Lords Sitting of 10 April 1862

MINUTES
.— PUBLIC BILLS.—2a Chancery Regulation; Crown Suits (Isle of Man); College of Physicians (Ireland).
3a Whipping; Pier and Harbour Act Amendment.

POOR LAW (SCOTLAND)—RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.—PETITION.
THE EARL OF WICKLOW presented a petition from James Toland and Elizabeth Murphy, the nearest relatives of a child who was horn in Glasgow, and whose parents were Roman Catholics, complaining of a certain decision of the Board of Supervision. They stated that the parents of the child were Roman Catholics; that the mother was dead, and that the father had enlisted in the army in 1855, and had not been heard of since. They complained that all access to the child was denied to them and to any pastor of the Roman Catholic religion, and that the child had been sent from the poor-house to a purely Protestant institution. He had presented a similar petition last year from the neighbourhood of Edinburgh; and the answer was, that the child, though only nine years of age, had no objection to being brought up a Protestant. The law of this country was that a child under fourteen years of age was incompetent to form any opinion on such a subject. The matter called for some interference, and ought to be investigated either by a Government Commissioner, or that the Poor Law Committee of the other House now sitting should be directed to extend its inquiries to Scotland.
746
It was a matter of gross hardship that a child should be subject to such treatment, and he trusted that the noble Duke, who must feel interested in the honour and integrity of his country, would aid him in abating the continuance of such an evil, if the evil existed.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that last Session a similar complaint was brought before the House, and he, in consequence, communicated with Sir John M'Neill on the subject. The result was that counter-statements were presented, which satisfied the House that great exaggerations had been made in the petition. If his noble Friend would communicate to him the particulars of the present case, he would again refer to Sir John M'Neill, and he was quite sure that all proper measures would be adopted. There was some difficulty in dealing with these cases in Scotland. The children were the children of parents who had practically deserted them; and if, in the present instance, the parent enlisted, and afterwards sent home no means of support for his child, nor communicated with the family, the man might be said practically to have deserted the child. In many cases it was felt to be better, on the score of health, and more economical, to bring these children up in the country; and as there were very few rural districts in Scotland where Roman Catholics could be found to take care of them, the children were necessarily put to board with persons of the Presbyterian Church. Wherever it was possible, Roman Catholic children were placed under the care of Roman Catholics, or were sent to a neighbourhood where there was a Roman Catholic priest.
THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYsaid, that a practical hardship had been alleged to exist in this case, and he thought that an investigation should take place. He would suggest to his noble Friend to move for a Committee after Easter. No one could more fitly preside over such a Committee than his noble Friend, who was well known for the honesty and impartiality of his opinions.

THE ADMIRALTY DEPARTMENTS AND BUILDINGS.—QUESTION.
LORD KINGSDOWNsaid, that in the course of the autumn formal notices had been served upon all proprietors and occupiers of premises in Spring Gardens and New Street, with a view to obtaining a site

747
for new offices in connection with the Admiralty. He had lately heard that the intention of building those offices had been either suspended or entirely abandoned. It was a considerable hardship for anybody to be turned out of a house that suited him; but if the public convenience required it, individual inconvenience must be submitted to. The hardship, however, was, still greater, to have an eviction of the kind he had alluded to hanging over one's head—and to be kept in a state of uncertainty whether it would or would not be executed. A man could under such circumstances neither lay out money on his house, nor dispose of it, nor provide himself with another, and he thought Government ought not to serve such notices unless they had fully determined to act upon them. He wished, then, to know from the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty, whether he had made other provision for the accommodation of his officers, or, at all events, whether or not the scheme for building new offices on the site in question had been abandoned?
THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, the Admiralty had determined to bring all their detached offices into close contact with the Department, as they believed that such a step would contribute to efficiency and economy in the transaction of the great mass of business which the Admiralty had to perform. The Admiralty had therefore pressed the question of new offices on the Treasury and Board of Works; and while the subject was under consideration, he requested the Board of Works in the autumn to give notices to the inhabitants of New Street and Spring Gardens that their houses would be required, so that if they came to a conclusion upon the matter, the purchase might be completed without delay. The matter, however, did not rest with the Admiralty, and the sum that would be taken for the new buildings would be brought forward in the Estimates of the Board of Works. Upon consideration of the subject, the Board of Works thought that the plan would admit of some improvement before Parliament was asked for any money, and therefore some delay had occurred in the matter. He could not, however, give the noble Lord the assurance that the matter would not come before Parliament in another year. The close connection of the several branches in the War Office Department had materially contributed to the despatch of public business, and a similar advantage would be obtained
748
for the Admiralty when all the departments were brought under one roof.

