Lords Sitting of 22 March 1858

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—la Consolidated Fund (£10,000,000); Consolidated Fund (£500,000); General Board of Health (Shipton, &c.); Cambridge University Matriculation and Degrees; Mutiny.
2a Law of Property Amendment; Marino Mutiny; Militia Act Continuance; Commons Enclosure.
3a Church of England Special Services; Trustees Relief.
ROYAL ASSENT.—Lady Havelock and Sir Henry Havelock's Annuities; East India Loan.

IMPORTED LABOURERS IN THE WEST INDIES.—QUESTION.
LORD BROUGHAMwished to put a question to the noble Earl the Under Secretary for the Colonies (the Earl of Carnarvon) with respect to some legislation which he understood had been going on in the West Indies in a retrograde direction, and which, if persevered in, was calculated to reduce the free negro population of those islands to somewhat of the same condition they were in before emancipation— or very near it. He had his information from a respectable clergyman in one of the colonies of the West Indies, whom he should take especial care not to name, having learnt the necessity of caution in this matter from what had formerly happened in the celebrated case of the missionary Smith, who was persecuted to death in that part of the world. The clergyman to whom he referred stated that an act had been passed in Jamaica which he hoped and trusted had not received
446
the sanction of the Government of this country, because, although, for anything he knew to the contrary, there might be unobjectionable and even good provisions in it, he was informed that some of its provisions were of a most reprehensible character. The rev. Gentleman stated, amongst other things, that the emigrants, as they were called, whether Coolies, Chinese, or African negroes, when brought to the island, were not allowed to choose their masters, but were apportioned or allotted by a public officer called the Emigration Commissioner; that they were kept under the strictest superintendence; that they were compelled to work every day in the year for nine or ton hours, with the exception of Sundays and three holidays; that they were not allowed to absent themselves from their master's grounds, and that if they should go from those grounds they were liable to be seized without a warrant; that if found five miles distant from the plantation, or out of the parish at any distance, they may be arrested or committed (without a warrant), and be sentenced to imprisonment for so many days with or without hard labour, and that whoever employs them should be liable to a severe penalty. He hoped and trusted the Act either had not passed at all, or if it had passed, that it had not received the sanction of the Government at home, at least as regarded those most objectionable parts of it. The rev. Gentleman had characterized the state of the negroes thus produced as an approach to Russian serfdom; but it gave him (Lord Brougham) inexpressible satisfaction to be able to state that at that very moment Russia was making great progress in the right direction towards the emancipation of the serfs, and that Russian serfdom was no longer what it was a few years ago. To the honour of the Emperor of Russia and his counsellors, serfdom in Russia would be brought to a very speedy termination, and it would ill become such countries as Prance and England to be making a retrograde movement in their colonies, when Russia was so laudably advancing. He wished to ask the noble Earl whether this Act, if it had been really passed in the colony, had yet received the approval of Her Majesty's Government? He earnestly trusted that the answer would be in the negative. He would also ask him whether he had any objection to lay a copy of the Act on their Lordships table?
THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, it was true that within the last few days an Act had been received from Jamaica, and

447
was at present under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. As it had not received the Royal assent, however, it would he better to refrain from expressing any opinion upon its substance or general bearing. The interests of the West India colonies had suffered greatly from the deficiency in the labour market; but while we were anxious to give full relief to them, as far as it could be legitimately and reasonably given, it was also the duty of the Government to guard most jealously and watch more closely every Bill which had for its object the importation of free labourers into those islands. It was not usual to lay on the table of the House the Bills of Colonial Legislatures until they had received the Royal assent, but he would not object to do so in this instance, if his noble and learned Friend made a Motion to that effect.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE—QUESTION.
EARL GRANVILLEwished to ask the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) if he was prepared to state to the House what course he proposed to adopt with reference to the conduct of business in that House; and also with regard to the adjournment for the Easter recess.
THE EARL of DERBYYour Lordships are aware that it has for a long time been a matter of considerable comment that at the early period of the Session your Lordships have very little business to conduct, and that the business of the Session is brought before your Lordships at so late a period of it that it has to be transacted in an unreasonable short period of time. Unfortunately, my Lords, I cannot hold out any expectation of any difference during the present Session. On the contrary, owing to the change of Government, as your Lordships must be aware, and the necessary adjournment of the other House, they have been prevented going on with the measures that were then before them. Beyond those Bills which have just been brought up from the other House and laid on the table, and which would be read a first time to-night, I am not aware that any other measures will come before your Lordships before the recess. I should therefore have been prepared to move the adjournment of the House on Friday next; but as I understand it would be for the convenience of my noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, and other noble and learned Lords, that this House should sit on Monday and Tuesday next, I propose that we adjourn from Tuesday next until Monday,
448
the 12th of April, it being understood that our meetings on Monday and Tuesday will be purely for the transaction of legal business.

