Lords Sitting of 6 March 1860

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2a Dwellings for Labouring Classes (Ireland); Attorneys, Solicitors, Proctors, and Certificated Conveyances.

ANNEXATION OF SAVOY AND NICE TO FRANCE.—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: I wish to put a question to the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Newcastle), relative to an apparent omission from the correspondence of our Government with the Governments of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, on the subject of the annexation of Savoy, as contained in the papers recently presented to Parliament. It appears that on the 27th of January Lord Cowley wrote to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs for instructions respecting the language he should hold on the subject. These instructions were sent to him by Lord John Russell on the 28th of January, in a despatch in which he gives excellent reasons against the annexation. That despatch was communicated to Lord Bloomfield at Berlin, who was desired, when he saw Baron Schleinitz, to make his language conform-
2
able to those instructions, but not to read it to him, much less to leave him a copy. The same letter was sent to Sir James Hudson, for his information. I find no other traces of any communication having been made by any Minister of ours to any of these three Courts, but I find it is reported that Lord John Russell has made use of these words,—"It is my persuasion—I may be totally mistaken, because other circumstances may occur to prevent it—but my persuasion is that if the language of disapproval be held at Berlin, Vienna, and St. Petersburg, this project of annexation will not be persevered in." In that I entirely concur; but it is not sufficient to state that that will be the effect if these several Powers hold the language of disapproval. It appears to me to be also necessary to take steps to bring them to a common opinion, and to the use of a common language; without that it is idle to suppose that any isolated expression of opinion on our part would be of any effect in putting a stop to this project. I have no doubt in my own mind as to the character of the language which the several Powers of Europe ought to hold. I think they ought to say that, considering the territorial changes effected by the peace of Zurich,

3
and the present state of Central Italy, they are willing and desirous to take steps for the purpose of conferring and consulting with France as to the future of Italy, with a view to securing the welfare of the Italian people in any way consistent with the repose of Europe; but that, looking back to the transactions of the year 1815, they consider that the frontier of France as then settled was finally settled, and that no consideration will induce them to acquiesce in its extension as arising out of any changes in the territorial distribution of Italy. What I wish to ask the Government is, whether any steps have been taken, and, if any, of what kind, and at what time, to communicate the views of the Government with respect to the annexation of Savoy to the Governments of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, and whether steps have been taken to obtain their co-operation in inducing France to desist from that project?
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE:—I have no difficulty in answering the question of the noble Earl. The views of Her Majesty's Government in respect to the proposed annexation of Savoy have been communicated to the three Governments of Russia, Prussia, and Austria. The form in which those communications have been made has been to send to those Powers the despatches written by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to Lord Cowley, which appear in the papers laid before Parliament, and to send at the same time other despatches received from Lord Cowley and one from Sir James Hudson, the whole of which have been laid upon the table of the House. As regards the time, the dates of the despatches to which I have referred are the 28th of January and the 13th of February. The communication was forwarded to Berlin and Vienna on the 17th of February and to St. Petersburg on the 25th of the same month. As to the noble Earl's question whether we have invited the co-operation of these Powers in a protest against the annexation of Savoy, I have to say that no specific proposition of that kind has been made. The noble Earl would appear to indicate his wish to see something in the nature of a counter-alliance formed; but there has not been any proposal of the sort. If he refers to the despatches on the table, they will show him and the public that the Powers to whom these communications were addressed can be under no difficulty in ascertaining the strong view which Her
4
Majesty's Government entertain on this subject.
THE EARL OF DERBY:—I have, also, a question to put to the noble Duke on this subject. Upon examination of the papers it appears there was a despatch received from Lord Cowley on the 25th of February, in which he refers to his having been written to by Lord John Russell the day before on the subject of the annexation; but no despatch from the noble Lord of that date is to be found in the papers. I see there is another communication on the subject of the annexation of the same date, but it appears to have been received before. It is possible that the mistake may have arisen in that way; but I should be glad to know whether there is any other despatch of the date of the 24th of February.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: There has been no mistake of the kind the noble Earl supposes. The despatch to which the noble Earl refers did not appear to be of any particular importance, but there is not the smallest objection to produce it, and my noble Friend the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs has it in his hand at this moment ready to lay on the table.

THE COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH FRANCE.

