Lords Sitting of 10 May 1860

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Paper Duty Repeal.
2a Public Improvements; Petitions of Right; Exchequer Bills (£13,280,000); Customs Bill.

INDIAN FINANCE.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, he presumed the Government would have no objection to produce to the House the Minute which had been published by the Governor of Madras, respecting the finance of India. He understood that the Government had promised to produce them in a few days to the other House of Parliament, and he trusted they would also be placed on the table of their Lordships' House with as little delay as possible.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that the Minute of Sir Charles Trevelyan would in a few days be presented to both Houses of Parliament.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, he would again complain of the non-production, by the Indian Department, of certain Returns required by Act of Parliament to be laid before the House; and said that if similar neglect were in future exhibited, he should more seriously call their Lordships' attention to the subject.

STATUTE CRIMINAL LAW CONSOLIDATION BILLS.

  OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON BILL.—COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Offences against the Person Bill read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, this was one of seven Dills for the consolidation of the Statute Criminal Law, which stood for Committee that evening. The subject had been before Parliament for many years,

  999
  and he took no credit to himself in respect to the production of these measures, except that of continuing the labours of his predecessors. As their Lordships would remember, many years ago Commissioners were appointed, to consider the subject of the codification of the law. Those Commissioners pursued their inquiries with great labour and diligence; they presented eight or ten Reports, which were subsequently reduced to the shape of Bills; but ultimately the codification of the whole of the law was found to be impossible, and it was, therefore, resolved to attempt only the consolidation of the Criminal Statutes, together with the assimilation of the criminal laws of England and Ireland. Such was the origin of the present Bill, and the set of Bills of which it formed one, which he hoped would receive the favourable consideration of their Lordships. It was only by placing a certain degree of confidence in those who had been employed to prepare the Bills, that the work of consolidation could be brought to a satisfactory conclusion. The Commissioners had done their best to fulfil the mission intrusted to them: the Bills had been referred to a Select Committee of their Lordships, which had been attended by lay, as well as by law Lords, and had been reduced to such a shape as that their Lordships might advantageously agree to them. He trusted their Lordships would not lose the present opportunity of effecting at least a partial consolidation of the criminal statutes.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he was satisfied that the limited amount of codification now proposed would be of infinite benefit; but hoped that ultimately the common law would also be reduced to a system.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHcomplained that the drivers of private carriages were not so amenable to punishment as they should be for any injuries which might be caused by furious driving or carelessness; and that the punishment awarded to offenders against the person was not so heavy as the nature of the offences demanded. In cases where such persons had caused the death of another by careless or furious driving, the offenders had been sentenced to two months' imprisonment only; though it would be hard to distinguish between their offence and that of some classes of murderers. By law the driver of a hackney carriage, who caused the death of another by driving over him, was liable to be indicted for a felony. He wished to see the drivers of private ve-
  1000
  hicles placed upon the same footing as those of licensed carriages.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the provisions of the Bill were taken from an existing Act, which was among those which were to be consolidated, and which was confined to the drivers of public carriages. The difference in the punishment awarded to them over the drivers of private carriages was, that hard labour was added to imprisonment, in the case of the former class. The reason of this distinction, he supposed to be, that drivers of public vehicles had charge of the persons whom they carried for hire; whereas drivers of private carriages had no such interest, and there being no special interest in the case, were loft to the operation of the common law. With regard to crossings, a person using them was bound to do so with ordinary care; and if any driver did not display a proper amount of caution in passing them, he would be liable to criminal indictment.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, the clause was a mere consolidation of the laws applying to public carriages, and had no reference to private carriages. In consolidating the law, the only defects which could be corrected were palpable mistakes, the Amendment of which would give rise to no difference of opinion. He desired to take that opportunity of acknowledging the very great assistance the Select Committee had derived from Mr. Greaves, an eminent member of the Bar, whose knowledge of all the branches of the law bearing upon their labours was most astonishing.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSreferred to the insuperable obstacles which had hitherto beset all attempts at the codification of the criminal law. The difficulty encountered in defining the word "murder" of itself ultimately led to the abandonment of one of those attempts. The various Bills which had been introduced for this object had cost the country not less than £100,000, and he doubted whether the expense would be compensated by the result.
  LORD WENSLEYDALEaddressed a few observations to the House which were inaudible.
  LORD PORTMANpressed the necessity of making some alteration in the law relating to aggravated assaults on women, since the parties by whom they were committed did not care at all for mere imprisonment. He suggested the propriety of enabling the magistrates to add hard

