Lords Sitting of 28 May 1875

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Metalliferous Mines* (106); Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 3) * (107); Endowed Schools Act (1868) Continuance* (109); Bishopric of Saint Albans (108); Sale of Food and Drugs* (112); Public Stores* (110); Railway Companies* (111); Matrimonial Causes and Marriage Law (Ireland) * (117); Justices (Dublin) * (118); Military Manœuvres* (115); Post Office* (116); Glebe Loan (Ireland) * (114).
Second Reading—General School of Law (90); Inns of Court * (89); Falsification of Accounts (93).
Committee—Report—Seal Fishery (Greenland) * (80).
Royal Assent—Regimental Exchanges [38 Vict. c. 16]; Sea Fisheries [38 Vict. c. 15]; Peace Preservation (Ireland) [38 Vict. c. 14].

VIVISECTION.

  A ROYAL COMMISSION.
  In reply to Lord HENNIKER,
  THE DUKE OF RICHMONDstated that, as had been already announced in "another place" by his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, the Government proposed to issue a small Royal Commission, with a view of obtaining information with reference to the subject of vivisection. Without such information as the Commission was calculated to obtain, he thought legislation would be premature.
  LORD HENNIKERsaid, that as it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to appoint a Commission on the subject, he thought it would be for the convenience of the House and the Government if he stated the course he proposed to pursue with respect to his Bill. He regretted Her Majesty's Government should have thought it necessary to appoint a Commission, for he thought they had ample information already; but, as the Government deemed it to be necessary, and in the face of the circumstances that the Prime Minister had, as it were, pledged himself to the appointment of a Commission, that this proposal had met with unanimous approval in "another place," and that the subject was, in some respects, a new one, he did not think it would be possible for him to do less than to postpone action in the matter. He would therefore put off the second reading of his Bill for a month, with a hope that it might then be possible to know to some extent the result of the inquiry; and, if not, their Lordships might be sure he should do his best to consider the convenience of the House when the proper time arrived.

SLIGO, LEITRIM, AND NORTHERN COUNTIES RAILWAY BILL—PREFERENCE STOCK.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
LORD REDESDALEsaid, that this Bill had come before the House as a Private Bill; but he had thought it his duty to remove this Bill from the usual place occupied by Private Bills on their Lordships' Notice Paper. There were
994
exceptional circumstances in connection with it, as introduced, involving a principle of great importance in railway legislation, which rendered it desirable that it should be considered by a Committee of the Whole House, as if it were a Public Bill. The question involved was, in a word, whether the promoters of a Railway were to be allowed to issue preference stock in their first or original Bill. That was what the promoters of the Bill now before their Lordships asked to be allowed to do, and which had never hitherto been granted. On the one hand he did not like, as Chairman of Committees, to give his sanction to a Bill containing such a provision; but, on the other hand, he did not like to take upon himself to reject a Bill to which there was no opposition, and which was represented to be one of some importance to the North of Ireland. The promoters asked for borrowing powers to the extent of one-half of their subscribed capital, which would be the first charge on the line. The landowners of the districts through whose land the line would pass had guaranteed a sum of £39,300 towards its construction, and £33,500, had been guaranteed by the baronies through which the line was to pass. The spirit and liberality of the landowners and of the baronies was very creditable; but he could not overlook the very serious objection to the proposal of the promoters to raise £50,000 by the issue of "preference stock" to come next after the borrowed capital, and before the two other capitals referred to. This was a complete departure from the rule usually observed of not giving power in an original Bill for the issue of preference stock. He believed that if the provision were sanctioned the result would be that none of the ordinary stock of the Company would be taken up, and that the promoters would have to come to Parliament for pre-preference stock or further borrowing powers, such securities necessarily taking precedence over the stock to be issued as preference under this Bill, and which the holders would consequently have been induced to subscribe under a deceptive title. He thought the principle involved in the provision was a vicious one, and likely to form a dangerous precedent.
THE EARL OF MORLEYbegged their Lordships to remember that the Bill

