Lords Sitting of 24 July 1860

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BIILS.—1a Heritable Securities, Ac. (Scotland); Game Certificates, Ac; Manchester Cathedral Church; Landed Property Improvement (Ireland).
2a Queen's Prison; Offences within Her Majesty's Possessions Abroad; Coast of Africa, Ac, Act Amendment; Herring Fisheries (Scotland); Felony and Misdemeanour; Crown Debts and Judgments.
3a Labourers Cottage (Scotland); Friendly Societies Act Amendment; Burial Grounds (Ireland) Act (1856) Amendment; Isle of Man Harbours; Dominica Hurricane Loan.

CENSUS (IRELAND) BILL.—COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he would express his satisfaction that the

79
clause relating to religious professions had been struck out of the English Census Bill. He wished to ask whether such a clause had been retained in the Irish Bill, in accordance with the wishes of noble Lords connected with that country? He also observed that there was a provision not in the Irish Bill, which it would be desirable to introduce into it, and another which it was in his opinion expedient should be omitted from it. The Census would give the numerical return of the population it found in that kingdom, but it would not give any return of the persons who had emigrated in the interval since the last Census. In former times emigration from Ireland was strongly advocated, and a great diminution of the population necessarily ensued. Latterly a very large increase had apparently taken place; but the extent of this increase had hitherto been only estimated by setting the number of deaths on one side and the number of births at the other, no account being taken either of emigration or immigration. Emigration they knew had largely gone forward, and he feared that when the details were ascertained it would be found that the country had lost a great portion of its military strength. Those who emigrated were principally the strong and hale, who would to a great extent have become soldiers if they had remained in the country; while those who stayed behind were largely made up of the old and very young. If it should be found that in proportion to the total number the most valuable portion of the inhabitants had left the country, it would be time, he thought, for the Government and Parliament to determine whether it was any longer advisable to take measures for the encouragement of emigration. He would suggest that the Government should introduce into the Irish Bill a clause similar to that contained in the Bill for England, defining the allowances of those who were to carry the provisions of the Act into operation. He likewise begged to move the omission from Clause 3 of the words, "and to take account of all such further particulars as by such instructions they may be directed to inquire into," which he thought placed an undefined power in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant.
LORD MONTEAGLEfully admitted that there was no longer any necessity for the encouragement of emigration from Ireland on the part of Her Majesty's Government, as that emigration had been attend-
80
ed with nearly all the benefits that were expected to follow from it. He would certainly impose no restraint upon that emigration; nil he thought the Government were now bound to do in the matter was to see that the emigrant vessels were perfectly seaworthy, well-found, and that the emigrants were adequately provided for, and exposed during their voyage to no improper treatment. He thought the noble Earl was mistaken with respect to the class of persons of whom the Irish emigrants now consisted. It was true that at the commencement of the movement those emigrants consisted principally of the young and active; but many of them after their success abroad had shown the most affectionate solicitude for the welfare of the relatives they had left behind them, and had, in many cases, taken care to supply the necessary funds for bringing over to join them both their young children and their old parents; so that the emigration now in reality included people of every age and of every variety of physical power. The latest returns would show that there was no longer any reason to apprehend a loss of military strength. With regard to the clause in the Bill which sanctioned an inquiry into religious professions, he strongly approved of that power being given, and he believed that such inquiries when made in 1835 had met with no opposition of any kind in Ireland. He very much regretted that it had been found necessary to omit the similar provision from the English Bill. He thought it was a concession to clamour and false alarm. It was impossible to suppose that to require a statement of the religious faith of persons returned by themselves could be regarded as an interference with religious freedom; there must consequently be some other motive for the objection. Could it be that persons objecting to afford information on such a point were actuated by an apprehension of some loss of their own importance if the truth were accurately made known. A party unwilling to have the exact truth stated thereby manifested a belief that the notions entertained as to its numbers and influence were at present exaggerated. In Ireland no objection was made to such inquiries. Under Lord Melbourne's Administration a special census was taken which was pointed solely at the relative numbers of the various Christian denominations, and yet the returns were obtained without the slightest difficulty. The ministers of all sects concurred in making the Returns most complete, and