LAW OF PROPERTY AMENDMENT BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSin moving the second reading of this Bill, stated that a law had been in existence from the time of Lord Coke to the present day, which had never been altered, but which every one agreed ought to be altered. The law was laid down in Dumpor's case, that whore a condition in a lease was dispensed with by license even to assign for example to one person the condition was gone for ever, and he proposed by the present Bill that any condition should only be affected by a license in the particular case to which the license referred. He thought that a landlord ought to have the benefit of every insurance effected upon his property, although not made in accordance with the lessee's covenant. There was already a remedy for the landlord under the Building Act, at least in the Metropolis, but his additional remedy would be found useful. Equity will in some cases relieve a tenant from a breach of covenant working a forfeiture, but this remedy is not extended to a breach of a covenant to insure. If a tenant were to omit to keep up his insurance, for however short a time, it would be a breach, and although no fire had occurred, the landlord might re-enter if there was the usual power of re-entry in the lease, and oust the tenant, who would be remediless although he might have expended thousands on the property. He proposed, that the tenant in the absence of fraud or gross negligence, where no damage had happened, should be relived if the insurance was correct at the time, but only once relieved, upon payment to the landford of twice the amount of the premium, which ought to have been paid with interest at 5 per cent. from the time they should have been paid. This will prevent negligence and will be an indemnity to the landlord for the risk run although no damage was sustained whilst the property was uninsured. It had become a common practice upon the sale of leasehold property to insert in the conditions of sale a provision to the effect that the production of the receipt of the last payment of rent without the production of any fire insurance effected upon the property should be a good title to the purchaser. Hundreds of purchases had been made under that stipulation, but nothing

  449
  could be more dangerous, because if, by mistake, the property had not been insured, the landlord, even although he might have given a receipt subsequent to the period at which the covenant to insure had been broken, would not be bound by that receipt, and might recover the whole of the property from the purchaser. A remedy in that respect was needed every day. What he proposed, therefore, was, that where the purchaser had not actual notice that there had been a breach of covenant, and the landlord's receipt for the last payment of rent, and the sale was a regular bonâ fide transaction, the purchaser should not be affected by any breach of covenant previous to that receipt. With regard to the days of grace allowed by fire insurance offices for payment on insurance policies, no court of law had yet actually decided whether they were bound to adhere to their promise to allow days of grace. All the insurance offices had lately issued advertisements stating that the days of grace were binding upon them; but he had lived long enough never to trust any directors; he therefore proposed to make it imperative upon the insurance offices to allow days of grace when they had given days of grace, just as if those days had been mentioned in the original policy. He requested the Law Life Office, whose business was of great extent and importance, to look at the clause which he had drawn on this point. They did so, and stated that it would in their opinion work fairly to them as well as to the insurer. The directors assured him that they had no objection to it. He would gladly receive any communication with which the directors of any other office might favour him upon the clause. He proposed that the release from a rent charge of part of the hereditaments charged therewith should not extinguish the whole rent charge, but should operate only to bar the right to recover any part of the rent charge out of the particular hereditaments released. The Bill contained a similar enactment with regard to judgments. The release from a judgment over a portion of an estate was not to operate beyond the actual portion released by the particular judgment. In this provision he followed the precedent which had been found to work satisfactorily in Ireland. With respect to uses he proposed an important provision which was calculated, he belived, to set at rest a number of very difficult questions which constantly arose out of this branch of the subject. He proposed that
  450
  where by any instrument any hereditaments were limited to uses, all uses thereunder, whether expressed or implied by law, and whether immediate or future, or contingent or executory, should take effect as they arose by force of, and by relation to, the estate and seizin originally vested in the person seized to the uses. This would get rid of the fine doctrine which is termed scintilla juris, and which led to such learned yet trifling discussions, after the passing of the Statute of Uses, in the reign of Henry VIII. With respect to the execution of powers by deed, he might remind the House, the law had already been altered in regard to wills, with perfect satisfaction to every one, and he proposed by this Bill, to place the law relative to the execution of powers by deed on precisely the same footing as the execution of powers by will. He proposed that where there was a power to dispose of property by deed, the instrument should be executed in the ordinary way, and property and powers should be placed on the same footing. It had been decided in that House, that if a trustee sold an estate—having the power to do so—and by mistake gave certain benefits to the tenant for life which he ought not to have, yet if that were a mistake and no fraud, they would not allow the estate of an innocent purchaser to be taken from him, hut would give compensation to the person entitled to the property, so as to make good the deficiency created by a wrong proceeding by mistake. Acting upon that principle he proposed to place powers on exactly the same footing as property. The effect would be that where money had been paid by mistake to the tenant for life, the mistake might be corrected by repayment of the money to the persons entitled under the settlement, and they would be placed in just as good a position as if the money had been originally paid to the trustees. The present law may work great hardships. The Marlborough family bought White Knights, the well known estate upon which they expended largo sums. It was sold under a power; and as the tenant for life had a power to cut down all the timber, but left it standing, the trustees allowed him to receive the value of the timber, but subsequently finding this was wrung, he invested the sum paid to him upon the trusts of the settlement, the purchase nevertheless was set aside, and a remainder-man under the settlement recovered the estate with the timber. The next clause took away the