995
came before them as an unopposed one, and that consequently, instead of having been sent to a Select Committee, it had been only subjected to the ordeal of the Committee of the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees. Their Lordships would see that the only persons who could be injured by the provision to which the noble Lord had drawn attention, were the landowners and baronies who had guaranteed£72,800 of the whole capital. As one of the landowners who had subscribed to the guarantee money spoken of by the noble Lord, and as the representative of those landowners, he thought he might assure their Lordships that the evil anticipated by the noble Lord would not arise; they were, however, quite willing that the provision in question should be introduced into the Bill. They were, therefore, fully aware of their obligations. Without such powers as were given in the Bill it would be impossible to make the railway; for such was the difficulty of raising capital for the construction of railways in Ireland, that without some kind of collateral guarantees, the capital could not be raised at all. There could be no danger of introducing this as a precedent for English railways, for the system of personal guarantees was neither known nor required; whereas, in Ireland, unless it were authorized, railway enterprize would come to a stop.
THE EARL OF LEITRIMgave his decided opposition to the Bill. There was no principle in it; it was got up in a most objectionable manner, and was a gross job.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, this was an opportunity for doing an act of national importance in Ireland. The object of the Bill was not to authorize the construction of a speculative railway, but one that was required by the necessities of the district, its purpose being to form a connecting line between two systems of railways; but, from its nature, it was one which could not be done in the ordinary way. To meet the difficulty a course had been taken highly creditable to the neighbourhood through which the line would pass,—but to which we were not used in England—namely, to guarantee a certain amount of the capital required. There would be a preference capital of £50,000 at 5 per cent, and then a £70,000 guaranteed capital by the landowners of the
996
district. If anybody was to be prejudiced by the first preferential charge it would be the landowners of the country: they were satisfied with the arrangement, and they asked Parliament to sanction it. He knew that his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees looked with horror on a proposal to issue preference stock in pursuance of powers given in a first Bill; but what reason or principle was involved in that doctrine, he (the Lord Chancellor) had never been able to see. If persons with their eyes open chose to enter into such arrangements, he saw ground why they should be prevented from doing so.
THE EARL OF ENNISKILLENbelieved this railway would be a benefit to Ireland, and in that belief he had guaranteed a certain sum of money.
THE EARL OF BANDONapproved of the principle of guarantees, and mentioned instances of its useful application in the South of Ireland. He should support the Bill.
LORD WINMARLEIGHsaid, that he objected to the principle of guaranteed capital; but from the peculiar circumstances of Ireland, he was afraid that English capital would not flow into Ireland for the construction of railways without it. Seeing therefore that the proposals of the Bill were necessary in Ireland, he should not oppose it.
LORD REDESDALEreplied that his objection remained still unanswered—namely, how, in the face of such a provision as that to which he called their Lordships' attention, the Company could raise the remaining £72,200 of ordinary capital. He was convinced if this Bill passed, the promoters would have to come to Parliament in a year or two for pre-preference stock or extended borrowing powers, and that the holders of the preference stock and the guaranteeing landowners and baronies would all find themselves deceived as to the position in which they would have been led to consider themselves placed by this Bill.
THE DUKE OF MANCHESTERsaid, he thought that it would be unnecessary to do; so he believed the line would be constructed with the preference and guaranteed capital.
LORD REDESDALE: Then why ask for more?
LORD WAVENEYobjected to the Bill as involving exceptional legislation, but intimated that under the circumstances

997
in which it came before Parliament, he should offer no opposition to it.
House in Committee accordingly.
Amendment made; the Report thereof to be received on Monday next.

GENERAL SCHOOL OF LAW BILL.
(The Lord Selborne.)
GENERAL SCHOOL OF LAW BILL.

