Lords Sitting of 9 August 1867

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Army Reserve* (320); Expiring Laws Continuance* (321); Church Temporalities Orders (Ireland) Validation, &c.* (322); Railway Companies (Ireland) Advances * (323).
Second Reading—Factory Acts Extension (296); Courts of Law Fees, &c.* (286); Railways (Ireland)* (316); Local Government Supplemental (No. 6)* (289); Turnpike Acts Continuance* (307).
Committee—Dogs Regulation (Ireland) Act (1865) Amendment* (247); Master and Servant* (248); Admiralty Court (Ireland) (273 & 326); Guarantee of Government Officers* (297); Public Health (Scotland) * (306); Sewage* (285 & 328).
Report—Master and Servant* (248 & 325); Poor Law Board, &c.* (303); Banns of Matrimony * (311); Guarantee of Government Officers * (297 & 327); Public Health (Scotland)* (306).
Third Reading—Barrack Lane, Windsor (Rights of Way)* (295); District Lunatic Asylums (Ireland)* (272); Militia Pay*; Indemnity* (274); Bank Post Bills (Ireland)* (275); Customs Revenue* (284); Inland Revenue* (287); Dominica Loan* (288).

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM—REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL—(No. 293.)—(The Earl of Derby.)

  COMMONS' AMENDMENTS TO LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that this Bill had been returned from the Commons with several of the Amendments made by the Lords agreed to; One Amendment agreed to, with Amendments, and several other Amendments disagreed to, for which
  1200
  they assigned Reasons. He therefore proposed to ask the House to take into consideration on Monday next the course pursued by the House of Commons; and he would then take the opportunity of stating the course which Her Majesty's Government would recommend their Lordships to adopt in the matter.
  Then it was ordered, that the said Reasons and Bill, with the Amendments, be printed, and to be taken into consideration on Monday next. (Nos. 317 & 318.)

GENERAL POST OFFICE—POSTAL CONVENTION WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INDIA, AND CHINA.

  CONVENTION PRESENTED.
  THE DUKE OF MONTROSE: I beg, my Lords, to lay upon the table of the House a copy of a Convention which has just been entered into between this country and the United States. By the provisions of this Convention, the postage of letters passing between the two countries will he reduced from 1s. to 6d. We also hope that we shall be able to have in future more frequent communication with America, and I have no doubt that we shall in a short time arrive at that which has never hitherto been expected, daily communication with that country. By means of another Convention we hope also to effect a very considerable reduction in the postage of letters to Canada, going through the United States—a reduction from 1s. to 8d., and to secure at the same time great facilities for communication with the new colony of British Columbia. We shall be able to send letters to that colony in a much shorter time than now, by the Isthmus of Panama, at a very reduced cost and much more frequently. I think your Lordships will be of opinion that these arrangements will be extremely satisfactory to the country at large. I must add, my Lords, that the Government of the United States has acted in this matter with the greatest cordiality, and has displayed the greatest anxiety to facilitate the communications to which I have alluded. I am also desirous of taking this opportunity to make a few remarks on the postal arrangements which have been entered into for India and China. After long consideration of the subject in a Committee of the House of Commons it was resolved by them to recommend to the Government that they should give notice to determine the existing contracts, have