  451
  right to limit an estate after lives in being for a term of twenty-one years, without reference to the minority of any person entitled to take the estate. This as it stood was an abuse of the law against perpetuities. The next clause was intended to supply a remedy for a defect in the law of inheritance which had been very much felt. He proposed that where there should be a total failure of the heirs of the purchaser of land in fee simple, the land should descend and the descent should be traced from the person last entitled to the land as if he had been the purchaser thereof. The real property Commissioners intended to provide for a case of hardship, but ultimately the clause was struck out of their Bill. He had introduced it into the present Bill. It was to provide for a case of this sort. An illegitimate person bought an estate, and married, and had an only child, a son, the estate not being devised, of course descended to his son; the son died without issue, and the estate was held to have escheated to the Crown instead of going, as he now proposed, to the natural heirs of the son. In the next clause he proposed to give power to any person to assign property to himself and another person, in the same manner as he might now assign the same to another. The last two clauses referred to the manner in which wills might be attested and executed. At present when a will was attested in any place where the testator might see the attesting witnesses sign, the will was held good even though he did not absolutely see them; but if it was attested in any place where the testator could not see them it was invalid. He proposed to enact that even though it might be attested in any place where the testator could not see the attestation executed, yet if the court or jury should be of opinion that the particular place of attestation was chosen not for the purposes of fraud but simply for convenience, the will should be valid. The old statute of Charles II. made a will valid which the testator acknowledged to the witnesses, and which was then attested by them. But the new Wills Act required that the testator should either acknowledge his signature or sign in the presence of the witnesses who were also to sign in the presence of each other. It might happen that a testator called in two persons and said, "I want you to witness my will," folding down the paper so as to cover the signature. Such a will was void. He thought that was too nice a distinction
  452
  upon which to invalidate a will when the signature of the testator was in the proper place, and the witnesses were both present, and both attested the will in the presence of the testator, and a clause upon the subject was therefore inserted. He could assure their Lordships, that in proposing these alterations, he was carrying out the declared intentions of the Real Property Commissioners. In their fourth Report, they proposed that the signature or acknowledgment should be in the presence of one or two witnesses present at the same time. He would read to the House, from the Report, what followed on this subject:—
  "We do not think it necessary to continue the provision of the statute of frauds which requires the witnesses should subscribe in the presence of the testator. This, as we have stated, has been disregarded so far that the Courts have not required that the testator should actually see the witnesses sign, but have considered it sufficient if he might see them; and yet several fair wills have been adjudged void, where witnesses have signed in an adjoining room, and even where the testator, if he had thought proper, might have seen them merely by changing his position. It is important that no long interval should elapse between the execution and the attestation of a will, because it would afford an opportunity for the substitution of a false will, and, therefore, create doubt whether the attestation was written upon the will which had been executed by the testator. But if it be required that both witnesses shall be present at the time when the will is signed or acknowledged, and shall attest it in the presence of each other, the signatures of the witnesses will usually be made either in the presence of the testator or before they lose sight of the will. We have considered whether any regulation can be made for affording further security in this respect, but we have not been able to devise any provision which would not occasion evil or inconvenience of more importance than the advantage it would afford. It does not appear to us that the additional security which may be obtained by requiring the witnesses to sign in the testator's presence is of so much importance, as the burthen and danger of imposing such a restriction."
  Their second proposition accordingly requires the two witnesses to subscribe their names to the will, but is silent as to the presence of the testator. The noble and learned Lord concluded by recommending the Bill to the consideration of their Lordships.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he had appealed to the noble and learned Lord the other night to postpone his measure for further consideration. It was undoubtedly one of considerable importance, and the public, he was sure, would feel much indebted to the noble and learned Lord for the great attention he had given to the