  THE ADDRESS. NOTICE.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, the House would recollect that on the previous evening he mentioned the course which the Government proposed to take respecting the Address relating to the Commercial Treaty with France. Their Lordships were, no doubt, aware that the Motion intended to come on in the other House was postponed from last night to Thursday. It would be, therefore, impossible to move the Address in that House on as early a day as had been intended. It might, however, come up from the other House in time, so that notice might be given for Monday. But as it was possible that the debate in the other House might be adjourned, and as it would be convenient to their Lordships to have a day definitively fixed for the discussion there, he begged to propose Thursday in next week, which would answer equally well whether the Address came up to that House on Friday or Monday.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he had no objection to Thursday week; but a noble Lord (Lord Teynham) had a notice on the books for that night for bringing forward some Motion about vote by ballot.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, he I had not recollected the circumstance at the moment. He hoped the noble Lord would not be indisposed to postpone his Motion for a day or two, and he would communicate with him on the subject.

GRAND CANAL, MIDLAND, GREAT WESTERN, AND GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANIES BILL.

  PETITION.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE presented a Petition of the Inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood of Portumna, against this Bill. The noble Marquess said the Bill involved matters of the greatest public importance, as it was a proposition for the amalgamation of two railway companies, which engrossed the whole west and south of Ireland, with the Grand Canal, which was the only other means of accommodation for a considerable portion of country lying between the two railways. Although the Bill was a private one it involved a matter of the greatest importance to Ireland. There would be found in their Lordships' library many Acts of Parliament by which the public money had been advanced to the Grand Canal Company. The grants specifically for the inland navigation of the Shannon amounted to £133,100. There was a share of a grant of £1,000,000 for public works amounting to £54,649; and a share of another grant of £250,000—so that he was within the mark when he said that £200,000 of public money had been spent upon the navigation of the Shannon, which by this Bill was coolly proposed to be transferred to these railway companies. A large district of country lying between these railways was entirely dependent on them for communication; but this Bill would place the public altogether at their mercy. It would be said, perhaps, that clauses could be introduced by which tolls and rates might be fixed; but there could be no security that the railway companies would not take off the steamboats and bring the whole of the west, the centre, and the south of Ireland under their control. It was absurd to leave such a Bill to be dealt with in a Select Committee, and he should therefore oppose the Bill when it came before their Lordships.
  THE EARL OF LUCANbegged to thank the noble Marquess for calling attention to this Bill, which affected the interests of a large portion of the population of Ireland. The Bill came before the House under a
  6
  false title. It was called a Railway Bill; but its object was to throw the navigation into the hands of the railway companies. It was most objectionable that any canal should be in the hands of any railway company—so much so that, two years ago, a Bill was passed requiring railway companies to come to Parliament before purchasing any canal whatever. The objection was much stronger in this case, where the canal was to be held by the two principal railway companies in the country, who claimed as their territory the whole of the west, north-west, south-west, and centre of Ireland. The Bill would be most mischievous in its operation. Had this amalgamation Bill passed five years ago, they would never have got a railway from Athlone to the west. This was not a mere Private Bill, but involved a question of public principle, and he thought the House should not allow it to go before a Private Bill Committee.
  LORD MONTEAGLEconcurred in all that had been stated against this Bill. The measure ought not to be dealt with as an ordinary Private Bill, for it was really a Public Bill of a very dangerous tendency. An attempt of this character was made sonic years ago; but it appearing to the Board of Trade that it was directly contrary to the public interests that such a measure should proceed, the Board gave notice to oppose it on that ground. He hoped that the same course would now be taken. He thought, it a sufficient argument against allowing this Bill to pass that he had not heard a single opinion in favour of this Bill from persons connected with Ireland.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, this Bill was one of a class which very strongly impressed upon his mind the necessity of having a Department in this country to watch over these matters. The traffic of the country, as conducted by railways and canals, required supervision. Some years since a Railway Board had been established in connection with the Board of Trade, but it had since been discontinued. Besides the powers for purchasing the canal, this Bill contained other powers known as "working arrangements." A Bill of the same kind, promoted by the London and North Western and Great Northern Railway Companies, had been rejected last Session; but it was again before Parliament. All the House could do in this case was to allow the Bill to go before a Select Committee. The Board of Trade

