Sitting of 23 June 1837

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a third time:—Foreign Officers.—Read a second time:—Metropolis Police Officers; Rolls Estate.—Read a first time:—Tithe Commutation Act Amendment; Reform Act (Ireland) Amendment; Coroners of Durham; Creditors (Scotland).

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
On Lord John Russell moving the Order of the Day for taking into further consideration her Majesty's Message,
Sir James Grahambegged the attention of the House for a moment. In an evening paper, The True Sun, which he held in his hand, there was an account of the Parliamentary proceedings of last evening, and in that paper there was the following passage relating to himself:—"At five o'clock, Lord John Russell presented himself at the bar, with a message from her Majesty the Queen, when instantly every hat was taken from the head of the wearer, except Sir James Graham, who manifested considerable reluctance, and who eventually
1582
complied with this decent testimony of respect, after the Speaker had more than once emphatically repeated 'Members must be uncovered.'" Now, the House would remember, that the noble Lord (John Russell) merely announced a message which he was ordered to bring up. There was some confusion before the Speaker began to read the Message, and several Members on the opposite side of the House had already taken off their hats. He, however, appealed to the Speaker, whether it was not according to the rules and old usages of the House, that all should remain covered until they heard the word Rex or Regina read from the chair. It had a better effect, and it was for that he had waited. The insinuation that had been thrown out against him was most unfair, and he could not, without compromising himself, avoid noticing it. It was not his intention or wish to proceed further with the complaint; and he would only add, that he was not in the habit of making empty professions of loyalty, and he hoped when the occasion came, he would not be found wanting in deference and loyalty to the Crown.
The Speakersaid, the right hon. Baronet had stated the practice of the House most correctly. The House would remember, that on the bringing up the Message there had arisen a considerable cry of "Off hats;" and he had taken the course he did in order to save the time of the House. With respect to the insinuation made against the right hon. Baronet, he must say, that no such conduct had come under his notice.

PUBLIC BUSINESS—ADDRESS.
Lord John Russell: On entering on the question for the consideration of the House this evening, I will merely say, I am quite sure no Member of the House, and especially the right hon. Baronet opposite, meant any want of respect for the Crown, or showed any indisposition to comply with the usages observed on such an occasion as that of last evening. I must also say, that the whole proceedings of yesterday exhibited but one unanimous feeling of loyalty to the Crown, and a resolute determination not to allow any political duty to interfere with the Address of condolence, or the general wish to show proper marks of respect to the Queen. I now proceed to what is more matter of political concern, and one which entirely regards the advice which has been given by those Ministers in whom her Majesty has been pleased to

1583
repose her confidence with respect to the business which has to be done during the remainder of the Session. Any comments, therefore, which may be made on the proceedings which we have advised, will be comments fairly made, not against the Crown, but directed against its advisers. Her Majesty's Message states that "The present state of the public business and the period of the Session, when considered in connexion with the law which imposes on her Majesty the duty of summoning a new Parliament within a limited time, renders it inexpedient, in the judgment of her Majesty, that any new measure should be recommended for your adoption, with the exception of such as may be requisite to carry on the public service from the close of the present Session to the meeting of the new Parliament." Sir, when his Majesty's Ministers took into consideration the public business before the House, they saw that there were only two courses that could be properly adopted—the one to bring down a message respecting the Civil-list, and propose to the House the settlement of that measure for the new reign, and then proceed with the public business already commenced; the other course is only to consider those measures which are absolutely necessary for carrying on the public service, and for preventing any public injury during the time which must elapse before a new Parliament could assemble. Now, with respect to the former of these courses, although I have no doubt that the present Parliament would have considered the matter of the Civil-list in the spirit of loyalty and devotion to the public service, and that a provision would have been made most adequate for the dignity of the Crown, yet, in considering that measure in conjunction with the other measures now before the House, it did not seem advisable that we should immediately undertake that measure, and proceed at the same time with those other important measures. The obvious objection which will strike every one as to proceeding in such a course is the expectation, the general and prevailing expectation, founded, not upon any advice or any proposition which may be adopted by her Majesty, but by a positive enactment of law, declaring that a dissolution should take place within a certain period. Therefore, if the House should proceed to consider the Civil-list, and the various measures already under consideration of the House, two very certain and inevitable evils would have occurred: the one is, that
1584