ITALIAN AFFAIRS.

  CORRESPONDENCE PRESENTED.
  EARL RUSSELLhaving presented (by command) correspondence respecting Southern Italy,
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYcomplained, that the production of these papers should have been postponed to the last day before the recess. Three or four weeks had elapsed since he made the Motion for this correspondence, and yet the few pages that were laid upon the table were all the result. It hardly required three or four weeks to extract such a valuable contribution to their Lordships' information. It was not of the number only of the papers that he had to complain, but of this—that there was among them only one despatch of Sir James Hudson written this year, the rest all related to 1861. With respect to the only despatch which related to this year, Sir James Hudson said that the law which regulated prosecutions of the press was well defined. But the question was, was it acted upon? He understood that, among other prosecutions, one newspaper had been prosecuted merely for reprinting an article from a London newspaper. The despatch did not contain any allusion to the proceedings in the Turin Parliament, nor to the speeches of M. Ferrari and other members, which described the atrocities which had been perpetrated in Naples, and which completely refuted his noble Friend's favourite idea of Italian unity. Notwithstanding the statement of Mr. Bonham on the subject of Major Fumel's proclamation, there was no doubt that Major Fumel had offered a reward of 100 f. to any brigand who would shoot his comrade. If Her Majesty's Government followed out their preconceived nations, they would receive the smallest possible amount of information from their agents. He wanted to know whether the noble Lord could explain why Sir James Hudson had taken no notice of the important discussions which had taken place in the Chamber at Turin this year. Was it because they were very much against his favourite doctrine of the unity of Italy? One despatch alone had been presented, giving a report of a speech of a deputy last year who had no particular claim to notice: why had none been forwarded this year?
  EARL RUSSELLsaid, that search had,

  749
  of course, been made at the Foreign Office for such papers as might appear to answer the terms of the Address in which they had been moved for by the noble Marquess, and very few were found to answer the description. With respect to the press prosecutions, Sir James Hudson had said that there was no case of oppression which had been brought under his notice, and he did not consider it necessary to give an account of what passed in the law courts. He was sure their Lordships would not think it necessary that an account should be sent to the Foreign Office of all the debates which took place in foreign countries. Our Minister at the Court of Turin sent reports relating to the condition of Italy, just as our Ambassador at the Court of Russia gave the Foreign Office much information: about the case of Poland, and our Ambassador in Austria much information about the state of Hungary; but it was not the practice, and he did not think it would be desirable, to place all that information before Parliament.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYwished to know whether he had rightly understood the noble Earl to say that there had been other reports of the late debates at Turin, which he had not thought it desirable to present?
  EARL RUSSELLsaid, that the despatch to which he had alluded was the only one that answered the noble Marquess's description.