  7
  proposed in such cases that the tolls allowed to be taken should be such that the canal might always remain fairly open to traffic. It was evident that some authoritative council was needed; for although the Board of Trade had been at great pains in these matters, it was impossible, constituted as the Board was, that it could take the lead in protecting the public interest in such cases. The business coming before the Board was so multifarious that matters were handed over from one officer to another, and no one knew how they were dealt with. The railway interest was always strong enough to overbear the interference of the Board of Trade. He wondered that the railway companies had not arrived at the conclusion that the more they accommodated the public the more they would benefit themselves. By the Orders of the House this Bill after being read a second time would go before a Select Committee. It would come before the House again on the third reading; but the House would probably not be disposed to reverse the decision of the Committee. He had nothing to suggest as to the course to be taken on this Bill; but he thought it highly desirable that the Government should adopt some means whereby they might exercise control over the plans promoted by great railway companies, and which seriously affected the public interests.
  THE EARL OF SHELBURNEbelieved that the railway interest would be extremely benefited by the creation of such a Department as had been referred to by the noble Lord who spoke last, either in connection with the existing Board of Trade or in the establishment of an entirely new tribunal. He thought that such an authoritative body would be of great assistance to those who sought to carry out great works of public utility, as well as to the populations these were designed to accommodate.
  After a few words from the Marquess of WESTMEATH,
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that a Government Department for the regulation of railways was no doubt desired by many of the railways and also by the public. In the first instance, the action of such a Board would be beneficial; but that which had happened before would happen again. Parties would complain of the decisions of the Board, the department would not be supported by the public and its influence would thus be weakened.
  8
  The Bill, at the first view, seemed to deprive the public of the advantage of the competition they at present enjoyed. That circumstance would be one of the elements for the consideration of the Select Committee, and if they thought that the powers asked by the company deprived the public of the competition they ought to have they could act accordingly. He saw no reason why the general course should not be followed in this case. Let the Bill be referred to a Select Committee and let them decide whether it was one of those cases in which it was desirable to affirm the amalgamation.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that the public would not be represented at all before the Committee. As a question of inland navigation, this case went far beyond that of a common canal; and he now gave notice that he would object to the third reading of the Bill unless it was altered in some way by which the public would be guaranteed against the mischiefs that he apprehended from it.

DWELLINGS FOR LABOURING CLASSES (IRELAND) BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for Second Reading read.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE moved the second reading of this Bill, which was to enable persons who borrowed money from the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland, for the improvement of estates in Ireland, to borrow money also for the purpose of building dwellings for the labouring classes. The Bill had been introduced last year and had passed their Lordships' House.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, it was true that the Bill had passed the House of Lords last year, but as it was by no means desirable that a system should be introduced by which the building of labourers' cottages should be made a charge upon land, a clause should be inserted giving the Commissioners power to judge of the necessity of the proposed new buildings, and at the same time to see that where the buildings were introduced to replace old ruinous dwellings the latter were destroyed. He hoped the noble Marquess would consent to the insertion of such an Amendment in the present Bill.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHobjected to the Bill, but hoped that if it passed care would be taken that loans were

  9
  not granted unless the plans of the proposed cottages were laid before the Commissioners, as in the case of the improvement of estates by drainage, &c. There was nothing on the face of the Bill that put a limit on the amount to be granted.
  THE MARQUESS OF BATH, also hoped that the noble Marquess would consent to the introduction of the provision in question, without which he must oppose it.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE, in reply, gave some explanations which were inaudible.
  Bill read 2a.