  1001
  labour to imprisonment in cases of aggravated assaults.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he did not approve of the magistrates, in cases of summary conviction, being empowered to inflict the punishment of hard labour.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHhoped that a provision would be introduced to the effect that the same penalty should follow where mortal injury was inflicted by a private as by a hackney carriage.
  The House went into Committee on the Larceny Bill.
  LORD BROUGHAMthought the only practical course for their Lordships to take, if they ever wished to pass these Bills, was to place all but unlimited confidence in those who had gone through them upstairs.
  House in Committee.
  Amendments made.
  The Report thereof to be received tomorrow.
  The other six Bills having for their object the consolidation of the statute criminal law—namely:—
  (2.) Larcency, &c., Bill.
  (3.) Forgery Bill.
  (4.) Malicious Injuries to Property Bill.
  (5.) Coinage Offences Bill.
  (6.) Accessories and Abbettors Bill.
  (7.) Criminal Statutes Repeal Bill also passed through Committee.

CUSTOMS BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  EARL GRANVILLE EARL GRANVILLE moved that the Bill be now read 2a. The noble Earl explained that the operation of the Bill, which had passed the House of Commons after much discussion, would be to simplify the tariff and to relieve the consumer by the reduction and abolition of duty to a considerable amount. He should, under ordinary circumstances, deem it to be his duty to enter into a detailed explanation of the provisions of the measure, and into an enumeration of the various articles with which it proposed to deal; but as most of the points to which he should have to call their attention were connected with the general question of the French Treaty, upon which a general discussion had already taken place in that House, and their Lordships were therefore already acquainted with the arguments and with the general scope of the Bill, he should refrain from occupying their attention at any length with respect
  1002
  to it, and content himself with expressing his readiness to furnish the House with any information on the subject which might be required at his hands.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: If, my Lords, we who sit on this side of the House offer no objection to the Motion which upon behalf of the Government the noble Earl has just made, and if we abstain from taking advantage of the opportunity which now presents itself to enter into a discussion of the Treaty with France, the tariff, and the general financial policy of the Government, it must not as a consequence be supposed that we acquiesce in, much less approve, the line of policy which in this respect Her Majesty's Ministers have pursued. At the time when we were first made aware of the proposals which by means of the Treaty were sought to be carried into effect we stated the objections to them which we entertained, and I need hardly say that those objections, instead of being removed, have been rendered still stronger in proportion as we have become better acquainted with the details of the instrument itself. The fact is, my Lords, that each day that passes renders firmer my conviction that the Government, in making use in the negotiation of this Treaty of inexperienced agents, in departing from the ordinary course of diplomatic arrangement and in entering into the consideration of an important subject with inadequate means and information, have brought the country into a position of very serious difficulty; have made a very disadvantageous Treaty, and have, so far as all the contingent advantages which it was supposed we were to derive from its operation are concerned, left us absolutely and entirely at the mercy of the French. Government—who, from the accounts which we now receive, are not, so far as I can see, very desirous to exercise any great degree of moderation in acting up to the powers in the matter which have been placed in their hands. While, however, these are the sentiments upon the question to which I feel it to be my duty to give expression, I concur with those who think that it is desirable the occasions should be as rare as possible on which your Lordships should feel it to be incumbent upon you to reject propositions connected with the finances and commerce of the country which have obtained the sanction of the House of Commons, and which come up to us stamped with the imprimatur and responsibility of Her Majesty's advisers.