CHANCERY REGULATION BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for Second Reading read.
  LORD KINGSDOWN, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that it was an additional step, though a small one, in the progress of improvement in the Court of Chancery—a Court which, he would not hesitate to say, having regard to the nature of the cases which it decided, and the value of the property which it administered, was now one of the cheapest and most expeditious, as well as one of the best in the kingdom. It had formerly been the practice for the Court of Chancery, in cases that came before it, to send questions of both law and fact to the Courts of Common Law for determination. The decision of these Courts, however, was by no means conclusive, and there was one case on record in which Lord Eldon sent a case to the Queen's Bench; but, being dissatis-
  750
  fied with the opinion, he sent it to the Court of Common Pleas. Lord Eldon was again dissatisfied with the decision, and he finally decided the case upon his own judgment, and a very large estate was now held upon that decision. This was on the construction of legal instruments—a question of law—but the same course was pursued with the same result in questions of fact. An issue was directed to be tried in a Court of Common Law; but if the Judge was dissatisfied with the verdict, he refused to act upon it. At that time the mode of taking evidence in the Court of Chancery was so defective that it was impossible to arrive at any satisfactory result. In the year 1852 a revolution was made in the practice of the Court of Chancery, and an Act was passed giving the Court the power of determining any question of law or fact which might arise previous to the decision of the equitable question. It was intended by this Act that the Court of Chancery should decide for itself all the questions necessary to enable it to pronounce judgment. This Act, however, was not obligatory, but only permissive. Another Act, passed in the year 1858, gave the Court of Chancery additional powers for determining all questions of fact. It was empowered to summon juries, and the verdicts of such juries had the same effect as if they had been given in a Court of Common Law. Last year, a Commission having issued, several suggestions were made for improving the practice of the Court. As the Judges were now provided with full means of ascertaining the truth in any manner which they thought most advisable, it was desirable to make it their duty to avail themselves of the facilities they possessed. At present, when parties came prepared, at great expense, to try the question of law and fact, they were sometimes told to go before a Court of Common Law to try their right, and then to come back to the Court of Equity and claim its interference. When the Bill was originally brought in, in the other House, it made it obligatory upon the Judges of the Courts of Equity to try all the questions that came before it in the proceedings in a cause; but it was afterwards thought desirable to insert some qualifying words, so that the Act might not cause additional expense beyond what was now incurred in certain cases. The Bill was not intended to effect a great deal; but he thought their Lordships would agree with him in thinking it desirable that the

  751
  Court of Chancery should avail itself to the fullest of these facilities for the administration of justice which the Legislature had already decided on placing at its disposal. He therefore begged to move the second reading of this Bill.
  Moved, that the Bill be now read 2a.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he fully approved the principle of the Bill: the only point on which he differed with his noble and learned Friend who had moved the second reading was as to what the Bill would accomplish. He thought it would accomplish a great deal, provided that its obligatory character was preserved; but certain alterations had been made in the Bill in its passage through the Commons, which, in his opinion, would very much detract from its efficiency, and might lead to its obligatory character being evaded. He should like to have an alteration made in the language of the second clause, in order to leave no loophole—no mode of evasion; in order to render it certain and sure that the Court of Equity should not send to the other side of Westminster Hall any portion of the justice which it ought itself to administer. He should communicate with his noble and learned Friend as to the way in which he thought the clause might be altered, so as to render it more effectual for carrying out the great object of the Bill.
  LORD KINGSDOWNconcurred with the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack in what he had said of one of the alterations; but it had been made in deference to an opinion of great weight— namely, that of the Solicitor General.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid a few words on the measure, which were inaudible.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that although he objected to the modifications which had been introduced into the Bill in the other House, he had no wish whatever to interfere with the discretion now permitted to the Court of Chancery of deciding as to how and when proceedings should be initiated. He only feared that the wording of the clause as amended might defeat the object of the measure.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday, the 6th of May next.

EDUCATION—THE REVISED CODE OF REGULATIONS.

  PETITIONS. QUESTION.
  LORD LYVEDENrose to present cer-
  752
  tain petitions against the Revised Code of the Committee of Privy Council on Education. His Lordship said, that as these petitions had been sent to him for presentation to their Lordships, he had thought it his duty to present them; but, for himself, he believed the Code was a great improvement on the existing system. Her Majesty's Government, in his opinion, deserved great credit for the energy with which they had met the difficulties of the case, and for proposing a system which, though it was not likely to be so popular, placed the education of the country on a sounder footing. He wished to ask his noble Friend the President of the Council whether he would consent, after Easter, to a Select Committee of their Lordships to consider the Minutes of Council on Education as recently altered? Unfortunately, during the present Session the great question of education had never been brought before their Lordships as a whole; but its importance had been frittered away in small discussions of particular points of the Code itself, or of objections to the Minutes of Council. Believing that their Lordships possessed peculiar qualifications for expressing a sound and valuable opinion on the subject, both owing to their personal acquaintance with the administration of schools in their several localities, and because they were unencumbered with the objurgations which reached Members of the other House from constituents opposed to a change in the system from personal interests, he was anxious that an opportunity of expressing their views on the question of education should be afforded to them. If that remark applied to their Lordships' House as a whole, it applied with equal force to a Committee of it. Limited as had been his experience of Committees of their Lordships' House, his personal observation led him to believe that a fairer or more impartial tribunal did not exist. At the outset of the discussions on the Revised Code they had been told that it was not to be made a party question. But disclaimers of party spirit, as they well knew, often ended in the bitterest party strife. He could not say that on the present occasion such had been the case; but at least there had been a very narrow escape. Everybody knew that a number of unfamiliar faces had appeared in Parliament ready to take part in the decision; and if the evils of party had