  1201
  open tenders for future contracts, and establish more frequent communication with India. It was proposed, in fact, by these arrangements, that we should have a weekly mail to Bombay, and from Bombay by railway to Calcutta and Madras. We have followed these recommendations of the Committee, and have given notice to terminate the existing contracts, and also for the sending in of the tenders for new contracts for the service both from Marseilles to Alexandria, and from Brindisi to Alexandria, and from Alexandria to Bombay, China, and Australia. A very curious misapprehension has got abroad among the public, and it has been alluded to in the other House of Purliament and in many of the newspapers, to the effect that in taking a course really and truly following out the recommendations of the Committee we were intending to give up the control of the postal communication with India which we possess by keeping it in our own hands, and to throw it entirely into the hands of a foreign Government. My Lords, that is an entire and most gratuitous mistake. Such an idea never entered my mind or that of any Member of the Government; and the only ground there could be for this suspicion was that in giving notice for our tenders we did not state that we would not contract with any foreign Government. From this the notion has been taken that we were going to contract with the Societé Messageries Impériales of France, and to give up the entire control of the English communication by our own vessels. There is no ground for that notion; and I can only imagine that it originated because in the Committee of the House of Commons it was suggested that we should avail ourselves of the assistance of the Messageries Impériales in certain cases; and it was also suggested by some that the service should be thrown into the hands of the Messageries Impériales, if the contract would be taken cheaper than by any of our own countrymen. That is wrong; but I do not mean to say that we ought not to avail ourselves in certain cases of the Messageries Impériales; and at present we do so, because we send letters to Marseilles and to China by those boats; but that is only a supplementary arrangement, assisting the service which we have under our own control. I say that to throw everything into the hands of a foreign country would be extremely impolitic, although we might in the first instance do these duties at a cheaper rate; and it is an entire mistake
  1202
  to imagine that it was our intention. Such a course was suggested, if it has been suggested at all, by the very persons who are now finding fault with our supposed arrangement. They said that we should not keep up the contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and that we should give notice and throw it open; and now they find fault with the Government for doing what has been recommended by the Committee, saying that the Peninsular and Oriental Company have some very fine ships, and have done the work satisfactorily. I would not have troubled your Lordships with this statement but for there having been an entire misconception on the part of the public, of which it was necessary that they should be disabused.

PARLIAMENT — ARRANGEMENT FOR THE REPORTING OF SPEECHES IN THIS HOUSE.

  MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATH, who had given Notice to move—
  "For the appointment of a Committee to consider the Arrangements for Reporting the Speeches of the Members of the House, and with special Reference to certain proceedings in the Reporters' Gallery on Thursday, the 11th of July,"
  said, that his Notice had appeared on their Lordships' Minutes for a considerable time, but the pressure of public business had necessitated its postponement until now. That Notice had reference to a charge he had made that the reports of the debates in their Lordships' House were not dealt with in a manner which, probably, their Lordships would approve. It was not particularly with regard to the disparaging language which had been used with respect to himself—and he had stated when he previously mentioned the subject to their Lordships that there was a respected gentleman who was ready to come forward and prove before any tribunal, on his oath the statements that he had made—it was not with respect to that language that he brought this subject forward, because he should not have thought himself justified, in a matter personal to himself, in troubling their Lordships by bringing it before them; but it was because it was connected with a threat made at the time by the person who used that language that he would not report anything that might full from him in public discussion in that House. That circumstance was the more remarkable because the subject which was dealt