a number of Members of this House, anxious to place themselves before those who had hitherto been their constituents would have left the service of the House, and would not attend here on measures of great public importance. The other evil, and which I think ought fairly to be considered by the Sovereign and her Ministers, is, that Members attending here, and performing to the utmost their duties to the public, will be exposed to the disadvantage which must occur—that while they are acting in the manner which they think conducive to the public interest, others will go before their constituents and represent their conduct in a light that is unfavourable, while the Member himself is unable, in consequence of attending this House, to clear his conduct from misrepresentation. That is a reason why I think we should not go on with all the measures now before the House. There are, Sir, up to this day, above sixty bills and orders of the day; combining the discussion of these with the consideration of the Civil-list, would protract the Session for at least two months longer. The question then is, what are the questions on which it would be advisable to call for the decision of Parliament? and what are those measures of which we can postpone the consideration? I have already stated the alternative of either going on with the regular business of the Session, including the consideration of the Civil-list, or of putting off all measures not absolutely necessary, and which might be postponed till the meeting of a new Parliament. Now, I do not think it would be advisable to adopt a course partaking of both these plans, going on with some bills and postponing others, and therefore consider it would be preferable to adopt the latter proposition. The first measure proposed to a new Parliament is the settlement of the Civil-list; and here I will take the opportunity of observing that the mode in which the Civil-list was fixed at the commencement of the late reign has obviated many of the objections that were usually raised against, not the amount of the grant, but against the intricacy and confusion that prevailed so long in the system. Notwithstanding that no one could fail to see that several questions must arise and would arise, motions would be made which would attract a considerable degree of attention both in this House and the country; and I must say, also, that if that question were to be taken up by the present Parliament, there are some others

1585
that call for consideration before that was proposed to the House. The question was different at the conclusion of the reign previous to the last. A measure was, therefore, introduced which, in my opinion, and in the opinion of many others, it was inexpedient to defer to another Parliament, namely, the consideration of the Civil-list when his late Majesty ascended the Throne. The present Queen was then a minor, and it was a matter of great importance that there should be a settlement of the regency, in order that in case of any calamity befalling the Sovereign, the country might not be without a regent to exercise the royal functions. No such necessity or difficulty exists at the present time, and the only proposition that it will be necessary to make now is, that provision be made by Parliament for defraying the expenses that are usually incurred under the Civil-list until the meeting of the new Parliament, when the matter could be deliberately brought under their consideration. With respect to another subject—the supplies of the year—the greater part of them have already been voted, and it would not be proper to depart from the ordinary course, but to bring them forward on supply nights, in order that they might be appropriated at the end of the Session. It will also be necessary to provide for continuing the sugar duties, before they expire. I proceed now to consider measures that had been for some time before the House, and also some of those which have been sent to the other House. The most important measure proposed to Parliament this year relate chiefly to Ireland; and I think, considering the great party differences which exist—considering the great numbers arrayed on one side, and the other with respect to one of these measures, the Irish Tithe Bill—it would not be proper, unless you are prepared to continue the whole business of the Session, to bring that measure further under consideration during the present Session of Parliament. There is another measure to which I have a great wish to call the attention of the House, because it is not a party measure, and also because it is a measure the principle of which has received general support, and is likely to receive the sanction of the House with respect to its general details. I mean the measure for the introduction of Poor-laws into Ireland. But at the same time, for reasons which I have already stated, many Members would be absent, from the belief that Parliament would not be of long con-
1586
tinuance, and it would not be fair to the Members who represented Ireland to bring under the consideration of the House a Bill so materially affecting them, and which is so entirely new for that part of the kingdom, without having the benefit of their opinions, or enabling them to propose what amendments they might judge necessary. I must therefore, and I say it with great reluctance, in fairness to the representatives of Ireland, defer that measure to a future Session. And here I wish to correct a misrepresentation that has gone abroad respecting what I said on that subject in answer to a question from the right hon. Member for the University of Dublin. That right hon. Gentleman asked if the Bill were founded on the Report of the Commissioners, or the recommendation of Mr. Senior, and Mr. Nicholls, and from the answer I gave, it was concluded that Mr. Nicholls was the author of the Bill. Parties then stated that it was presumptuous in that gentleman to go over to Ireland, set aside the Report of the