  753
  been avoided, his noble Friends on the Treasury bench would hardly deny that the result Arrived at was due not so much to conviction of its propriety as to a very reasonable dread of a party defeat. Before a Committee of their Lordships' House, however, there would be no fear of the introduction of party or personal feelings. These latter had, unfortunately, been largely imported into the discussions. At public meetings during the recess, the hostility to the alteration in the educational system had been freely ascribed to the economy of Mr. Gladstone and the philosophy of Mr. Lowe. Nothing could be more unfair than the attacks which had been made on that right hon. Gentleman. Himself an adept in education, perfectly skilled in the right method of stimulating energy and encouraging genius, a fine scholar, and a lover of literature, what on earth could induce him to oppose the existing system, supposing it were best adapted to the requirements of the country? On the contrary, he thought the country was indebted to the right hon. Gentleman and to his noble Friend the President of the Council for having stemmed the tide of extravagance which was overwhelming the Estimates. What was the object which the State proposed to accomplish by the grants for education? He had read with pleasure a letter written by a lady named Sewell to the Royal Commissioners—a more sensible or practical composition he had never seen. This lady stated, that if the education given in schools were confined to such as was fitted for children who had to earn their bread by the sweat of their brow, as their fathers had done before them, the object might be attained; but if they went further and endeavoured to raise the condition of the children themselves, they would certainly and assuredly fail. The question was whether that idea had been kept in view in the State-assisted schools? The education given in these schools was intended to be, in the words of the Royal Commission, "cheap, sound, and elementary." But had it been confined to that? So far from being elementary, the reports of some of the Inspectors defined what they considered a "good," a "fair," and an "excellent" school: but, according to their description of an "excellent" school, the highest class of these schools was such that their Lordships might send their sons to them, or themselves wish they had received their education there. He
  754
  contended that Parliament had no right to tax the people for anything beyond elementary instruction. To remove barriers which a man himself in after life would be unable to surmount was a fair and legitimate object; but further than that they ought not to go. It was said that the instruction should be carried so far as to give the people of the humbler classes a love for books: but what was the kind of books that these classes loved? It had been seen in the Report upon Military Schools that the books which they chiefly read were works of fiction and romance. If it were sought to give them a taste for any higher class of literature, they must not only be supplied with books, but with places in which to read them; and if they attempted that, he did not know how far they might have to carry the expense, unless they meant to resort to the system of the ancient Romans, who gave games to the people for the purpose of amusing them and keeping them quiet. He trusted that no one would suppose him to be an enemy to education—on the contrary, he had always been a determined advocate of education; but, at the same time, he held that anything beyond elementary education ought to be supplied by voluntary efforts, and not by public money. When the present system was originally established at a cost of £20,000, it was never contemplated that it would reach £800,000. A right rev. Prelate had asked, considering the vast sums they wasted in unholy wars, what objection there could be to the expenditure even of £2,000,000 on the education of the people, if that outlay might possibly rescue thousands from the cell and the gibbet. But did the education now given so save them? The most unsatisfactory part of the Commissioners' Report, to his mind, was that which treated of the moral results of the educational system. There were under that head only some half-dozen pages, followed with reports only from Inspectors in mining and manufacturing districts, stating that they thought there was an improvement. But where were the criminal statistics to substantiate their case? He thought their Lordships were entitled to ask what value they received for the £800,000 which the country was every year spending on schools; and what was the answer of the Commissioners? Why, that the money did not educate one-fourth of the children of the nation, and that the education which was given was "too ambitious and too superficial." They could hardly have found in the