81
there never yet was a more expeditious, more accurate, or cheaper statistical return made. No objection had been raised to this provision in its passage through the other House, and he hoped their Lordships would adhere to the Bill as it now stood. The Irish Census was, however, incomplete in one respect, inasmuch as it was a mere enumeration of numbers, unchecked by those calculations derived from the returns of births, marriages, and deaths which were so indispensable in England. He was glad to hear that a Bill had been introduced in the other House for establishing a system of registering births, deaths, and marriages in Ireland, which had only been withdrawn on account of the lateness of the Session. He trusted it would ultimately become the law of the land.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he did not propose to press any Motion; he had only pointed out the difference between the two Bills. No doubt this provision would give a great trouble to the enumerators, for he remembered hearing that in a small town in the North of Ireland, near which he had resided many years ago, there were no less than sixteen different sects.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he certainly regretted that it had been necessary to remove from the English Bill the provision which was originally inserted for obtaining Returns of the religious professions of the people. But when the Government found that, rightly or wrongly, that provision was offensive to a great portion of the inhabitants of the country, it would have been very improper upon their part to insist on its retention. He hoped the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Ellenborough) would not press his Amendment for the omission of certain words in the Irish Bill, which had only been introduced for the purpose of ensuring greater completeness in the Returns.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, the point that he objected to was the general power given to inquire into any subject besides those actually specified in the Bill which the curiosity of the Lord Lieutenant, or of somebody about the Lord Lieutenant, or of somebody else who was about somebody who was about the Lord Lieutenant, might prompt him to have inquired into.
LORD MONTEAGLEwas disposed to object to a general power, but was afraid it might deprive the collectors of the op-
82
portunity of making their Census comparable in all respects and in all points of information with the last, and thus injure the relative value of the results. He would suggest that the noble Earl should postpone his Amendment until he had had an opportunity of ascertaining what were the exact points inquired into in the last Census.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he had no objection to the Government preparing a schedule, in which should be inserted all the subjects that were inquired into in 1851; but he did object on principle to this clause, which empowered the Lord Lieutenant to inquire into any subject on which his curiosity might lead him to seek information.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the objections of the noble Earl did not seem to be shared by the Irish Peers. Unless there was some particular objection he thought it was desirable to keep the form of inquiry as near as possible to that which was instituted in 1851.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, his objection was that these irrelevant subjects of inquiry would extend the time for taking the Census, and would increase the expense. He objected to it, therefore, on economical as well as Parliamentary grounds.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the last observation did not support the argument of the noble Earl, because in Ireland the constabulary performed almost all the duty, and the expense was small.
Amendments withdrawn.
Bill reported without Amendment; and to be read 3a on Thursday next.

CENSUS (ENGLAND) BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  House in Committee (according to Order.)
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHobjected to the unnecessary details required by this Bill. What earthly use could there be in taking the names of every man, woman, and child, in England and Wales? 28,000,000 of names, which no man would ever read, to be bound up in 30,000 volumes! Why, it would be enough to form the foundation of a new Alexandrian Library. Besides this, the rank, profession, occupation, and condition of every person were to be stated, it was obvious that the occupation and profession were sufficient. Moreover they required to know what was the relation of every