ATTORNEYS, SOLICITORS, PROCTORS, AND CERTIFICATED CONVEYANCERS BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  LORD CHELMSFORD, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, he was anxious to explain the circumstances under which it was introduced when there was already another measure of the same character before the Legislature. The whole of the laws with respect to attorneys and solicitors were comprised in the statute 6th and 7th Vict., which regulated the admission of attorneys to the roll and other matters. The experience of sixteen years had shown that the existing system required amendment, and that legal education was susceptible of improvement. The Incorporated Law Society having turned its attention to the subject, prepared a Bill for the improvement of the law, which was circulated among the members of the different Inns of Court, was sent to the different law officers, and a copy was transmitted to each of Her Majesty's Judges. Every one who was acquainted with and had investigated the subject expressed their approbation of the Bill so framed, and among others, his noble and learned Friend now on the woolsack, then Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, who expressed his highest approbation of the measure, and undertook to introduce it to the House. That was done, and the Bill having been introduced under his noble and learned Friend's auspices, passed their Lordships' House, and was sent down to the House of Commons very late in the Session—on the 27th of July. It did not get into Committee till August, where in consequence of the interposition of the Board of Inland Revenue in a matter relative to the stamp duties, delay took place, and before the Bill could be passed the
  10
  Session came to an end. It was the intention of the Incorporated Law Society to have re-introduced their Bill on the opening of the present Session; but it being necessary to communicate with the Inns of Court and the Board of Inland Revenue with respect to the machinery for the certificates, some delay took place, and in the meantime an hon. and learned Friend, a Member of the House of Commons, introduced a Bill which, with some alterations, had come up to their Lordships' House. That Bill was framed in a very remarkable manner. The Bill which under the auspices of his noble and learned Friend had passed their Lordships House, contained thirty-one clauses, embodying a general plan for the regulation and improvement of the profession generally. The hon. and learned Gentleman; to whom he had alluded selected eight clauses of that Bill, and imported them into his own, adding three original clauses. When the Bill was introduced, the Incorporated Law Society put themselves into communication with the hon. and learned I Gentleman, and requested him cither to withdraw his measure in favour of the larger scheme which they proposed, or to delay its progress for a stage or two, in order that both measures might be before the House of Commons at the same time. That, however, was refused, and the Bill went into Committee; when the Incorporated Law Society endeavoured to procure the insertion of the twenty-three remaining clauses of their Bill; but the Committee were of opinion that the general scope of the Bill did not admit of the insertion of those clauses, and said it was too great an alteration to be made in Committee. The Bill of the hon. and learned Gentleman therefore proceeded, and having passed the House of Commons, was brought up to I their Lordships' House. Under these circumstances, the Bill, the second reading of which he now moved, had been prepared at the instance of the Incorporated Law Society, the object of which was to elevate the character of the profession generally, to raise the standard of legal education, and to confer privileges on certain classes of persons who desired to be admitted to practice as attorneys. Nothing could be more inconvenient or contrary to their policy and mode of legislation than to allow two Bills to effect the same object to be introduced in the same Session, when the whole of the provisions might be incorporated into one measure; and it was, there-

  11
  fore, desirable that they should pass a Bill which had already substantially received their sanction, and not allow the introduction of the Bill brought up from the other House. It was not necessary to describe at any length the general scope of the measure he was now advocating; but there were one or two provisions of great importance on which he would make an observation. Under the present system no person could be admitted an attorney without having served five years as an articled clerk; it was proposed to give to persons who had taken a degree at any of the Universities the privilege of being admitted after a three years' service under articles, and to others who had passed a creditable examination the privilege of being admitted after a four years' service. There could be no doubt that such a provision would tend to raise the character of the profession. It was proposed also to give to persons who had served for ten years as clerks in attorneys' offices—not those who did the mere drudgery, but clerks who were engaged in a sort of business in which attorneys themselves would be engaged, and which necessarily tended to improve their professional knowledge—the privilege of being admitted after serving as articled clerks three years. He had at first thought that clause objectionable, as operating against the interest of gentlemen who, having received a liberal education, chose the profession of attorneys; but, after mature deliberation, he thought that the privilege ought to be conferred upon persons of that class who had faithfully and honestly served as clerks to attorneys for long periods, and had thereby acquired a high degree of professional knowledge and experience. There was some alteration in this Bill and the last one with respect to conveyancers, who, instead of being permitted to renew their certificates at their own option, would now do so under the sanction of the Inns of Court.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he rejoiced that the Bill had been brought before the House by his noble and learned Friend, and expressed his approval of those clauses that related to a meritorious class of persons the managing clerks, and which would tend to raise them in society. He trusted that some provision would be introduced to test their literary acquirements. He also expressed his approval of the provisions with reference to certificated conveyancers.
  After some explanation from Lord CRANWORTH,
  Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

INDIA—ADDRESS FOR PAPERS.
LORD MONTEAGLE LORD MONTEAGLE moved an humble Address to Her Majesty for Copies of the Statement founded on detailed Reports from the several Presidencies and Districts in India, and exhibiting the moral and material Progress of India, directed to be annually prepared and laid before Parliament under 21 & 22 Vict., c. 106, s. 53; also, all Correspondence between the Government of India and the Home Government relating thereto; And also Copies of any Correspondence between the Secretary of State for India and the Government of India on the subject of the Introduction of a Government Bank and Paper Currency in India. The noble Lord said, that Parliament usually contented itself with the belief that when it had directed a certain thing to be done, compliance with its directions was sure to follow. With regard to India, at least, that was not always the case. When in 1858 the question of the government and administration of the East India Company's territories was before Parliament, it was found that extremely important provisions in the law, with reference to a three-fold selection of candidates and with reference to private patronage in the civil service, had never been put into practice—they had been allowed to remain a dead letter. So also with regard to a provision in the Act of Parliament requiring the Company to apply certain sums annually to the purposes of education. In consequence of these and other neglects he (Lord Monteagle) called the attention of the House to the subject, and proposed that, as in the Colonial Department, a blue-book relative to the administration of these matters in India should be annually laid before the House. It was then argued that the matter had better be left in the hands of the Government; he did so; and nothing had been done in the matter. In 1858 he brought the matter before Lord Stanley, the Secretary for India, and a clause was introduced ordering that annual accounts should be furnished, accompanied by statements prepared from detailed reports from each Presidency, exhibiting the moral and material progress of India. The accounts only had been given, but no detailed statement; and the accounts which ought to