  1203
  with was one arising from the public Papers on their Lordships' table—relating to the proceedings on the proposed abolition of the Transubstantiation Declaration; and he had to remark, as a matter of fact at the time, that not one syllable of what he stated on that occasion was reported in the public press, which generally reported the discussions of that House. It was on that ground, and on that ground solely, that he had brought the subject before their Lordships. His Motion was that a Committee should be appointed to look into that matter. At an earlier period of the Session, supposing the matter was one which their Lordships would think it right to take up and pursue, to arrive at a knowledge of the facts before a Committee might be all very well; but at that late stage of the Session he confessed that he should not wish to persist in that Motion, and more especially because he did not wish it to be supposed for a moment that personal feeling had influenced him in the matter. With these few words he would now leave the matter entirely in their Lordships' hands.
  Moved, That a Select Committee be appointed to consider the Arrangements for reporting the Speeches of the Members of the House, and with special Reference to certain Proceedings in the Reporters' Gallery on Thursday, the 11th of July,—(The Marquess of Westmeath.)
  THE EARL OF DERBY: I am glad to hear that the noble Marquess does not intend to persevere with his Motion for the Committee of which he has given notice. Your Lordships could hardly at this time of the Session—if there were no other objection—deal with such a question, and I therefore think the noble Marquess has exercised a wise discretion. My noble Friend's Motion itself consist of two parts. First it suggests "the appointment of a Committee to consider the arrangements for reporting the speeches of the Members of the House." Now, I must confess, it appears to me that such an inquiry is quite uncalled for, because it is a matter of astonishment how accurately and carefully the speeches made in this House are generally reported by the press; and I must say that I have never found on any occasion, in comparing the reports of the various papers, any indication that the least partiality or partizanship have been exercised. I must also say that I do not think it would be any improvement, or anything on which we could justly congratulate ourselves, if the reporters were to
  1204
  take down and give to the public our speeches in a verbatim form. I am quite convinced on my own part that though what we say may sound very well when spoken, yet if our words were taken down literally our speeches would not in all cases stand the test of critical examination; and, on the whole, I believe your Lordships may congratulate yourselves on the wonderful accuracy, correctness, and fairness with which our debates are generally reported. With regard to the particular complaint made the other day by my noble Friend, I must say that if it really appeared that there was anything like an agreement on the part of the members of the press that his speeches or those of any individual Peer should be systematically suppressed, I am sure your Lordships would be of opinion, and the members of the press themselves generally would be of opinion, that such a systematic suppression would be a gross violation of the permission under which they are enabled to report the proceedings that take place in this House. I think, however, that my noble Friend is not disposed to sustain that view of the case, or to entertain the belief that there is any such agreement among the Members of the press to deal unfairly by him. Still less do I think there is any ground for the imputation that any deeply laid scheme not to report the noble Marquess has been concocted on account of a large number of Jesuits being connected with the public press. I believe that any such idea is entirely confined to the mind of the noble Marquess, and that none of your Lordships share it. But my noble Friend also complained, as I understood, that in the Reporters' Gallery there was language made use of with regard to himself which was, to say the least of it, most disrespectful. Certainly, if such language as that was made use of by any person, I think it was most reprehensible, and that it ought to be visited with censure. At the same time I do not think my noble Friend owes any thanks to his confidential friend for reporting to him the very unflattering language alleged to have been so used concerning him. I am sure that the noble Marquess will not deem it worth while to inquire who the individual may be who made use of that language, nor, even if he had ascertained who it was, to press the matter further upon your Lordships with a few to any proceedings being taken. Whoever the person may have been, I

  1205
  trust he will have been convinced of the gross impropriety of the expressions he uttered, and that the feeling which your Lordships and the public generally must entertain in regard to such conduct will be a sufficient warning to him, and to every one in the position of a reporter, that they are expected to treat the Members of this House with due consideration and respect. I am sure therefore that the noble Marquess will rest satisfied with this expression on the part of your Lordships as to the extreme impropriety of the language used on the occasion in question, and, at the same time, of your conviction that there is no such general conspiracy or agreement not to report his speeches as he seems inclined to think.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHsaid, that the judicious remarks of the noble Earl had, he hoped, cleared his respected friend (Mr. Harper) from any appearance of impropriety in reporting to him the language that was used personally to himself. That language was spoken at the same time that the threat was used not to report anything that he should say. He trusted that the House would not suppose for a moment that his friend (Mr. Harper) did an act otherwise than friendly to him, in letting him know what seemed calculated to injure his position as a public man.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

FACTORY ACTS EXTENSION BILL.
(The Earl of Devon.)
FACTORY ACTS EXTENSION BILL.