  (NO. 90.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that as both that Bill and the Inns of Court Bill had been before the country for some weeks, he had been much surprised to find that neither to himself individually, nor, so far as appeared to any Member of their Lordships' House, had any communication been made of the views of the four Inns of Court with regard to the proposed legislation. As the two Bills had an intimate relation to each other, and both stood on the Paper for the second reading that evening, he would refer to both measures. As to the Inns of Court Bill, he had no reason whatever to object to it. Last year, when his noble and learned Friend (Lord Selborne) introduced a Bill of a somewhat similar description, he stated the objections he had to that measure. He told his noble and learned Friend that he would have preferred a Bill which dealt with the Inns of Court somewhat after the manner in which the Colleges and the Universities had been dealt with—namely, that the Inns of Court should be required and empowered to make statutes for their own regulation as places of learning and discipline; and that, if they failed to prepare such statutes as should be approved of by the Queen in Council, Commissioners should be empowered to frame statutes for that purpose, which should be binding on them. Now, that was the course proposed in the Inns of Court Bill which his noble and learned Friend had now before their Lordships' House; and he was bound to say that, whether, speaking in his official character, or as a Member of their Lordships' House, or a Bencher of one of the Inns of Court, he thought the Bill was a desirable one, and that it ought to receive the assent of Parliament. He said that, reserving to himself at the same time the right to make some objections as to certain points
  998
  of detail, as to which he thought alteration necessary. But as regarded the other Bill—the General School of Law Bill—he could not go so far. He held, and he must repeat, that it was not the business of Parliament, or of the State, to create or constitute a school for the teaching of Law. Probably his noble and learned Friend would say that if their Lordships would look at the Bill, they would find that he proposed only that there should be an Examining Body in the first instance, and that there was to be a teaching body only in certain events—that was to say, when sufficient funds could be obtained for the purpose. But when he found that the Bill was entitled one to establish a School of Law in London, he (the Lord Chancellor) must say he did not know the meaning of words, unless it meant an institution in which Law was to be taught. He thought the State should do in the case of the legal profession what it did in that of the profession of Medicine—establish an examining tribunal, through which it took security that there should be a standard which must be reached by all candidates before their admission to the profession. At present, we had the four Inns of Court for those who proposed to go to the Bar, and we had the Incorporated Law Society for those who intended to become attorneys and solicitors. In his opinion, those bodies required to be supplemented by an Examining Body, which should provide a standard of examination, such as should give security that the teaching in the subsidiary institutions should be of a kind adequate for those who were to be admitted into these professions. If they established a new body as a teaching body, they would put a cheek upon the rivalry which existed with the existing bodies where Law was taught, and which might have the effect of condemning the existing education. The Bill pointed to a teaching institution of some kind, but its provisions did not point out with sufficient clearness how it should be done. He had no desire to oppose the second reading of a Bill that was intended for so excellent a purpose as was in his noble and learned Friend's mind; but he thought it would be better to confine it to a much more moderate proposition—that of establishing an Examining Body, such as existed with regard to Medicine and Surgery. Whether such

  999
  a body should be called an Examining Council or a Legal University was a matter of no importance—but, he thought, that the Bill proposing, as it did, to institute a General School of Law, contained a much too ambitious project. He would not, however, oppose the second reading.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Sellorne.)
  LORD HATHERLEYthought that the necessity for a separate School of Law would depend very much on how the Inns of Court Bill was worked; but he was also of opinion that it would not be amiss to have by the side of the Inns of Court a body established by Act of Parliament which could take a part in the promotion of any scheme for the promotion of legal education. He was happy to say there was a growing feeling in favour of means being afforded to young men who did not intend to practise at the Bar, whereby they might obtain a good practical knowledge of the laws of the country. It was highly desirable that there should be an adequate knowledge of the Law among those classes who might be called upon to perform the duties of country magistrates, or of municipal officers; and it was a significant fact that several officers of the Army had got called to the Bar with the view of fitting themselves for the discharge of their duties on courts-martial. Examination had not had the effect of deterring gentlemen from presenting themselves for call who did not intend to practise. For those who did intend to practise he should wish to see the application of a uniform and complete system of legal instruction and examination.
  LORD SELBORNEsaid, he was gratified at the manner in which his two Bills had been discussed by his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack. As to the General School of Law Bill, he was happy to find that his noble and learned Friend, though not assenting to all its proposals, would not oppose the second reading:—and as to the other Bill, the Inns of Court Bill, it was still more satisfactory to him to find, that his noble and learned Friend quite approved the course proposed to be taken. Under these circumstances, he had good hopes that these measures would, either in their present, or in some modified form, at no
  1000
  distant period become law. He need hardly say that nothing could be further from his mind than the wish to take any course which would be hostile or in any way unfriendly to the Inns of Court. Like his noble and learned Friend, he had the honour of belonging to the Governing Body of one of those institutions. Although he had a strong opinion that those great societies were not all that they might be, and ought to be, for effectuating the objects for which they existed, yet he was disposed to hold them in honour—he desired that every good should happen to them, and to that end he sought to enable them to do all that was required of them in the best possible manner. He thought that those were the best friends of institutions who wished to see their public utility enlarged. This was his object with respect to the Inns of Court. As to the next stage of both his Bills, he would fix an earlier day for the Committee on the Inns of Court Bill than that for the Committee on the Bill now before their Lordships' House. He was glad that he found himself, so far as he did, in in agreement with his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack; and he regretted when he found that their views differed as to one important part of this Bill. He could not acquiesce in what his noble and learned Friend had said against the teaching clause of the Bill, and against the title of a General School of Law, if it was not to be a Teaching Body. The Inns of Court had been likened to Colleges; but it should be remembered that they were not at present bound together by any common connection—they were not members of any general organization in the nature of a University. The Incorporated Law Society, which represented another and most important branch of the legal profession, was also a separate institution. The Committee of the House of Commons which a good many years ago inquired into the entire subject, more especially as regarded the Inns of Court, recommended that they should be united into a Legal University; and the Royal Commission which afterwards sat made a similar recommendation; and his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) had himself expressed concurrence in that view. But the larger institution—that which was to be in the nature of an University—was an institution which must be