Commissioners, and introduce a new scheme. In answer to that, I said that the Report of the Poor-relief Commissioners for Ireland contained much valuable information and suggested useful measures, but that as a whole it did not satisfy the Government, and they did not think they could introduce a Bill founded on it. The Government, therefore, after sending Mr. Nicholls over to Ireland, took the opinion of Mr. Senior and Mr. Cornwall Lewis, for the purpose of framing a Poor-law for Ireland; and I cannot pass over the subject without mentioning that the paper drawn up by Mr. Cornwall Lewis was a confidential paper presented to the Government; but as it refers to a subject that will again come before Parliament, I recommend Gentlemen who take an interest in the subject diligently to consider the report of Mr. Lewis, which contained arguments on the subject that were founded on great experience and great knowledge, and enforced with a power of argument which had hardly been surpassed by any paper of that kind. In putting off the Irish Tithe Bill and the Irish Poor-law, though they would be postponed for only one year, I must at the same time say that they are measures of great importance to Ireland, and I believe they would have been brought to a conclusion but for the calamity which has befallen us by the death of the King. There is another measure with respect to Irish Corporations—a measure founded on such clear

1587
principles, and supported by every thing that Parliament has done with respect to other parts of the kingdom, that I now state, as I shall always be ready to state, my firm conviction that that measure will be finally adopted by Parliament and the law in Ireland will be founded on principles similar to those which regulate municipal institutions in England and Scotland. The other measures to which I will allude, and which have been under the consideration of Parliament are founded on the Report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England and Wales, and I wish to acquaint the House that it is not my intention to propose any Bill for regulating Ecclesiastical benefices, or ask the House to go on with the Pluralities and the Residencies of Clergy Bills, and I feel myself the more justified in this course on account of the provision made last year, which prevents dignitaries of the Church from disposing of sinecures in Cathedrals and churches till Parliament shall take the whole subject into consideration. I have always considered that there was no question of more importance than the moral and religious instruction of the people; but as it is a subject not pressing, and requiring mature deliberation, I think it may be deferred without injury. There is another subject which has been brought before the House, and, in my opinion, prematurely brought before it. I mean the final proposition for the promotion of religious instruction in Scotland. I have on former occasions stated, that I thought the proposition a premature one, and I now state that I do not think it a proposition on which we ought to decide in the present Session. But, Sir, I repeat, what I have said on former occasions, that I am fully sensible of the importance of the subject; and the House and the public may be assured that the question as to the best means of promoting religious instruction, and as to the funds by the aid of which that object could altogether be best accomplished, will form together a subject to which her Majesty's Government will pay the most serious attention. I am in hopes that a part of the funds originally devoted to the maintenance of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, but now not required, under the name of bishops, teinds and feus, may form some portion of the means for the purpose. The House, however, ought to be in possession of some information as to the nature and extent of those funds; and the subject shall be carefully considered, with a view
1588
to ascertain whether by those funds, and by the abolition of sinecures, the means may not be obtained of giving to religious instruction in Scotland the extension which is so desirable. There are some other measures respecting Scotland which have been introduced, the decision of which, however, it does not seem to us to be desirable to precipitate in the present Session; and there is one, to the introduction of which the House has agreed, but which has not been actually introduced—I mean the Bill for the increase of the judges' salaries—with which it is not my hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate's intention to proceed in the present Session. My hon. and learned Friend has also other measures respecting Scotland which it was his intention to introduce. Of these he means to bring forward only those which have in effect received the assent of this House, and the passage of which, therefore, through the House, is not likely to be attended with any delay. Sir, there are several Bills in progress through the House which relate to the criminal law of this country. It must be allowed by every one that it is a matter of considerable importance that Parliament should determine upon the definition of what specific crimes shall be the subject of capital punishment. I am of opinion that these Bills are not of a nature calculated to occasion any long discussion; and, therefore, considering how material it is that those persons who are charged with the administration of the criminal law should be rendered perfectly aware of the opinions of Parliament on the subject, it is my intention to propose proceeding with the Bills in question on the earliest day on which I may find it practicable to bring them forward. Sir, I shall be exceedingly glad if we may also find it possible to proceed with the Imprisonment for Debt Bill. There is another measure, Sir, respecting our colonial administration, which is one of great importance, and with regard to which I yesterday evening promised the hon. and learned Member for Bath that I would give a distinct answer to a question which he put to me on the subject—I mean the state in which the question between the Assembly of Lower Canada and the Government of this country now stands. This House agreed, by a large majority, to certain resolutions on the subject; in which resolutions the other House of Parliament concurred, I believe, without any, or with little difference of