  (No. 296.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF DEVON, in rising to move that the Bill be now read the second time, said, he felt that the duty and privilege of recommending such a measure to their Lordships belonged much more properly to the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Shaftesbury), whose name had been so long and so honourably associated with his exertions on behalf of the factory workers, and by whose philanthropic exertions so large a portion of the population of this country had been benefited. The object of the Bill was to apply the provisions of the Factory Acts to various descriptions of factories and trades not yet within the operation of those Acts, and it extended the provisions of those Acts to certain manufactories where upwards of fifty persons
  1206
  were employed. Various Acts had been passed between the years 1833 and 1850—mainly through the exertions of the noble Earl—having for their object the moral and physical well-being of children, young persons, and women employed in particular trades and manufactures. In addition to these Acts, there were various special Acts dealing with particular works, containing modified provisions analogous to those contained in the Factory Acts. The first of these was an Act regulating bleaching and dyeing works; in 1861, an Act was passed for the regulation of lace works; in 1864, the Factory Acts Extension Act was passed, which took a large and beneficial step in advance on the previous enactments. The provisions of the Factory Acts, which it was now sought to extend, were originally limited to factories in which machinery was employed in manufacturing textile and other fabrics, and in which steam, water, or other motive power was employed in propelling the machinery. The provisions of the Acts regulated the hours of labour and the time of the day in which children, young persons, and women might be employed. They provided for the education of children, making it necessary, in order to their legal employment, that they should receive instruction during a certain number of hours. They also applied to the fencing off of dangerous machinery, and to the cleanliness of factories. They made due provision for regular inspection; and they imposed certain penalties for the infringement of the regulations of the Act. Although legislation had dealt before 1862 with manufactures and a class of employment which required special and supplementary Acts, it was felt that a very large number of cases still remained in which children, young persons, and women did not possess that protection which was given to other classes by the Factory Acts, and which was so much needed for their employments. The noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury) in that year brought the subject before their Lordships, and the result was the appointment of the Children's Employment Commission to inquire into trades and manufactures not yet regulated by legislation. That Commission occupied four years in its inquiry. It examined witnesses belonging to near 160 trades, and the results of its inquiries were embodied in five different Reports. The first recommended immediate legislation in the case of children and women employed in the manufacture of lucifer matches,

  1207
  certain species of earthenware, percussion caps, cartridges, paper staining, and other trades; and in all these cases it would be agreed by those who read the evidence adduced, that there was abundant need for legislation. The legislation which had been adopted in consequence, enforcing provisions for regulating the hours of labour, cleanliness, and the ventilation of factories, had exercised a most beneficial influence on the establishments to which it had applied, and had conferred great advantages on a large number of persons. The subsequent Reports of the Commission showed, however, that there was ample need of further legislation, and they made certain recommendations in regard to different branches of manufacture, which were carried out by the present Bill. It was introduced into the other House of Parliament; it underwent a most careful revision by a Select Committee, which examined, or was in communication with the representatives of all the trades concerned, and the result was that the Bill passed through the other House of Parliament. The 3rd Clause enacted that the provisions of the Bill should apply to blast furnaces, copper mills, mills or premises where iron was converted into malleable iron, steel, or tin plate, iron, copper, and brass foundries, premises where steam, water, or other mechanical power was used; and also to paper, glass, and tobacco factories; and to premises were printing and bookbinding were carried on. It likewise—and this was a most important provision—enacted that the Bill should apply to any premises were fifty or more persons were employed in any manufacturing process, or in manual labour. It should be borne in mind that there was another Bill before the other House regulating the hours of labour; and the two Bills would carry out the recommendations of the Commissioners. The 4th Clause incorporated certain Acts, particularly the sanitary provisions of the Act of 1864; and the 5th Clause provided that the Bill should not apply to any trade which had been already dealt with by existing Acts. The 7th Clause prohibited the employment on Sunday of any child, young person, or woman in any factory, the employment of females or boys under twelve years of age in any part of a glass factory were glass was annealed or melted; and the employment of any child under eleven years old in grinding metals. The 8th Clause, which was of greater importance than it appeared at first sight, di-
  1208
  rected that no child, young person, or woman should be allowed to take meals in any part of a glass factory, arsenic being used in that manufacture, and deleterious consequences having resulted from floating particles of it becoming mixed with the food of the workpeople. The 9th Clause gave extended powers for securing effective ventilation, and also dealt with another very serious subject. It appeared that the average age of the men employed in grinding, glazing, or polishing on a wheel did not exceed forty years, this being partly the result of frequent accidents from portions of the grindstone becoming detached, but mainly of the dust which was generated getting into their lungs. To meet this serious state of things, there was a provision that fans should be introduced to blow away the dust, and prevent its being inhaled by the workmen. These were the principal provisions of the Bill, and in the Schedule were various modifications suspending the full operation of those provisions for a limited period, and under certain conditions. Communications had been carried on with persons interested in the various trades, and it appeared that in many cases serious loss would be caused by the immediate enforcement of some parts of the Bill. When the Bill went into Committee there would a favourable opportunity of considering any objections that might be entertained. He thought any noble Lord who had acquainted himself with the facts contained in the Commissioners' Report would be satisfied of the necessity of this measure, the importance of which might be judged from the statement of the Commissioners that the number of young persons, women, and children on whom it would confer great moral and physical benefits, amounted to 1,500,000. This was a consideration which could not but recommend the measure to the minds of their Lordships. He therefore ventured to ask their Lordships to assent to this Bill as the complement to the new legislation which had been pursued with respect to factories, and which had proved so beneficial to multitudes of the labouring classes of the country.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Devon.)
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYsaid, he was unable to express the deep sense of gratitude he entertained towards Her Majesty's Government for having introduced this Bill. Two years ago he had to thank