  755
  English language two words more condemnatory of the existing system; for what they wanted was an education which was unambitious, but which was sound. He believed the operations of the Committee which he proposed would be attended with the best, results. He did not intend that they should travel over again the ground exhausted by the Royal Commission; but he thought it very important that a statement should be put forward authoritatively of the present position of the question, which was not understood by the country, many persons being carried away by the general cry in favour of education. It might be asked of what use would the inquiry be, seeing that the question was after all one of national expenditure, and. their Lordships' House had no constitutional control over the Estimates. He did not think, however, that that argument was tenable for a moment. To say that one of the most vital questions of the day was to be excluded from the consideration of one branch of the Legislature, and that the other, by holding the purse-strings, should have complete dominion over it, seemed to him to be as monstrous a doctrine as it was unconstitutional. He believed that the decision of a Committee of their Lordships on such a subject would be very valuable, and that it would be well received by the community at large, whatever it might be. With these views, and desiring not to obstruct, but rather to forward the measures of the Government, he asked his noble Friend whether he would himself propose, or sanction if proposed by any other noble Lord, the appointment of a Select Committee to consider this subject.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, although I cannot give to the question the answer which my noble Friend would desire, I hope he will allow me to thank him, not only for his courtesy to myself personally, but also for his truthful and just appreciation of the great public services of Mr. Lowe with respect to this question; and still more do I wish to thank my noble Friend for the good sense which he has shown and the excellent principles which he has laid down in the speech which he has just delivered. I can assure my noble Friend that I should be the very last person to undervalue the utility of the discussions of this subject in this House. On the contrary, I feel that I have reason to be most highly satisfied with the character of these debates, and also with the great good sense and judgment which have been
  756
  exhibited in many of the occasional speeches delivered since the commencement of the Session, to which that of my noble Friend is a valuable addition. I am pleased with the position of the question in this House, where the discussions have been entirely free from party spirit. I entirely agree with what my noble Friend has said in regard to the Revised Code. My noble Friend the noble Marquess behind me (the Marquess of Lansdowne), under whose conciliatory administration the Minutes of Council first found favour with the country, has authorized me to state (which I do with especial gratification) that in his opinion the time had come for a change in the mode of administering the Parliamentary grants; and he has also authorized me to say, that although he has not been able to consider every point of detail, he thinks that the changes embodied in the proposal which we made will have had a very beneficial operation. In answer to the appeal which has been made to me as to whether the recent alterations are not rather concessions made under fear of defeat, I frankly confess that, in my opinion, those last concessions are not improvements on our plan, but, on the contrary, will to a certain extent, tend to diminish its economy, and to weaken the effect of the stimulus which we wished to apply to that elementary instruction, with regard to which my noble Friend has not expressed himself one whit too strongly in describing it as the important part of national education which the State ought to assist. I was, at the same time, glad to find that my noble Friend does not undervalue the advantages of a higher class of education. My own opinion is, that you cannot educate the people too highly if you really educate them soundly in those elementary matters which it is essential that they should know. That, however, is, with the large mass of the labouring classes, impossible; and my objection against the existing system is not that it has taught too much, but that it has not taught—at least not so well, nor so universally as we could have wished—exactly that most important part of education. In reply to the question of my noble Friend, I must answer it in the negative. I must say that I do not think that the adoption of the course which it suggests would help us with or further the measure which we have in hand. At the beginning of the Session the Government thought it necessary to consider the different proposals which it was probable would be made by the opponents of this