  1003
  And if that he a course which it is expedient to refrain from adopting under ordinary circumstances, the reasons which operate against its being taken—when the question is not only one between your Lordships and the other House of Parliament, but one which involves the issue of our negotiations with a foreign Power and the adherence to a Treaty to which, however disadvantageous to us it may be, we are so far bound as to render it impossible for us to retrace our steps—acquire considerably increased force. I may add, that from a Bill of the nature of that which we are now considering, and which, as your Lordships are aware, comprises a great variety of articles, it would not be possible for us to eliminate any one of its provisions, and send the measure back so altered to the House of Commons, without an interference with the privileges of that branch of the Legislature. No alternative, therefore, remains to us, except that of cither assenting to or absolutely rejecting the Bill as it stands, the result of adopting the latter course being that we should disturb the whole of the financial arrangements of the Government, and not only that, but materially interfere with those commercial arrangements which have been entered into by the commercial world upon the full reliance that that scheme would receive the assent of Parliament. I am, under those circumstances, of opinion that we should be acting unwisely in rejecting the Bill, and I, for one, should certainly shrink from taking upon myself the responsibility of asking your Lordships to pursue that course, notwithstanding the fact that I regard the whole of the arrangements which have been made by the Government, including the Treaty, as being of a most improvident and dangerous character; and the financial position of the country, as a consequence, not only in the present year, but perhaps still more as regards the next, as being one which is calculated to create the deepest anxiety in the mind of every man who gives the slightest consideration to the progress of public affairs and to our financial and international policy. There are undoubtedly proposals embodied in this Bill which, if carried into effect, will tend to aggravate the difficulty, inasmuch as it provides for the remission of duties which upon a more fitting occasion it might be just and expedient to abolish, but with which we cannot at present afford to dispense. We are nevertheless, as it were, compelled to give our assent to those
  1004
  proposals, and thus far to diminish the already too attenuated revenue of the country. There is, however, another subject—I refer to the abolition of the paper duty—with which the terms of the Treaty do not in the slightest degree interfere, with respect to which no commercial arrangements have as yet been entered into, and in dealing with which Her Majesty's Government call upon us to make a wholly useless and dangerous sacrifice of nearly £1,500,000 of public revenue. My noble Friend on the cross benches (Lord Monteagle) has given notice of his intention to oppose the second reading of the Bill in which this proposal is embodied; and I, for my part—feeling that its rejection, so far from embarrassing Her Majesty's Government, interfering with their other arrangements, prejudicing the course of business, or proving injurious to the financial position of the country, would rather tend considerably to the advantage of each—will do everything in my power to accomplish that rejection, and so preserve a large sum of money to the Exchequer and a large portion of the revenue to the State. I cannot help adding that I think that the noble Earl, following the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his calculations, has confounded two matters. He treats the reduction made in the tariff as being a relief to the consumer to a certain amount, and assumes that the loss to the revenue will be made up by the increased consumption that will be occasioned. But when the noble Earl assumes the extent of the relief to the consumer he is not entitled to take as relief the whole amount of the duty he is taking off; because he will find that in several articles in which the duty has been taken off the consumer is obtaining no relief at all; but that the prices are still kept up, and in some instances have increased on the prices at which they stood when the duty was levied. I do not admit the proposition that the relief to the consumer is equivalent to the amount of the reduction of the duty. I shall not, my Lords, on this occasion cuter into any further discussion on the commercial and financial arrangements of the Government; but your Lordships will recollect that before Easter the noble Earl stated he thought it would be convenient that the financial arrangements of the Government should be brought under the consideration of their Lordships' House as a whole; and I cannot but think that the most fitting opportunity for taking the

  1005
  discussion will be on the occasion when my noble Friend proposes to us to deal with the measure which involves so large an amount of revenue as a million-and-a-half—I mean the Bill for the abolition of the paper duties.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 2a and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

LUNATIC ASYLUM, COUNTY DONEGAL.