  1209
  the late Government for the care taken in examining other Reports that had been presented, and for embodying their recommendations in a Bill. The value of the measure exceeded his powers of description, for, as had been mentioned by his noble Friend, it concerned the welfare of no less than 1,500,000 women and children and young persons, in whose cases it was manifest that an immediate remedy was required. Its apparent intricacy was accounted for by the large surface over which it extended, and by the number of trades it affected. It was perfectly true that the early efforts of legislation were directed almost exclusively to the manufacture of textile fabrics where steam or water power was employed. That legislation was comparatively easy; but it was a much more difficult task to regulate a great variety of trades differing in their hours of labour, and in almost every other respect. The principle which had been acted upon had been to apply the provisions of the Factory Acts as far as possible to the varying circumstances of the various trades. The first Commission on this subject was appointed in 1842, and it led to several remedial enactments, such as the prohibition of the employment of women and children from mines and collieries; but the public mind was not then ripe for more comprehensive measures. In 1862, however, when everybody had become satisfied of the beneficial results that had accrued from such legislation, and that the time had come for making further inquiry with a view to additional legislation, a Commission was again appointed and their Report led to the Factory Extension Act of 1864, which applied to several important branches of industry, The Government had now brought in a measure which, taken in connection with the measures introduced by the late Government, would embrace as nearly as possible all the remaining branches of manufacture, so that there would shortly be not a single department of manufacturing industry which was not placed under legislative regulation. Their Lordships had not long ago given a second reading to a Bill for the regulation of agricultural labour and the education of the children employed in it. That Bill had been withdrawn, but he trusted it would be passed next Session. He could not sit down without expressing his thanks to a great many persons who had laboured to promote the object he had at heart — to Lord John Manners
  1210
  in particular, the First Commissioner of Works, who, as Chairman of the Committee on this subject, had devoted a great deal of time and ability to the task; and also to Mr. Bruce, the Member for Merthyr Tydvil, to whose exertions they were in a great measure indebted for success. It would not be necessary for him to go into details to prove the necessity for legislation, or to describe the deleterious effects, social, physical, and moral, produced by the present system. All that might be taken as conceded; and all seemed to be of one mind, not only that legislation would be useful, but that it was absolutely necessary, and would be most beneficial. They had had the strongest evidence in the other House of Parliament in support of that view from the masters engaged in textile manufactures, and the heads of great establishments, all of whom, without exception, testified to the great social, physical, and moral blessings which had been the result of factory legislation. He believed that they might ascribe in no small degree to that legislation, the noble conduct of the Lancashire operatives during the cotton famine, who, supported by the feeling that they were really cared for by the Legislature, had endured with unparalleled heroism the suffering to which they had been subjected. The legislation of 1864, short as the time had been for its operation, seemed to him to have produced the most manifest benefits. He himself had been particularly struck in going over the Potteries—a district which had formerly been in a most degraded state—to find the great improvement that had taken place. The lads and girls there were elevated to a degree which could only have been expected when the beneficent, legislation of Parliament had been in operation for many years. He visited the schools last year, and the universal testimony of the schoolmasters and all who had to do with them was that the most wonderful improvement had been wrought. He remembered going among the fustian cutters also, and the testimony of mothers, fathers, and employers was uniform to the effect that there was the greatest improvement in the moral, physical, and social condition of the employed. He was informed by all the inspectors that the value of education in those districts was quite understood, as would be shown by the fact that within the factory districts alone there were now nearly 70,000 children under tuition, whereas, at

