HL Deb 22 April 1869 vol 195 cc1351-3

Order of the Day for the naming of the Select Committee on these Bills.

THE DUKE OF SOMERSET

took exception to the Select Committee consisting of so large a number as twenty-three. Great inconvenience would be felt by taking the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and four other noble and learned Lords from the Court of Appeal in order to serve on this Committee. Anyone who had served on a Committee would know that if they were to have so large a number of Members it would be almost impossible to carry on the business of the Committee. Let their Lordships only imagine how it would be with twenty-three Members—who, as he understood, had been selected because, on this subject, they held twenty-three different opinions, or nearly so—if they were sent upstairs to try to come to some agreement. It was said that there were seventy-eight clauses in the two Bills which were the same; but, in spite of that identity of clauses, it was quite certain there was enough of disputed matter in the Bills to last the Committee to the end of the Session. Now, he would really appeal to their Lordships, whether it would not be giving a fair opportunity for the display of that difference of opinion which, the noble Marquess on the other side (the Marquess of Salisbury) said, is so much to be desired, if they were to send the Bills to a Committee consisting of fifteen members. He begged to propose that the Committee be reduced to the number of fifteen.

THE MARQUESS OF BATH

said, that if the noble Duke would look at the list he would find that out of twenty-three Members six were right rev. Prelates, five were noble and learned Lords, and therefore there were only twelve ordinary lay Lords. The noble Duke would admit that on a Committee of this kind there ought to be a full number of right rev. Prelates; and it was also necessary to have noble and learned Lords on it, because the Committee would require their guidance on legal matters. It was so difficult, on account of their other engagements, to procure the attendance of every noble and learned Lord, that the Committee might have to depend on the advice and assistance of some one or other of them. If the noble Duke objected to the numbers, he ought to name those who were to be struck out.

LORD WESTBURY

said, that if they took five Law Lords for this Committee, the Court of Appeal would have to be shut up during the time of its sitting. In his opinion, two Law Lords would be quite sufficient for the purposes of the Committee. He had sat on several Committees in that House, and he had never seen one in which the business was very well done, on which there were more than eleven Members. If they limited the number to eleven or twelve, they would have a Committee quite large enough to represent the House, as well as quite large enough for all purposes of concentration and information.

EARL GRANVILLE

felt bound to say that he thought the business would be better done in a small Committee—more especially as a great deal turned on the wording of the clauses; it would only cause confusion to have a large body like twenty-three. At the same time, he did not agree with his noble and learned Friend (Lord Westbury), that he had never seen business very well done in a Committee larger than eleven. He thought twenty-three was a very unusual number; but having looked at the list proposed, he would acknowledge that the names chosen were those of persons who took a great interest in the subject.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY

said, that, in selecting the Committee, it had been thought advisable to place a certain number of Prelates and a certain number of learned Lords upon it; and to these had been added a number of lay Peers. If, however, it was the opinion of their Lordships that the Committee would be better if it consisted of only fifteen instead of twenty-three, he should not object to the lesser number being agreed to.

THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY

said, he was wholly indifferent as to whether the Committee consisted of fifteen or twenty-three Peers.

LORD REDESDALE

was anxious to know who was to nominate the fifteen Members?

The Question "That the Committee do consist of fifteen Members" was then put, and agreed to.

Naming of the Select Committee put offto Monday next.

And, on April 26, the Lords following were named of the Committee:—

L. Abp. Canterbury. V. Halifax.
L. Abp. York. L. Bp. Oxford.
L. President: L. Bp. Ripon.
M. Salisbury. L. Bp. Gloucester and Bristol.
E. Shaftesbury.
E. Portsmouth. L. Portman.
E. Carnarvon. L. Westbury.
E. Beauchamp. L. Cairns.