  1001
  created, for it did not now exist; and if it were created he hoped it would extend to, and embrace, the Incorporated Law Society—and the mode in which, as it appeared to him, that could best be done, he had attempted to embody in the General School of Law Bill. His noble and learned Friend, however, thought it would be better to confine such an institution—though he would still call it a University—to the duty of examination, and not extend its powers to the office of teaching. He did not agree with his noble and learned Friend on that point; but if such should be their Lordships' view also, there really was nothing in the provisions of the Bill or in its title which need stand in the way of giving effect in Committee to the suggestion of his noble and learned Friend. The title, it was said, implied teaching. On the contrary, he ventured to say that the title "General School" no more implied teaching than did the title "University." The University of London, for example, was an examining body and did not teach. The phrase "General School" or Schola Generalis was merely the ancient name for what we now called a University: the original meaning of the word "University" being identical with that of the modern word "Corporation." But why should there not be teaching in the General School, as well as in the Inns of Court? The argument against it seemed to him to rest on misconceptions. It was no part of his proposal that the State should teach Law. If the School were founded, professors and lecturers would only be appointed when funds and endowments came in—the Crown would have a voice in the nomination of some members of the Senate, but would have no further power. The Bill, too, did not propose, for the purpose of calls to the Bar or any other purpose, to compel students to attend a single lecture in connection with the School of Law. All that was sought by it was to provide means by which, when funds were forthcoming, a system of Academical teaching of Law might be established. The Inns of Court and the Incorporated Law Society had, no doubt, each a system of teaching; but, with respect to the teaching at the Inns of Court, he could not speak of it as efficient. The attendance of students at public lectures and private classes had fallen off
  1002
  in an extraordinary manner, and he thought their Lordships would agree with him that at least no harm could be done by rendering it possible by some general organization to make the system of teaching Law larger, more liberal, and less exclusive than it was at present. He believed that all persons who had recorded their opinions on the subject, and who had studied it in a manner which entitled them to speak with authority had said, that Law might be, and ought to be, taught upon scientific principles and in a more liberal manner than had been the custom—at least in modern times—in this country. He wished to see that done, and had made the proposals contained in the Bill with that view. At the same time, if their Lord-ships concurred with his noble and learned Friend that the establishment of a mere Examining Council was preferable, he confessed he would rather see that opinion given effect to, than that things should be allowed to remain as they were at present; although he should regret the loss of that which he considered by no means the least important part of his own proposal.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday the 8th June next.
  Then—
  INNS OF COURT BILL read 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the "Whole House on Tuesday the 8th June next.

SEAL FISHERY (GREENLAND) BILL.
(The Earl of Dunmore.)
SEAL FISHERY (GREENLAND) BILL.