13
have been published in May last were not yet forthcoming. It was, however, added in a note to the accounts "that the statement exhibiting the moral and material progress of India had not yet been received from the Government of India." The Home Government was made aware of this in 1859, and he presumed there must be some correspondence on the question. With reference to the last part of his Motion, he learned through the public papers that there was a measure of enormous importance under discussion in India—a measure which if rightly described assumed that the Government of India were about to establish themselves in the position of bankers, issuing promissory notes payable on demand. Now, he did not say that this was an improper measure, but he could hardly imagine the case of any country, either abroad or at home, in connection with which a more important or critical question could arise for the consideration of the House than that of any Government assuming the position of a banker, and dealing in financial, pecuniary, and commercial affairs; but if that Government were a despotic Government, and if there were any case of exigency—and they knew the exigency under which the Government of India had been compelled to exist—if so easy and tempting a remedy as that of issuing a little more paper money to relieve itself from a pressing difficulty presented itself, he feared it might be too often induced to relieve itself in this way from its difficulty. It was a question calculated to create alarm and apprehension. We ought to know something of this matter, and how the matter was viewed by the mercantile communities of Calcutta and Bombay, and if such a scheme was really to be taken into the hands of Government, what were its recommendations and the plea for proposing it. It was altogether a question that called for the utmost consideration and the greatest possible care.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLmust be excused following the noble Lord into a defence of the East India Company against the accusations he had brought against them, seeing that they were now dead and buried. These complaints, whether well or ill-founded, had nothing to do with the form of Government, although the noble Lord bad insinuated that the same thing might arise under the new form of Government. With regard to the papers, for which the noble Lord had moved, the statistical returns had not been received at
14
the India House. No very voluminous correspondence had taken place on the subject; but he believed that the Indian Government had been asked to produce the statement, and whenever it was produced it would be laid before Parliament. The clause in the Act was certainly vaguely worded when it referred to the "moral and material progress of the country." That was a very general topic, and he did not think that returns pursuant to such an order would have enlightened his noble Friend on the question of currency. With regard to the issue of bank notes said to be in contemplation, his right hon. Friend the Secretary for India had received a copy of a Minute issued by Mr. Wilson. He (the Duke of Argyll) believed that the construction put upon a part of that document in England was a mistaken one; but it was the wish of his right hon. Friend not to produce the Minute until he was also able to produce his own Despatch in answer to it. As soon as his right hon. Friend's reply was sent out there would be no objection to lay both before Parliament.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHhoped that nobody would be sanguine enough to expect ever to see the return now asked for. In India they would not understand what was wanted; or, if they did, there would be no one to employ for the purpose. Perhaps a Report might in time be forthcoming; it would be very voluminous, and probably not worth having. He would suggest that the only practical way to obtain the voluminous mass of information would be by schedule and Act of Parliament.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEthought that if things existed in India as described by the noble Earl, it argued a degree of incapacity for the new Government of India that might have been supposed to belong only to the old. It was no more impossible to make these reports upon India than it was to make these reports in connection with other colonies. All the Colonies of Great Britain, from Heligoland upwards furnished similar returns to those now asked for, showing their moral and material progress, and if they could not be procured respecting India it would be owing to the virtual re-creation of the effete and absurd Board of Directors, chosen out of almost the same body, and serving as a screen for negligence. The Colonial Minister had no difficulty in getting these reports, and he did not see why there should be any difficulty in this

15
case. He trusted the question of paper currency was one that would be fully discussed.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: It is no use sending out the order when there is no one to obey it.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, if it were impossible to make out the return the officials ought to report to that effect, and prove it; but it was not proper that the servants of the Government should have the power of saying whether they would obey the orders of Parliament or not.
LORD MONTEAGLEthen withdrew that portion of his Motion relating to a Government Bank and Paper Currency.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
House adjourned at a quarter-past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, Half past Ten o'Clock.