  MOTION FOR ORDER IN COUNCIL.
  LORD LIFFORDmoved for Copy of the Order in Council naming the village of Letterkenny as the place where the proposed Lunatic Asylum for the County of Donegal was to be built, and of the deport of the Inspector on which that Order was founded. In doing so, he wished, he said, to call the attention of the House to the opinions upon the subject which were entertained by several gentlemen who had some knowledge of the locality in question. The Lord Lieutenant of the County had said that he saw with exceeding regret the course which the Government of Ireland proposed to adopt. The Marquess of Abercorn, the Ear] of Leitrim, the Earl of Erne, and Lord Donegal, who were large proprietors in that part of the country, were all opposed to the scheme. Out of the magistrates of the county twenty-four had signed a letter, which he held in his hand, objecting to the proposed site, and only three were in favour of the Letterkenny Asylum. One of the wants which had for years been most bitterly felt in Ireland was that of a strong public opinion. He was happy to say that evil was being gradually remedied; but meanwhile the Government officials were not subject to the same responsibility as in this country. The noble Lord on the woolsack would probably recognize the saying,—"It is a far cry to Loch-ow." The people of Ireland, therefore, looked on the Lord Lieutenant as their protector, and, feeling that by his high position and personal character he was removed both from the sympathies and necessities of his subordinates, they trusted that he 'would look into the details of the Government himself, and see that those beneath him did not attempt practices of which in England they would not dare to be guilty.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he had no objection to the production of the papers, and when they were produced the House would be able to judge on what grounds
  1006
  this asylum was to be built on this spot. He regretted that his noble Friend the Lord Lieutenant was not present to afford the information desired by the noble Lord.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIMsaid, he was not in the least surprised at the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland not being hero, and, indeed, he thought he had acted very prudently in staying away. He for one could not join in the eulogiums which it was the fashion to pour forth upon the noble Earl—
  EARL GRANVILLE,interrupting, said, that the reason why the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was not present simply was that he was not at the present time iii London. If the noble Earl wished to make an attack upon his noble Friend or the Irish Government he would suggest that he should put a formal notice on the paper, and then his noble Friend the Lord Lieutenant would be present to defend himself.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIMresumed. He certainly objected to the manner in which the Government of Ireland was conducted, the principle which animated it being that of electioneering. He objected to the humbug of the Government bringing into the House of Commons a Bill to reform that House whilst the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was carrying corruption to its highest point. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland could not arrange even such a matter as a lunatic asylum, or the appointment of a High Sheriff, without having some electioneering interest in view. There was no single excuse for him. He had heard it argued a thousand times that in having such a high officer as a Lord Lieutenant in Ireland they were protected from having outrageous jobs carried out. For himself he held a diametrically opposite opinion. He thought that the Lord Lieutenant was the greatest mischief-maker in the whole country. By the system which at present existed in Ireland the gentry of that country had been set aside, and the whole business placed in the hands of stipendiaries from the Lord Lieutenant downwards. Hence these jobs. The present instance was a gross job. Within the last live years there had been expended, and very properly, £306,114 on lunatic asylums in different parts of Ireland; and of this £41,450 had been laid out at Omagh, within two miles of the place where it was proposed to erect this new building, whilst in Deny the sum spent was £1,425. Three years ago