  83
  person in a Souse to the bead of the family, and where each person was born—a question which many persons would be unable to answer. And it was to be remembered that the English inquiry at least would be very expensive, and these irrelevant inquiries would probably add some hundreds of thousands of pounds to the expense. It would be impossible to obtain this information in a single day; another day would be required, and the expense would be proportionally increased. He must say he greatly preferred the system of Ireland, which was much simpler, and where these particulars were not required.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, these particulars were required in Ireland, for he distinctly remembered that on the last occasion these particulars were required to be filled up in the papers left at his House; and more than that, there was a column for the blind, deaf, and dumb.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: That is here too.
  THE EAEL OF DONOUGHMORE: The only difference between the two countries appears to be that in England the information is entered in a book, and in Ireland on separate sheets of paper.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that all these particulars were required by the former Census, and the Home Secretary thought it desirable to continue the forms as exactly similar as possible. In England sheets were first left at every house, and afterwards collected. They were often written in pencil, and would be illegible by the time they had been turned over six or seven times. It was also a great assistance to the central office to have them copied into books, and in the case of sheets filled up in the Welsh language a translation was indispensable. It was not desirable to make changes which would perplex the enumerators. It was refreshing, however, for the Government to find themselves asked to omit details for which hitherto the pressure had been all the other way. There had been a great anxiety in some quarters to have an educational column, and one enthusiastic ethnographer was anxious to have returns of the number of people with different coloured hair, that some idea might be formed of the relative proportions of the Saxon and Danish races.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, his object in the remarks he had made had been to point out how all the statistics that were really necessary might be most simply and cheaply procured. If they got
  84
  a statement of the number, sexes, and ages of the people, they had all that, as a Legislature, it was possible for them to require. He did not think that the returns which would be obtained under this Bill would be such as they could rely upon, and the reason of that was simply that too much care was taken to make them perfect. First, a schedule was to be sent to each house; the enumerator was then to call and see that answers were attached to all the questions: having amended and completed the answers as well as he could he must proceed to copy them into a register: then the return had to be examined by the registrar, who, if not satisfied with it, was to make out another; the superintendent-registrar was to perform the same operation; so that by the time the return had been enlarged and amended by the various officers it would be a perfectly original document, on which they could hardly place much reliance. The truth was that the system was quite overburdened, and that the Irish system as it had hitherto prevailed was much superior.
  Bill reported without Amendment; and to be read 3a on Thursday next.

TITHE COMMUTATION BILL.

  REPORT,
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  LORD REDESDALEobjected to that clause in the Bill which made the price for the commutation of tithes compulsory at twenty-five years' purchase. There was no reason why a greater number of years' purchase should not be accepted if it could be obtained. For this purpose he would move an Amendment, the effect of which was, that the commutation should be for "not less than" twenty-five years' purchase.
  EARL DE GREY AND RIPONopposed the Amendment. A Select Committee of their Lordships had pronounced in favour of the arrangement in the Bill, and he thought it would be better to adhere to it.
  After a few words from Lord PORTMAN and Lord CRANWORTH,
  Amendment disagreed to; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

  THIRD READING. BILL PASSED.
  Bill read 3a (according to Order).
  LORD BROUGHAM,adverting to the

  85
  petition he presented last night, complaining of the alteration in the Friendly Societies Act of 1855, by a clause introduced on the Report of the Bill of 1853, on the eve of the prorogation of Parliament, whereby the consent of only one-fourth was substituted for five-sixths of the Members as necessary previous to the dissolution of a Friendly Society and the distribution of its funds, observed that this Bill was, he believed, intended to remedy the evil there pointed out.
  Bill passed.

FELONY AND MISDEMEANOUR BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD BROUGHAMmoved the second reading of this Bill. Its object was to assimilate the practice in cases of felony or other criminal proceedings to that adopted in civil proceedings, so far as regarded the regulation of addresses to the jury. It provided that in every trial for felony or misdemeanour, at the close of the case for the prosecution, the presiding Judge shall ask the prisoner's counsel whether he intends to adduce evidence; and if he states that he does not, then the counsel for the prosecution shall, if the Judge think fit, be allowed to address the jury a second time for the purpose of summing up the evidence. The Bill further allowed the prisoner or his counsel, after opening his case and calling his witnesses, to again address the jury, commenting on his evidence; the right of the counsel for the prosecution to reply, and all other proceedings, to remain as at present. Under the existing practice it had been found in too many cases that counsel for the defence, being afraid of the speech in reply at the other side, abstained from calling witnesses, thereby defeating the very aim and end of justice, namely, the discovery of truth. The great recommendation of the Bill was, that it placed the procedure in cases of felony and misdemeanour on the same footing as in civil cases. He did not support it on the ground of its being more favourable to prisoners and defendants, but because it was calcuated to elicit the truth.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
  LORD WENSLEYDALEfelt great objections to the measure. The nature of civil and criminal proceedings was entirely different. In the former, which were often most complicated, a clear exposition of the law was requisite in the first instance,
  86
  and difficulties which constantly presented themselves in the course of the trial required to be elucidated by argument. There were, moreover, no means of anticipating what the witnesses would say. But in any criminal case in which a conviction could be hoped for, the facts appeared clearly in the preliminary depositions; and long speeches would only consume the time of the Court, without being attended with any corresponding benefit. He therefore moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
  Amendment moved, to leave out "now," and insert "this Hay Three Months."
  LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, he was unable to understand on what principle it could be refused to place counsel in criminal cases on the same footing as in civil actions. The consumption of time, he thought, was wholly beside the question. If it were just and proper that counsel should have this right, the time employed was a secondary matter as compared with the attainment of justice. The counsel for the prosecution had always the advantage of basing his statement on ascertained facts; the defendant's counsel, on the contrary, having to treat of evidence which in most cases had never before been adduced. An ingenious counsel on the other side might point out discrepancies between the speech made under such circumstances and the evidence as afterwards given; it was consequently but fair to afford defendant's counsel an opportunity by summing up the evidence of removing such an unfavourable impression from the minds of the jury. He hoped, therefore, that their Lordships would read the Bill a second time.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he felt the greatest diffidence in giving an opinion upon this question, but still be must say that he thought there was great weight in the objections which had been stated to the measure. He also thought that it would he particularly hard upon prisoners who had no counsel to have two speeches instead of one made against them by the counsel for the prosecution.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid that, though with some hesitation, he should support the Bill. He was quite persuaded that this Bill would lengthen trials; yet if it were necessary for the proper administration of criminal justice the question of time ought not to have any weight in their decision. The principle, however, had been tried in civil cases, and on the whole successfully, and it might be of use in crimi-