  453
  subject. The provisions of his measure were very general—many of them were very valuable—some of them, he ventured to say, were objectionable. But whatever might be the opinion of himself or that of any other noble Lords, he thought after hearing the able exposition of his noble and learned Friend on a subject in itself difficult and complicated, their Lordships would all agree with him in thinking that this matter could only be discussed advantageously in Committee. He would, not, therefore, oppose the second reading; but he would suggest that after it had been read a second time it should be sent before a Select Committee, where its clauses could be much better considered than in the House itself.
  LORD BROUGHAMconcurred with the noble and learned Lord that this Bill could be better discussed by a Select Committee. To many of its provisions he had material objections. There were other clauses in it of great importance, to which he apprehended there would be no objection.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he would state on Friday what steps he should take as to the further progress of the Bill.
  THE EARL OF DERBYtrusted his noble and learned Friend (Lord St. Leonards) would not object to send his Bill before a Select Committee, where it was most likely to receive the fullest and most attentive consideration.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he had no objection to refer both this Bill and the Bill for Simplifying the Transfer of Land to a Select Committee on Friday, when he would take the opinion of the House upon a clause in the latter Bill, to which the late Lord Chancellor objected.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a and Committed to a Committee of the whole House on Friday next.

  MAGISTRATES' (GREAT YARMOUTH) PETITION.
  LORD SONDESaddressed their Lordships with reluctance; but having the honour to hold the office of High Steward of Yarmouth, it was his duty to attend to the wishes of those who placed him there. He therefore presented a petition from the Mayor, Aldermen, and Magistrates of Great Yarmouth, praying for an inquiry into the recent Appointment of Magistrates in that borough. He had understood that last year the hon. and learned Gentleman, one of the Members for the borough of Yarmouth, had a
  454
  communication with the late Lord Chancellor, in which he represented to him that it was necessary to increase the number of magistrates in Yarmouth. The noble and learned Lord attended to the wish expressed to him, and intimated to the Mayor that he would appoint six new magistrates. This announcement caused great astonishment in the borough of Yarmouth. The town council assembled and resolved by a majority of 25 to 5, to present a memorial to the late Lord Chancellor against the proposed addition to the bench. They presented a memorial, which is embodied in the petition accordingly, which stated that the magistrates then on the bench were constant in their attendance, and were sufficiently numerous; that the borough had about 31,000 inhabitants now, thirty-one magistrates, and thirty-one policemen — being one magistrate to every 1,000 inhabitants—and one policeman to each magistrate, which appears ludicrous—that the bench represented every shade of political feeling; but that the six gentlemen proposed to be appointed were all of one political opinion. The Mayor of Yarmouth presented this memorial to the then Lord Chancellor and had a long interview with him, and a correspondence took place between them. The noble and learned Lord intimated that it was his intention to persist in the appointment of the six magistrates, and that he felt it his duty, contrary to his usual practice, to appoint the new magistrates all of one party. This made a great sensation in the borough of Yarmouth, and in consequence the town council assembled and unanimously determined to petition their Lordships on the subject. Their petition be now presented; and represented that the addition to the magistracy was not made because there was any deficiency in number, and not because the administration of justice was partially administered, but because the majority of the bench had not voted for the liberal candidate at the last election. He believed that the noble and learned Lord was acquainted with Yarmouth, and connected with the county of Norfolk. He could assure him that this transaction made a great sensation in the county and borough. The noble and learned Lord, amongst his various duties, had not time to read the local press, but he (Lord Sondes) wished he would refer back to some numbers of the Norwich Mercury, the oldest and most influential of the Liberal papers in that county, and see the remarks upon that