  1211
  the time when the Act was passed, there were not, he believed, 1,000. Returning to the Potteries, the legislation which had taken place with respect to them had proved the greatest boon. Mothers declared that their children devoted all the time they had to learning what might be useful to them hereafter. He had been informed that in every instance, whether of textile fabrics, potteries, or fustian cutting, the work done was both greater in quantity and improved in quality, and that was simply because the employed brought untired limbs and minds to their work; while, simultaneously, wages had risen without any loss to the employers. With regard to tins Bill, it was no doubt very intricate and important, and had come up to their Lordships at a late period of the Session. He would impress upon their Lordships, however, that this Bill had been elaborated before a Select Committee of the House of Commons by men of the greatest experience, themselves proprietors of works, and conversant with all the details of the subject — very much more conversant than their Lordships could be. He trusted, therefore, that their Lordships would give it a second reading, and pass it through Committee without any material alterations, because, at this period of the Session, it would not be well to send it down to the House of Commons with any Amendment which would be likely to give rise to difference of opinion, no begged to thank their Lordships for the manner in which they had received the Bill. He was certain that bypassing it they would be doing that which would carry comfort and peace to the hearts of thousands. By showing this interest in the welfare of the people, and by endeavouring in this way to advance their moral, social, and physical improvement, they would be doing more for their happiness than even by the great measure of Reform which they were now passing to enfranchise the great mass of the people, and they would make that Reform more easy and more successful in its operation. This was a great work—a work that would bless the whole nation, and, as had been said by the noble Earl who had moved the second reading, by such a measure they would be carrying joy, comfort, and peace, to the hearts and the homes of 1,500,000 of their fellow countrymen.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that his noble Friend (the Earl of Shaftesbury) had expressed his thanks to many persons
  1212
  who had given their assistance to this great work. He hoped it would not be out of place to say a word about the part his noble Friend himself had taken. It was now some thirty or forty years ago since he had the pleasure of co-operating in a very small degree with his noble Friend in those early struggles in the House of Commons on the subject of factory legislation, when his noble Friend had enormous difficulties to contend with in overcoming the not unnatural opposition of the employers. He well remembered the statements that were made of the fearful state of moral and physical suffering to which the children were then exposed in factories. At last, his noble Friend's perseverance, his powerful and simple eloquence — an eloquence not merely of words, but of acts—the eloquence of earnestness and truth, succeeded. To this great cause his noble Friend had sacrificed his whole political life, for he had from time to time resisted solicitations to public employments that he might devote himself entirely to this great cause, and he hoped that, in the gratitude of the country and the approval of a good conscience, his noble Friend would find an ample reward for the exertions and sacrifices which he had made.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