1589
opinion. The sense of Parliament has therefore been fully pronounced on the claims set up by the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada. It remains for us to introduce a Bill embodying the resolutions to which Parliament has agreed; and enabling the governor of Lower Canada to take from the chest of the colony the supplies not voted by the House of Assembly, but necessary to defray the expenses of the civil government in the province. Sir, I should be very unwilling now, at the commencement of a new reign, to enforce a measure which, absolutely necessary as I think it to be, may yet be considered by some to bear a harsh and coercive character. I think the bill which it is my intention to propose, may ultimately be only probably, I wish I could say only possibly, necessary. But to me it appears, that it is not necessary that we should proceed with that Bill in the present Session of Parliament. Whenever it may be introduced, so large a majority of the Members of this House are bound to support it, and it is so obvious that it will meet with no opposition in the other House of Parliament, that the Assembly of Lower Canada may be induced by such a declaration on the part of the Parliament of Great Britain to conclude that their claims and propositions are not consistent with the relations which ought to subsist between a colony and the mother country. It is scarcely necessary for me to add, that I should most heartily rejoice if such should turn out to be the case, and that if, instead of persevering in the inadmissible claims which they now make, the House of Assembly, by advancing claims of a more moderate character, should put an end to the existing differences, and should heal the wounds which those differences have inflicted. But, Sir, when I say this, I do not mean to retreat in the slightest degree from the doctrine which I have heretofore maintained on the subject. I hold to the various propositions which I have heretofore advanced; and Parliament having declared their concurrence in these propositions, I hope the Assembly of Lower Canada, animated by good and patriotic feelings, will see the expediency of modifying their course. If the Bill to which I have alluded do not pass, it will be necessary to agree to a vote of credit for the purpose of carrying on the civil government and of paying the salaries of the judges, as well as of discharging all
1590
the arrears due to them; the advances to be repaid out of the treasury of the colony. There are some other measures which we think it will be necessary to introduce in the present Session; and several Bills will also be called for, for the purpose of continuing Acts that are about to expire. Among the former, it is the intention of my right hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, to bring in a Bill to enable the Commissioners to carry on the surveys and maps connected with English tithes. I intend to propose, and I do not anticipate any objection to the proposition, the appointment of a Committee on the subject of Church leases; in order that that Committee may collect and arrange all the evidence necessary with a view to its being submitted to the consideration of a new Parliament, and thereby of saving the time which would be lost if the appointment of such a Committee were to be deferred until the assembling of that Parliament. It will, as I have already said, be necessary to introduce several Bills for the purpose of continuing existing acts; but it is not likely that those Bills will provoke any observation or opposition. I have now, Sir, before moving the Address to her Majesty, which I am about to have the honour of proposing, stated the course which her Majesty's Ministers intend to pursue with reference both to those measures which are already before the House, and to those new measures which they think it their duty to introduce. On the whole, it is our determination to take only those supplies, and proceed with and propose only those measures, which can fairly be considered by the present Parliament, postponing the consideration of any proposition which we think cannot be fairly and advantageously discussed in the present Parliament. I now beg leave to say a few words as to the principle on which alone her Majesty's Ministers will be guided with reference to the measures to which I have adverted, or to any others which we may deem it advisable to recommend to the adoption of Parliament. We consider that, during the last few years several measures of vast importance, of a religious and of a political character, have received the sanction of the Legislature. Of the former, the Bill for removing the civil disabilities of the Protestant Dissenters, and the Bill for the relief of the Roman Catholics, were the chief. Of the latter, the Bill for reform-

1591