  (NO. 80.) COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  THE EARL OF DUNMOERsaid, that, owing to the lateness of the hour when the Bill came on for a second reading, he had postponed the few remarks he proposed to make until to-day. The object of the Bill was to establish a close time in the seal fishery in the seas adjacent to the Eastern Coast of Greenland, without which it was the general opinion that those animals would altogether cease to exist. The origin of the Bill, which had come up from the House of Commons, was this—The attention of the Board of Trade had been repeatedly

  1003
  called to the murderous manner in which the seal fishing was conducted in Greenland and the adjacent seas. From the accounts given in the public journals, and from reliable evidence which had been taken on the subject from ship-owners and captains of vessels employed in the trade, it appeared that there were about 60 ships engaged in the fishery, hailing from England, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Holland. The practice had been to commence fishing about the month of March, when the breeding seals were killed in great numbers. The newly-born seals were then left motherless, and consequently died of starvation, and unless some steps like those proposed in the Bill were taken in the matter to obtain a close time for seals, there was every reason to anticipate an ultimate extinction of the species and the consequent annihilation of a most profitable branch of industry. The matter had been brought before Her Majesty's Government by the Swedish Government, and the accounts which had appeared in this country were fully corroborated by a despatch from Her Majesty's Minister at Stockholm, and also by the almost unanimous opinions of persons engaged in the trade. He would read a short extract, dated Christiania, August 19, 1874, enclosed by Her Majesty's Minister at Stockholm, in his despatch. He said—
  "Ever since the month of May, when our seal fishers began to return, negotiations have been going on, though hitherto without result, between our different shipowners, with a view to some understanding being come to as to postponing the opening of the seal fishery for one month later than is now the practice. The captains give heartrending descriptions of the manner in which the fishing was conducted this year, owing to its having commenced too soon—namely, at the close of March. There was this year a good prospect of all the vessels being able to return full. Thousands of pregnant female seals were to he seen swimming about preparatory to giving birth to their young on the ice over the shoals frequented by the shrimps, on which the seals principally subsist. But the vessels were lying in wait, and such a destruction commenced that after the lapse of three days the fishing was utterly destroyed, and thousands of young seals were heard crying piteously after their slaughtered mothers. The young seal is worthless until it is three or four weeks old. If the fishing is conducted in this manner for a very few years more the seals will be utterly exterminated."
  The steps which the Board of Trade had taken in the matter were described, and the Correspondence which had passed
  1004
  was given in a Parliamentary Paper in the hands of their Lordships. The Board had expressed their opinion that the best recommendation they could give was that the object in view—namely, the protection of the seal fishery—might be obtained by the introduction of a Bill framed on the principle of several recent Acts, giving Her Majesty power by an Order in Council to prohibit the killing of seals within certain geographical limits before a certain date in each year; such powers to be only exercised if Her Majesty was satisfied that other nations fishing in the same waters had made, and would enforce, similar arrangements with respect to their own fishermen. The Bill in its present shape had been approved by the Foreign Office, and had passed through the other House of Parliament without Amendments. He therefore hoped their Lordships would see fit to give it an equally free passage through that House.
  House in Committee accordingly; Bill reported without Amendment; and to be read 3a on Monday next.

FALSIFICATION OF ACCOUNTS BILL.
(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
FALSIFICATION OF ACCOUNTS BILL.

  (NO. 93.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said that its object was to amend the law so as to punish the falsification by clerks, officers, servants, and others, of their employers' accounts and documents; and for that purpose it declared that any such person who wilfully and with intent to defraud should destroy, alter, or mutilate any such books, writings, or documents, or should make false entries, or otherwise falsify them, should be guilty of a misdemeanour, and be liable to penal servitude for seven years, or to two years' imprisonment, with or without hard labour. As an example of the necessity for such legislation, he might instance a recent case, where the manager of a large banking firm, being in difficulties, transferred the money of a client to his own account. A prosecution was instituted, and the case was clear, but a conviction was impossible. Similar cases had occurred before, and the present Bill, which had obtained the

  1005
  assent of the Law Officers of the Crown, and had passed the other House without amendment, would, it was hoped, prevent these offences.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of of the Whole House, on Monday next.