ADMIRALTY COURT (IRELAND) BILL.
(No. 273)—(The Lord Chancellor.)
ADMIRALTY COURT (IRELAND) BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Moved, That there be laid before this House, Correspondence between the Irish Government and The Lord Chancellor and The Lord Chancellor of Ireland relating to that Judge.—(The Marquess of Clanricarde.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that inquiry had been made, no such correspondence could be found, and the belief was that no such correspondence existed.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.
  Clause 4 (Repeal of 23 & 24 G. 3. c. 14. ss. 1, 2, & 3 (Irish), and so much of 2 & 3 W. 4. c. 116. s. 1., as relates to the Salary of the Judge of the Admiralty Court of Ireland, and of 20 & 21 Vict. c. 79. s. 14).
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, that the Judge of the Admiralty Court in Ireland held office under an Act of Parliament

  1213
  which made him irremovable, except upon an Address from both Houses of Parliament; his tenure was therefore the same as that of the Lord Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench; yet, for the first time in the annals of English history, the enactment which fixed his tenure on this footing was to be repealed by this clause, in order that he might be immediately removed. If this gentleman was an unfit person to discharge the duties of the office, it would be proper to say so; but the Judge defied anybody to show this. There had been a constitutional safeguard against the removal of Judges, and it was now proposed to take it away. He had stated the case, and he appealed to their Lordships to consider whether they ought not to pause in what they were doing.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, when his noble and learned Friend spoke to him on this matter he stated that he felt placed in a position of the greatest embarrassment, because he was desirous of sparing the feelings of the gentleman who was involved. He believed there was no such correspondence as the noble Marquess alluded to in reference to the conduct of this gentleman with regard to a will and acquitting him of any impropriety, nor indeed was there in the minds of those who had considered this subject any suspicion in regard to his conduct. He quite admitted that this was an exceptional case, and it might perhaps be the first in which it had been necessary to act in the way proposed by this Bill. The late Government introduced a Bill upon this very subject, and there was in it a clause with respect to this gentleman which was much more offensive than the clause of this Bill, for it actually removed him by name from office. This clause provided that in case the gentleman should not be re-appointed he was to retire upon his full salary which was as far as he was concerned, a little improvement in the way of dealing with him. He took upon himself the responsibility of saying it was absolutely necessary this gentleman should be removed, or it was impossible the Bill could be allowed to pass. The Bill would introduce great improvements into the Court, extend its jurisdiction find bring within its cognizance matters connected with the Common Law, of which this gentleman had had no experience; therefore he would not be competent to perform the large duties which would be thrown upon him. There was a little mistake about this gentleman having given up a
  1214
  large practice to accept the office of Judge. He gave up the position of stipendiary magistrate at £600 a year for that of Judge of the Admiralty Court at £500 a year, making a sacrifice for an advance of position. However distressing it might be to him, it was absolutely necessary be should take upon himself the responsibility of dealing with the question in the manner proposed by the Bill, and it was done in the least offensive manner, because the gentleman was to retire upon his full salary. Let it not be understood he held out any hope that the gentleman would be re-appointed for there was no intention of re-appointing him. It was considered that this was a better way of dealing with him than that proposed by the late Government. He was most anxious to avoid saying anything which might hurt the feelings of this gentleman, but he must insist on the clause being retained in the Bill, or the Bill must be given up altogether.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that if no correspondence such as that referred to did exist it made the case of this gentleman much stronger, because it showed the Irish Government had not been consulted on the question whether he ought to be removed or not. Both he and his predecessor in the office of stipendiary magistrate had had private practice, and clearly he would not have given up his office and practice fur an office with less salary but that he believed his new office was a patent one for life. He relied upon the Acts of Parliament and the Act of Settlement, which, having been extended to Ireland, placed Judges on the same footing that they occupied in England, and he knew that he could not be removed except upon Addresses from both Houses of Parliament, This was a constitutional point of the highest importance. If the objectionable clause of the Bill were agreed to, it would be a precedent for introducing into any Bill to amend the practice, procedure, and jurisdiction of the Court of Queen's Bench, a similar clause removing Judges of that Court. The course proposed was totally at variance with all previous practice, and its adoption in this case would have the worst possible effect in Ireland. In all other respects the Bill was an excellent one. In the Report of the Commission which inquired into the Court of Admiralty it was distinctly stated that the office of Judge was a patent office, and that the Judge could not be removed, except upon an Address to the two Houses of Parliament; and there was a precedent