  757
  measure; and, among other things, we thought it probable that it might be proposed to refer the subject to a Select Committee. Upon a careful review of the advantages and disadvantages of such a course, we came to the conclusion that such a reference would not be desirable. Nothing is more important in regard to questions like this than that you should inquire and consider well before you act; but the time does come when you must act, and the multiplying of different forms of inquiry is a most inconvenient form of action. My noble Friend did ample justice to the labours of the Royal Commission. That Commission sat three years; they had a large staff, a certain sum of money was expended, and a very able Report was the result. My noble Friend proposes that the Committee should not go over the ground which has been already traversed by the Commission; but it would be impossible to avoid doing so, and the result would be that the Committee would be examining the same witnesses and discussing the same questions as the Commission examined, with infinitely less time. If there was any force in these objections to the appointment of a Committee at the beginning of the Session, it is clear that they apply with tenfold force now that we have nearly reached the Easter recess; and such a Committee could not, if appointed, commence its labours until a considerable part of the Parliamentary Session, which does not promise to be a remarkably long one, had elapsed. For these reasons I cannot hold out to my noble Friend any hope that I shall either propose or encourage the proposal of a Select Committee upon the subject.
  EARL STANHOPEexpressed his entire assent to the conclusion at which the noble Earl the Lord President had arrived. He did not think that any advantage could result from the labours of a Committee, the appointment of which must greatly delay the settlement of this question. Their Lordships had now before them, in the Report of the Commission, the evidence, and the additional papers which had been produced, ample information; and all that was now needed was that that information should be applied and acted upon. There was, indeed, one point upon which he should be glad to receive further information. They had been promised that a substantial portion of the grant should be given independently of the examination. That term "substantial portion" was
  758
  rather an elastic one, and might be either expanded or contracted. On that point he thought the noble Earl ought to give the House some information.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he intended to-morrow to lay on the table papers showing the mode in which the Government proposed to fulfil the pledge given in the other House, and to take the opportunity of making a short statement on the subject.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, I cannot but think that the noble Earl opposite is perfectly justified in refusing to accede to the proposal of the noble Lord (Lord Lyveden). There can be no doubt that a Committee, if appointed, would sit a very long time, and, whatever might be the value of its recommendations, they would probably come too late to be of any use. The noble Earl appears to be quite satisfied with the position which the question occupies in the House; and perhaps he has reason for being so. For my own part, however, I regard the situation of the question as being in the last degree unsatisfactory, and I think that people generally, when they begin to examine it, will be of the same opinion. The Government had before them a case of the most monstrous abuse, shown in the Report of the Royal Commission—an extravagant expenditure constantly increasing, very little good being done, and no hope of more good being obtained. They accordingly endeavoured to apply a remedy. If they could not reduce the expenditure, they desired, at least, that it should not be charged to the public without some return; that the benefit should be commensurate with the outlay. That was a most legitimate object; it was their duty to attempt it, and it would have been contrary to their duty had they not attempted it. But the Government were driven—fairly driven—from that position. They would, no doubt, have been beaten had they gone to a division, and they very properly gave way. I am apprehensive of the consequences of their concession. The same coalition which has defeated them in this instance will be ready to resist them again in future years, and the contest will have to be renewed. I see nothing in prospect but increasing expenditure, without any increase of advantage to be afforded to the public in exchange. That is a very deplorable state of things. I know not whether, by proposing the measure in the shape of a Bill, instead of proceeding by revised Minutes

  759
  of Council, the Government could have avoided the difficulty; but I trust they will place before the country clearly, distinctly, and forcibly, the question of public economy which is involved this matter. The only interest I take in the matter is on account of the grants of public money. I feel perfectly satisfied, that if Parliament were to refuse all support to the education of the people, it would still go on. Such an impulse has, been given to the cause that there is no fear of its falling. Indeed, I believe the public education would be conducted with much greater advantage than at present, because great portion of it would be derived from the charity and benevolence of individuals, and would be received with gratitude; but when the public marches in with a long purse at one door, we find that charity and gratitude walk out at the other, and generally persuade economy to accompany them. That, I apprehend, will be the case; and I most sincerely wish success to the Government in whatever efforts they may make to stay the progress of this enormous charge, which has already risen to a very great amount, and which threatens—for the most eloquent advocates of the system rather glory in it than lament it—to extend still further, and to absorb a large additional portion of our revenue.
  Petitions to lie on the table.
  House adjourned at half-past Six o'clock, till To-morrow Twelve o'clock.