  455
  transaction. He must express his opinion, that if magistrates are to be made for party purposes, there must be an end to that great feature in the administration of justice in England by unpaid magistrates, and the country must expect stipendiary justices to be appointed throughout the kingdom.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, though he was not aware what the contents of this petition were, yet if it were for an inquiry into his conduct he would at once say that the more searching that inquiry was the more glad he should be. He thought it necessary that he should state shortly what the facts were, because he entirely concurred in the opinion of the noble Lord that the making the appointment of the magistrates subservient to any political or party purpose was a course of conduct which was more completely disgraceful than any other. He must state at the outset that he had no connection with Yarmouth. He was never there in his life,—at any rate not for forty years,— except once, and that was on a railway excursion, when he stayed about an hour, and he knew nothing of the place except that an old friend of his represented it a good many years ago. The way he came to make the appointment of the additional magistrates was this. On the first day of last Michaelmas term, on which it was usual for the Lord Chancellor to entertain the Judges and the Queen's Counsel, one of the Queen's Counsel represented to him that the state of the magistrates of Great Yarmouth was most unsatisfactory. He would not say from party motives or from whatever cause it was, but it so happened that all the magistrates, except three, were not only of one political party, but were violent partisans. The number of magistrates was eighteen; the noble Lord overstated the number. He did not like to speak of Whigs or Tories, but of these eighteen, fourteen were violent Tories, one was a neutral, and three were Liberals. He said he could not appoint magistrates on the ground of politics; that was not the ground on which he went in this matter; but his informant said, "I will bring before you the facts, and I think they will induce you to interfere." He also got a memorial from the three liberal magistrates, who stated that they were in an unpleasant predicament; that they had to act with persons who were opposed to them in politics; that they did not like to absent themselves, but that they were only three
  456
  against so many, and that the suspicion prevailed that justice was not impartially administered. Turning a deaf ear to these representations would have been an easy way to himself; but on further reflection he thought that was not a proper course, and that he was bound to sift the matter to the bottom, and see whether there was any truth in the statement that justice was not impartially administered, or that it was believed that it was not impartially administered. The course he took was this: Being unconnected with Yarmouth he wrote to a gentleman of the highest respectability in the county of Norfolk, with whom he was not even personally acquainted, and stated what had been represented to him, and begged him to give him his opinion. He got a courteous answer from his correspondent, who stated that he had nothing to do with Yarmouth himself, but that he thought he had a friend with whom he would communicate, who would give him an impartial opinion on the subject, In the course of a week he got a letter from that gentleman, saying he did not believe, from his knowledge of Yarmouth, that with the then bench of magistrates it would ever be believed in Yarmouth that justice was impartially administered. He returned that letter, and therefore he had not the means of showing what were the exact expressions, but that was the effect of it. He (Lord Cranworth) thought he could not ride off, and say he could not interfere on party grounds; but he thought himself bound to put the magistracy in a position in which justice should not only be impartially administered but should be known and felt to be so. He might mention, to show the state of things, that the only two brewers in the town were Conservative magistrates; that they had the greatest possible influence, and that nobody but a political friend of theirs could ever get a license for a public-house. He was perfectly aware it might be said that brewers could not act in the matter of licenses; but they were acting with the other magistrates, sitting with them nine days a month, and it was ridiculous to suppose that the influence of these persons did not continue during the licensing days. And, therefore, it was that he felt himself bound to interfere. He communicated with the mayor; he did not say to him "justice is partially administered in your borough," but he told him he was satisfied from the information he obtained

  457
  that it Was thought to be so, and he mentioned the circumstance about the licensing, and that at the last election, out of eighteen magistrates fourteen voted against the Liberal candidates, which satisfied him that the allegations were not without foundation, and he said to him, "Let there be no mistake. I will appoint additional magistrates; and I tell you honestly and freely I do so because I think there is an undue preponderance of one political party on the bench." He did not know whether this explanation would be satisfactory to their Lordships; but for himself, if he had the same thing to do over again, he would take exactly the same course; because the holder of the Great Seal was bound to do everything in his power to have the magistracy as free as possible from party and political bias. Unfortunately, in the appointment of borough magistrates the holder of the Great Seal had very little, if any, guide. In the appointment of county magistrates he had the guide of the Lord Lieutenant, and though it was said that Lords Lieutenant acted from political motives, from his experience he did not think they did. But with regard to borough magistrates, there was nothing whatever to guide the Lord Chancellor in his appointments. In his appointment of borough magistrates he endeavoured to keep the two parties equal on the bench, and it was on that principle that in the appointment of magistrates at Yarmouth he appointed them all on one side. If an inquiry were instituted it should have his entire concurrence; and if the noble Lord moved for the appointment of a Committee he would second it.
  LORD SONDES LORD SONDES, in reply, said, he regretted he had made a mistake in supposing the noble Lord was acquainted with Yarmouth; he believed that at the last election twelve magistrates voted fur the Conservative candidate and ten for the Liberal. He did not wish to contend further with the noble and learned Lord, and left the case in the hands of their Lordships.
  Petition to he on the table.