ing the Representation of the People, was the great and prominent measure. Sir, there are these who, considering that those measures are on the Statute-book, are willing that they should remain there; but who, having made a determined opposition to them in their progress, although they are willing that they should remain on the Statute-book, are not disposed to agree to any proposition which would carry them into effect. Sir, in any such disposition we never can concur. We shall always maintain that those measures were not intended to be barren; but that they were intended to be productive of fruits beneficial to the United Kingdom in all its future relations and administrations. When you said, that you would no longer impose civil disabilities on the Protestant Dissenter, when you said that you would no longer impose civil disabilities on the Roman Catholic, you said that, preserving all the just rights of the Established Church, you would provide that, in all the civil relations of life, the members of different religions should be placed in a situation of perfect equality. We consider it to be wholly inconsistent with the spirit of the measures which have been already adopted on the subject—an inconsistency not shared by many in this House, but which has been too frequently manifested by persons out of this House—to grant civil privileges to persons professing one religion, in preference to persons professing another religion; thereby mating the Established Church the object of extensive hatred and ill-will, and sowing dissensions, distrusts, and jealousies in every quarter of the country. We are of the opinion which was expressed by William 3rd, "That religion is God's province, and that religious differences ought not to be carried into the civil relations of the State, or into the civil relations of life." Of this I am quite sure, that the attempts which have been made during the last two or three years, to excite differences grounded on religious principles, to disseminate ill-will and distrust among persons of different religious persuasions, can never tend to form the foundation of that united community which it is so desirable that the people of this great empire should become. In this country, a great majority of the people are members of the Church of England, but they are combined with millions of Dissenters of various descriptions. In Scotland, another class, formed of Dissenters, constitutes the great majority of the
1592
people, and forms the Established Church; but of which the Queen is the head. In Ireland, there is a small minority of the members of the Established Church, and a large majority of the professors of another Christian creed. Of all these classes, the Sovereign of this country is the Sovereign. Of all these classes, the House of Commons is the representative. Since the passing the Bill for relieving the Protestant Dissenters—since the passing of the Bill for relieving Roman Catholics—it can no longer be justly maintained, that differences of religious opinion ought to be rendered the source of civil jealousy and disgust. If we wish this empire to be strong—if we wish it to be united—if we wish it to present an unbroken front to any enemy by which it may be attacked, we can obtain that object only by doing that which is not only not contrary to religion, but which is in strict conformity to the spirit of true religion—we can attain that object only by extending to those who, although they differ from us in religion, have the same civil interests as ourselves, the hand of fellowship; by treating them with brotherly love and affection, by respecting the conscientious feelings of those who worship the same God as ourselves, although not exactly in the same form, and with the same ceremonies. With respect to the other great measure which I have mentioned, the Bill for Reforming the Representation of the People in Parliament, while I consider it a final measure in one sense of the expression, I do not consider that it is to remain a barren and unproductive act on the Statute-book, or that it ought not to be followed by any other measure that may be thought calculated to improve, to ennoble, or to advance the institutions of this country. So far am I from thinking that it ought not to be so followed, that, on the contrary, I think it most accordant with the spirit of the constitution that such improvements should be proposed to Parliament, that they should be deliberately discussed, and that, if adopted, they should be adopted on grounds of public benefit; and that, if rejected, they should be rejected on the ground that they are not conducive to the public benefit, and not from motives of bigotry or prejudice. In that spirit, Sir, and in that spirit alone, can we continue to administer the affairs of the country. In that spirit, and in that spirit alone, we have advised, and shall continue to advise her Majesty, who has been graciously pleased to confide to us the responsibility of

1593
directing the public affairs. I am quite aware, that in pursuing this course, we cannot pretend to expect the universal concurrence of the Members of this or of the other House of Parliament. I am aware, that we shall be exposed, as other administrations have been exposed, to misconstruction of our motives, and misapprehension of our objects; but we have accepted our situations with the condition which naturally belongs to them, and we shall be ready at all times to defend our conduct in offering to our gracious Sovereign the best advice which it is in our power to give. We know, that in some cases, we shall not experience the concurrence of persons who believe that they are more attached to the ancient institutions of the country than we are, or who fancy they know better than we do the effect which liberal measures will produce on the State. But we are sure, that the people of the country, generous and just, will give us credit for doing the best we can to promote their welfare and prosperity; and, called by the Queen to submit to her Majesty such advice as we may think proper, we shall always tender that advice in the spirit in which alone it ought to be offered to any Sovereign, and with an anxious desire to advance the freedom, to promote the happiness, to sustain the glory, and to perpetuate the name of this great empire. The noble Lord concluded, by moving an Address to the Queen; which was an echo of that part of the Message to which he had referred.