  1007
  the then Lord Chancellor of Ireland took great interest in matters of this kind and did infinite good; and he believed that fifteen years ago there was a rule that no lunatic asylum should be built except in assize towns. He should like to know on what principle this rule had been departed from? It was of the utmost importance that there should be proper investigation as to persons confined in lunatic asylums, for otherwise they might be made the means of imprisoning persons who were perfectly sane. Erecting lunatic asylums in out-of-the-way places would facilitate such an improper practice. There could be no object in laying out several thousand pounds in building an asylum in this part of Donegal, when they might if necessary make some addition to the asylum already existing. He did not find that there had been any extraordinary excess lately, but rather a diminution in the number of lunatics in that part of Ireland. In Londonderry and Donegal there were only 214 lunatics, only six in the prisons, and very few in the poorhouses. This asylum was not wanted, and there could be no earthly object in laying out this money. Gentlemen connected with Ireland had had no explanation in reference to this matter, and he thought that it was not satisfactory that a matter of this kind should be brought forward by the Irish Government entirely on their own responsibility, and without consulting a single one of the individuals who would have to pay towards the money which was to be expended. They ought to have some explanation from the Government. Why was not the Lord Lieutenant there, or why was not means taken for obtaining from him the information necessary to answer this question? He thought it was very desirable that there should be somebody in that House to represent the Irish Government. In the House of Commons there were the law officers for Ireland, and why, in their Lordships' House, should there not be an Irish law lord? In the absence of such an arrangement, why should not the Lord Lieutenant be there in person to answer for his own jobs? Why did he not come down and make some of those pretty speeches which he was in the habit of making in other places; and in which he was constantly talking of the prosperity of Ireland. The Lord Lieutenant had lately, at a public meeting, answered a speech which he (the Earl of Leitrim) had made in that House—a circumstance which he did not think was pro-
  1008
  per or respectful to their Lordships. What he had said as to the corrupt manner of carrying on the Irish Government was the opinion of every person in that country. How wore the lieutenancies of Londonderry and Roscommon given away lately, and for what purpose? The manner of carrying on the Irish Government brought it into thorough contempt; and, though it might be the intention of Her Majesty's Government to stand by the Lord Lieutenant, the feeling in Ireland was that they had sent the Earl of Carlisle to Ireland in order to disgust the Irish with the system of having a Lord Lieutenancy.
  THE EARL OF EGLINTON,in the absence of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and in total ignorance of all the circumstances connected with this matter, thought that it would be extremely hazardous in him to give an opinion as to this lunatic asylum being placed in this particular spot; neither in his absence would he dare to say one word in dispraise of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. He as fully believed that that noble Lord was as free from all charges of corruption and jobbery as he (the Earl of Eglinton) felt himself to have been during his tenure of office. He knew the manner in which such questions as this came before the Lord Lieutenant, and it was this:—They were referred to a Committee of the Privy Council, and the Lord Lieutenant signed the decision of that Committee—he would not say in ignorance—but at all events in a manner which rendered him as innocent and free from all blame, as was any one of their Lordships. Though, however, he acquitted the Lord Lieutenant, he did not acquit the system, which, on the contrary, he thought was entirely erroneous. In all these cases of county questions the opinions of the magistrates, of the gentry and tenantry ought to be taken into consideration; and in this respect the system should be altered. When he was, to use the phrase of the noble Earl, the Chief Stipendiary of Ireland during the late Government, a Bill was brought forward by the Administration in the other House for the better government of lunatic asylums, and it got as far as a Select Committee in the other House, and would have become law had it not been for the dissolution. That Bill proposed to give the county magistrates almost the sole management of these asylums, subject merely to the approval of the Lord Lieutenant. He thought it desirable that some such Bill should still be passed. His noble Friend

  1009
  complained of the Lord Lieutenant not being present in that House to answer for the jobs he had committed; but he must call their Lordships' attention to the fact that if the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland were to be frequently present in that House it would not be possible for him to do his duty in the country he was sent to govern. It was the duty of Her Majesty's Government, however, to answer for him in his absence; and, when due notice had been given of the present Motion, he thought the noble Earl opposite might have informed himself so as to give more satisfactory information on the subject.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that any suggestion for the improvement of the present system coming from the noble Earl would be received with that attention which it deserved. He was sorry, as to the particular case, that he was unable to give any additional information to that which would appear on the face of the correspondence.
  THE EARL OF DESARTaddressed a few observations to the House which were inaudible.
  THE EARL OF CLANCARTYsaid, he thought it would be matter of great regret, in Ireland if anything were said against the principle of maintaining the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; and he thought that the appointment to that high office of a nobleman entirely unconnected with the country was the best arrangement that could possibly be made. The public in Ireland looked with the utmost confidence to the Lord Lieutenant's high-minded opinion, which was, in fact, their only resource when they felt aggrieved by the public functionaries. The whole country felt greatly indebted to the noble Earl (the Earl of Eglinton) for the laborious and painstaking manner in which he had administered the affairs of Ireland. He did not believe there was a single individual in that country who felt that any act performed by the noble Earl had been inconsistent with his high and important duties.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIMsaid, he did not intend to say one word against the office of the Lord Lieutenant; what he complained of was the manner in which the duties wore performed by the present Viceroy. He entirely agreed with what had been said by his noble Friend who last addressed the House. Nothing could be more honourable and correct than the course of the noble Earl (the Earl of Eglinton) when he filled that office; but the contrast between him and Lord Carlisle
  1010
  was as great as that between light and darkness.
  House adjourned at a Quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, Half-past Ten o'clock.