CHURCH OF ENGLAND SPECIAL SERVICES BILL.

  THIRD READING.
  On Order of the Day for the third reading,
  VISCOUNT DUNGANNONsaid, he would not oppose the passing of the Bill; but he hoped that the utmost caution would be shown in the choice of persons who were to be sent into parishes under this Bill,
  458
  and that in their discourses they would as much as possible avoid topics of a controversial and party character; otherwise, they would sow the seeds of schism between the incumbents and their parishioners. The measure, to say the least of it, was an experiment, and it might be productive of good if cautiously applied. He confessed he did not look with much satisfaction upon any measure of that kind; but he thought the Bill of the Archbishop was much better than that introduced by the noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury), and which he could not but view as tending to remove the line of demarcation between the Church and sects. He should like to ask the Archbishop whether, under this Bill, persons would be able to administer the holy Communion during the special services that might be appointed?
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, the Bill would not in any way enable the administration of the Communion during the special services.
  Bill read 3a; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

NEGRO REGIMENT FOR INDIA.

  QUESTION.
  LORD BROUGHAMasked the noble Lord the Under Secretary for War (Lord Hardinge), whether there was any truth in the report that the Government intended to send to-morrow two officers to the coast of Africa for the purpose of raising black regiments for service in India. He cordially hoped that if this was not an entirely unfounded it was yet an exaggerated statement; because he could conceive nothing more strongly to be deprecated than sending men to purchase negro slaves —for it amounted to that — in Africa, with the view of enlisting them in black regiments. It would not be a free emigration scheme; but an emigration of slaves, purchased in the slave market and obtained from the native Princes, amid all the horrors, the detestable atrocities of the slave trade. If such a scheme were in contemplation, we must at once give up our negotiations with the French Government, by which we were endeavouring to obtain the abandonment of the emigration system adopted by that country; our mouths would be closed for over if we ourselves were entering upon the same course and commissioning persons to proceed to the coast of Africa and procure negroes for India. [The Earl of

  459
  DERBY: There is nothing of the kind.] If there was no foundation for the report, then all he could say was that he should be highly gratified, and at once relieved from the necessity of addressing their Lordships, or entering his protest against such a proceeding as he had described. He hoped his noble Friend would state to the House that there was no intention to take any such stops.
  VISCOUNT HARDINGEassured the noble and learned Lord that the War Department knew nothing of the report to which he had referred. It had, he believed, no foundation whatever in fact.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the stop in question might be a very dangerous one, and it would be satisfactory to their Lordships to hear that the Government had no intention of taking it. He was glad, however, that his noble and learned Friend had called attention to the subject.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he had never even heard of such a report until the noble and learned Lord mentioned it. It would, however, have been more convenient if the noble and learned Lord had given the Government some previous intimation of this question, in which case they might have been able to ascertain from what possible source such a rumour could have emanated, and therefore to give it a more positive answer. All he could say, he repeated, was that he had not heard of such a report.
  LORD BROUGHAMagreed that it would have been much more convenient if he had had an opportunity of previously communicating the purport of his question to the Government. But the case was this —the report had just reached him, and, seeing that his noble Friend at the head of the Indian Department had left the House, he had no means of asking anybody except his noble Friend connected with the War Department. If he had waited until the noble Earl was in his place, it might have been too late; because the report, if true at all, purported to be that to-morrow morning two officers were to leave this country for the coast of Africa. By putting the question he had obtained the satisfactory reply that the War Department knew nothing about the matter; and he trusted the report would turn out equally groundless as regarded the Indian Department.
  House adjourned at seven o'clock, till To-morrow, Half-past Ten o'clock.