parliament, and which reflected upon Rajah Brooke in a manner which he believed to be utterly undeserved, should continue day after day on their Lordships' Minutes, without any opportunity being afforded of fully answering them. If the noble Earl thought proper at that moment to bring forward his charges, he was sure their Lordships would be ready to listen to him, but he (Earl Grey) must protest against continuing upon the paper such notices as had stood upon it in the noble Earl's name for some days past.
THE EARL OF DERBYadded the expression of his hope that the noble Earl (the Earl of Kingston) would either bring forward the questions of which he had given notice, or that he would abandon them; but if he did press them, he hoped the noble Earl would bring them before the House in such a manner as to enable their Lordships to give a decision upon the subjects to which they referred. The noble Earl had placed upon the paper a very extraordinary string of questions, some
1598
of them relating to persons altogether unconnected with Rajah Brooke; the noble Earl had, however, given notice of a slumber of questions which he proposed to pat to the Government with regard to Rajah Brooke, some of which, it was self-evident, it was impossible for the Government to answer. For example, the noble Earl had given notice of his intention to ask what was the amount of Rajah Brooke's fortune when he went out, what revenue he had collected, and under what circumstances he sought to obtain the assistance and sympathy of the Government and people of this country. If the noble Earl put those questions to Rajah Brooke himself, he might choose to answer them, but it was impossible for Her Majesty's Government to do so. With regard to the last two questions of which the noble Earl had given notice—namely, whether the Chinese had not been subjected to great oppressions and exactions, which, to a certain extent, justified their attempt to murder Rajah Brooke, and whether the whole course and conduct of Rajah Brooke in the East had not been such as to desecrate the name of England for humanity and justice—he (the Earl of Derby) could only say that, if those questions were put to him, all he could state in reply was, that to the best of his belief Rajah Brooke was not liable to either of the imputations which they conveyed. Charges had been made against Rajah Brooke; a full and searching inquiry had been instituted; and impartial persons had declared their opinion that the course which he had pursued had been perfectly justifiable. If charges of this nature were preferred, they ought to be brought forward in such a form that a definite answer might be given to them, and not in the form of questions put to the Government which it was impossible for them to answer, but which conveyed imputations of a most serious character against a very meritorious official.
THE EARL OF KINGSTONwas understood to assure the House that he did not wish to advance any charges which could not be fully proved, and to express his readiness to postpone his questions to a future day. [Cries of "Withdraw!"]
LORD CAMPBELLsuggested, that the noble Earl had already received the only answer which, as the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby) had stated, the Government could give to several of his questions, and he therefore suggested that they should be withdrawn.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONsaid, he should like to move that the notices should be withdrawn, but did not know whether he would be in order in doing so.
LORD REDESDALEsaid, that such a course would not be in order. The noble Earl at the head of the Government had, however, answered the questions as far as he could, and he would appeal to the noble Earl (the Earl of Kingston) as to what good could be done by allowing these questions to remain on the Notice-paper? If the noble Earl intended to bring forward a charge, let him put it in a different form; let him propose a substantive Resolution, and their Lordships would know how to deal with it. But questions that had already been answered should not be allowed to remain on the Notice-paper.
THE EARL OF ROSSEalso urged the noble Earl to withdraw his questions.
LORD CAMPBELLwould move that the clerk at the table be directed that these notices be not printed with the Votes of the House.
THE EARL OF WICKLOWsaid, the questions of the noble Earl had been on the paper for four nights. On one occasion the noble Earl was sitting opposite when the clerk called upon him, but he merely shook his head, and refused to put the questions. On the other occasion when they were on the paper the noble Earl did not attend. He (the Earl of Wicklow) hoped there was some mode of avoiding such a practice, for it would reflect great discredit upon that House if it was in the power of any individual Peer to put forward, day after day, libels against individuals on the Minutes of their Lordships, and then, when called upon to bring them forward, to refuse to do so, and postpone them indefinitely. He hoped some measures would be taken for the protection of the public against such a practice.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONsaid, that the course taken by the noble Earl, in reference to these questions, was in every way unfair to the individual upon whom they reflected.
THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHsuggested, that, although it might in this case be a very proper course to resolve that the notices should not be printed, their Lordships ought to be careful that they did not establish a precedent. He thought, however, that it was most objectionable that any noble Lord should be allowed to continue to impute grave crimes and misdemeanours to individuals, without bringing
1600
those charges directly under the consideration of the House.
Several other noble LORDS having appealed in vain to the Earl of Kingston, either to ask his Questions or to withdraw his Notices,
LORD LYNDHURST LORD LYNDHURST moved, "That the said Questions have been sufficiently answered, and ought not to be renewed."
On Question, Resolved in the Affirmative.

OATHS SUBSTITUTION BILL—JEWS' BILL.
PRESENTED. READ 1a.
LORD LYNDHURST presented a Bill to substitute one Oath for the Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, and for relieving the Religious Scruples of certain of Her Majesty's Subjects.
Afterwards,
THE EARL OF LUCAN presented a Bill to provide for the Relief of Her Majesty's Subjects professing the Jewish Religion.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that it never rained but it poured. Their Lordships had now two Bills before them, each having the same object in view. One of them was laid on the table in the early part of the evening by the noble and learned Lord (Lord Lyndhurst), and the other was now presented by the noble Earl (the Earl of Lucan). With all respect to his noble and gallant Friend he thought he had better leave the matter in the hands of the noble and learned Lord.
LORD LYNDHURSTgave notice that he would move the second reading of his Bill on Thursday next.
THE EARL OF LUCANwished to have his Bill considered at the same time as that of the noble and learned Lord, but thought that Thursday next was entirely too soon.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, it was important that every Member of their Lordships' House should know exactly what each of those Bills proposed to do. It appeared that they were to have rival Bills before them. He knew nothing of the merits of either measure. Under the circumstances he did not think he was asking too much when he said he thought that there ought to be, at all events, ten days' notice given before the Motion for the second reading of either of them.
LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, as he had no objection to do anything that was convenient to the House, he would postpone the second reading of his Bill until Friday week.
EARL STANHOPEsaid, he had a Motion on the paper for Friday week, but under the circumstances he would postpone his notice to next Monday week.
The Bills were severally read 1a; and ordered to be read 2a on Friday, the 18th instant.
House adjourned at a quarter to Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.