GEOGRAPHICAL EXHIBITION AT PARIS.—QUESTION.
LORD HOUGHTON, in rising to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to send a Commission to the Geographical Exhibition at Paris? explained that he was informed that it was proposed in August next that there should be an important Exhibition in Paris of all objects connected with Geography—including maps, representations of forests and mountains in various parts of the world, and everything connected with the science and practice of Geography. Although the project did not emanate from the French Government, it had a certain public character, and they had allotted a spacious building, part of the Palais de l'Industrie, for the exhibition of the various articles proposed to be sent. It was hoped that the Congress would be attended by all the eminent geographers and travellers from the different counties of Europe, and that considerable good would result from the meeting together of men who had gone through different adventures, and were able to communicate to each other the result of their travels. It was hoped that a number of men of science would also be present, who would be able to communicate on all those matters which occupied the border-land between Science and Geography. The French Government intimated a desire that the Governments of other nations should appoint certain Commissioners whose duty should be to represent officially the different countries, and who should also superintend with care the different objects which those countries might exhibit. The matter had of course come under the attention of the Royal Geographical Society, of which he had the honour to be a member, and the merits of which were fully recognized by the Government and people of this country. That society would probably send over some one as their
1006
delegate and representative; but it would be difficult for any such person delegated by a private Society to take upon himself an official character which would give him the authority and right to represent this country at the Exhibition. The Royal Geographical Society had thought it right to devote a sufficient portion of their funds to that purpose; but still it would hardly be consistent in a delegate of the Royal Geographical Society to accept a quasi-official position. He wished, therefore, to ask, Whether Her Majesty's Government had any intention of sending over to Paris any person who should represent the English Government as Commissioner at the Exhibition, and who should receive such remuneration as might enable him to perform those functions without involving any pecuniary expense on his part? It would not be necessary to allow any large sum for this purpose, beyond travelling expenses and such moderate outlay as was required by the duties he would have to perform. He believed that every other important country of Europe had come to the determination to send a Commissioner to represent it; and that the proposition had been accepted by the French Government was evident from the fact that all official communications relating to the Congress were to come through some official person. He hoped that Her Majesty's Government would think that some small outlay for this object was justifiable, seeing that the Congress was not only of great scientific interest, but also because of its bearing upon the interests of commerce.
THE EARL OF DERBY: In answer to the Question of the noble Lord, I ought, perhaps, to explain that the project of this Geographical Congress and the Exhibition connected with it originated in the first instance, not with the French Government, but with the French Geographical Society, The French Government have supported the scheme, but they have never given it an official character; and in the first instance the French Government did not take any active part in support of it. What happened was this—The President of the French Geographical Society in August last applied to Her Majesty's Government for the appointment of a Special Commissioner to attend the Congress. That application was considered

1007
by the various Departments concerned, and it was not thought advisable to comply with the request; partly because it did not proceed from the Government of that country, but from an unofficial association—although, no doubt, very important and useful one—and partly because international exhibitions of this kind have greatly multiplied of late years, and it was thought that a growing disinclination had been shown in "another place," when questions of finance are considered, to vote the money for these frequently recurring Exhibitions. Further communications passed, and a few days since it was intimated by Her Majesty's Government to the Royal Geographical Society, that they would be prepared to name any person whom the Society might recommend, but on the understanding that no expense should be incurred by the public for the purposes of the Exhibition. The Royal Geographical Society considered that proposal, and informed the Government that they were not in a position to accept it. They have, however, determined to send a delegate to the Congress on their own part—and having been for many years a member of that Society and very much interested in its proceedings, I am bound to say that a better representative of the Royal Geographical Society could not have been selected.
LORD HOUGHTONsaid, that the Geographical Society could not take charge of the maps and valuable articles which would be sent for exhibition by a large number of persons, and he was afraid if the noble Earl persisted in his intention not to give any assistance, there would be no person to take charge of the English department at the Exhibition, and that would amount to a practical exclusion of England from the objects of the Exhibition.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he did not think he was quite the person who was in a position to give an answer to such an appeal. If pecuniary assistance was required, the noble Lord might make a representation of the fact to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, by whom it would receive fair consideration. He had stated the decision of the Government upon all the questions which up to that time had come before them.
House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.