  87
  nal cases. If, indeed, the Bill were to pass, he could not help feeling some satisfaction that he would no longer have to go circuit. He was afraid that the multiplication of speeches would tend to the perplexing of juries. In Scotland there were only two speeches in criminal cases, one for the prisoner and one for the prosecution; both being delivered after the evidence on both sides had been given. This practice had been found very successful. Under the Bill, as at present worded, if four prisoners were tried together there would be ten speeches. Still, as this right of summing up might be essential in 'some cases, he would not withhold his assent, though it was with some misgiving and hesitation that he gave it.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that practically in all important criminal cases in Scotland there were two speeches on each side.
  LORD CRANWORTHthought that in ninety-nine cases out of 100 the Bill would very unnecessarily lengthen trials, and anything which made the proceedings of criminal courts more distasteful to prosecutors must be generally injurious, and prevent the detection and punishment of crime. A great increase in the number of speeches, he was afraid, would by no means tend to the enlightenment of juries. He had no doubt that in many cases the Bill would operate more to the advantage of prosecutors than prisoners, but the advantage of either part was not the question they had to consider. The object to be attained was the greatest possible safeguard for the delivery of true decisions, and if he could persuade himself that improper verdicts were given for wan); of this right, he should be very sorry to oppose the Bill. He suggested that the Bill might be qualified in this way—that the presiding Judge might allow two speeches if he thought the case one of such difficulty a nddoubt as to make it reasonable. They would thus secure the object in view whenever it was necessary, and yet save the unnecessary protraction of all trials; because every counsel would construe the powers into a duty to address the jury a second time.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that having heard the speeches of two lawyers on each side, though they were not of great length, his mind was not more clear than before they addressed their Lordships. The noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, with a partiality for Scotland, said that the proceedings in that country
  88
  were perfect. His noble and learned Friend who moved the second reading must also have a natural admiration for Scotch institutions, but he proposed an entirely novel course, different from what existed here, and different from what existed there. If the Scotch law were so perfect, why should it not be adopted?
  On Question, That "now" stand part of the Motion, their Lordships divided:—Contents 13; Not-Contents 10: Majority 3.
  Resolved in the Affirmative.
  Bill read 2° accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

  CONTENTS.

  Campbell, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.) [Teller.]

  Somerset, D.

  Broughton, L.

  Chelmsford, L. [Teller.]

  Caithness, E.

  Foley, L.

  Ducie, E.

  Harris, L.

  Granville, E.

  Stratheden, L.

  Spencer, E.

  Wodehouse, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Amherst, E.

  Cranworth, L.

  Carnarvon, E. [Teller.]

  Egerton, L.

  Romney, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford)

  De Vesci, V.

  Wensleydale, L, [Teller.]

  Melville, V.

  Sydney, V.

  House adjourned at Eight o'clock, to Thursday next, half-past Ten o'clock.