  1215
  of proceeding in the constitutional and lawful mode, in the case of Sir John Barrington, who, in 1829, was removed from this Judgeship for malversation of suitors' money. If this gentleman was incompetent, as was alleged, the matter could have been settled by private arrangement. There was one aspect of the case which was not a good one, and that was that this gentleman was to be pensioned at his full salary, and that another gentleman was to be appointed at £1,000 a year. At all events, the change, if necessary, ought to be made in a more regular manner. The gentleman was not aware of this Bill until it was actually read a first time in this House. The Bill of the late Government was a very different measure. By it the Court was to be united with the Court of Probate, and one Judgeship was to have been done away with; and the removal of this gentleman in that manner would have been a constitutional mode of proceeding. He had no alternative but to move the omission of so much of the fifth clause as related to this matter.
  An Amendment moved, to leave out from ("Act") to ("so.")—The Marquess of Clanricarde.
  LORD CRANWORTHput it to his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, whether he would really insist upon this strong measure. This gentleman might be removed in a proper manner if there were a good reason; but he could not imagine why the security for the independence of Judges should be sacrificed. At any time this would be an extraordinary proceeding, and it was especially so in the last days of the Session, when there were few except the Members of the Government in attendance. He put it to his noble and learned Friend whether the course proposed was a proper one. The reference to the Bill of the late Government was an argument ad hominem, but his "withers are unwrung," for he never heard of such a Bill.
  LORD ROMILLYwas understood to support the clause, and to assume that the gentleman to whom it referred had been guilty of no misconduct, but that his removal was contemplated entirely because it was believed that he would not be equal to the performance of the new duties.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, that since he had last spoken he had received, he presumed from the gentleman to whom this matter referred, a card, on which was
  1216
  written, "I demand an inquiry into my conduct." If the Government thought he was not competent to perform the functions of Judge they should have stated so on the face of the Bill.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORmaintained that the course contemplated in this Bill was a much preferable one to that which had been contemplated by the Bill of the late Government, The clause had been framed in the way least offensive to the gentleman's feelings—it would have been most offensive to have stated on the face of the Bill that he was incompetent. It certainly was the impression that this gentleman would not be equal to the new duties, although he might be, and no doubt was, fully competent for those at present assigned him.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that whether the object proposed were right or wrong, there could be no doubt that by the mode of removal which was now proposed the security for the independence of the Irish Judges was struck at. Such a thing would not, he would venture to say, be attempted in England.
  On Question, that the Words proposed to be left out stand Part of the Clause? their Lordships divided:—Contents 25; Not Contents 5: Majority 20.

  CONTENTS.

  Chelmsford, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

  Bagot, L.

  Beaufort, D.

  Churston, L.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Clinton, L.

  Colville of Culross, L. [Teller.]

  Marlborough, D.

  Richmond, D.

  Crofton, L.

  Denman, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Redesdale, L.

  Bathurst, E.

  Romilly, L.

  Derby, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

  Devon, E.

  Graham, E. (D. Montrose.)

  Skelmersdale, L.

  Tyrone, L. (M. Waterford.)

  Haddington, E.

  Malmesbury, E.

  Wynford, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Cranworth, L. [Teller.]

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde) [Teller]

  Foley, L.

  Lyveden, L.

  Stratheden, L.

  Resolved in the Negative.
  Clause agreed to.
  Amendments made; the Report thereof to be received on Monday next; and to be printed, as amended. (No. 326.)
  House adjourned at half past Seven o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Four o'clock.