Mr. Humesaid, it appeared by what had fallen from the noble Lord that in a few weeks that House was to separate, after having sat for four months without agreeing, with a single exception, to any one measure of importance. He admitted that the course proposed by the noble Lord was the only one that could be adopted under the circumstances of the case; but it was a matter of grave consideration for the people of England what had produced that state of circumstances, and what steps were calculated to avert its recurrence. Of this he (Mr. Hume) was quite sure, that if the House again met, with parties balanced as they now were, the same results would follow. He was convinced that public business could not go on unless one party had a decided majority over the other. He did not differ from the noble Lord's view of the course which the House ought now to adopt. He regretted, however, that the noble Lord had not said anything about
1594
the emancipation of the Jews. He hoped, however, that that was mere forgetfulness; and that justice would be done to the Jews as well as to the professors of every other religious creed. He begged to tell the noble Lord, also, that he was extremely sorry that, as a minister of a new sovereign, he had not intimated any intention of completing the Reform Bill. There was another measure, the final Registration Bill, the non-passing of which would leave Ireland at the general election in a dreadful state. This should be considered by her Majesty's Government. At present there was not a single election in Ireland in which the candidates were not subject to enormous expense and endless trouble. He was sorry that the noble Lord was determined to persevere in his Canada project. For himself, he would never consent to give a pound of the public money in this country for the purpose of supporting misrule elsewhere. If the noble Lord flattered himself that the Assembly of Lower Canada, when it met, would regard with a friendly eye the resolutions of the Parliament of Great Britain, he was greatly mistaken; and he (Mr. Hume) was sure that the House would not warrant a vote of credit to Ministers who were so unworthy as to endanger a civil war in the state. He trusted that by the commencement of the new Parliament, Government would be prepared to carry out the principles of reform, and would propose the only measure which would enable electors to give their votes honestly and without intimidation—the ballot. Extended suffrage was also most dear. If the noble Lord should not be prepared to make such propositions, he (Mr. Hume) trusted that other Members would; and he was sure that they would be supported by the great body of the population. He hoped that among other matters to be reformed, the noble Lord would not forget our large establishments. A change was requisite in the whole management of the army. He hoped that our military establishment would not only be reduced, but placed under the management of men whose opinions were in unison with those who were pledged to carry reform into every department of the state. He was aware that there had hitherto been a difficulty on that point; but he trusted that that difficulty had now ceased. There was one more subject to which he wished to advert. He hoped that in the new Parliament, Ministers would be prepared to recommend to the House a general system of education for

1595
the people; if not, he was persuaded that they would be compelled to do so by the public voice. He would tell the noble Lord that if education had been spread more widely throughout the country, the outcry against the new poor-law would not have been so loud and general; and that if he wished the principle of that measure, which he (Mr. Hume) again declared to be the best measure in principle which a Government had ever produced, to be generally approved, it could only be by general education. He hoped, therefore, that Ministers would be prepared with a plan on the subject; and that, in point of education, Englishmen might hold up their heads as highly as the subjects of any despotic monarch. The noble Lord had not said anything about the press. If he wished well to the people, he would replace the press in the condition in which it was in 1792, and would repeal the Bill of last Session, which was a disgrace to Parliament and to the right hon. Gentleman by whom it had been introduced. In regulating the civil list, he trusted that Ministers would take care that the public money should not be received by those who were undeserving of it.
Lord Stanleysaid, that however unsatisfactory it might be that after sitting for so long a period as from February to June, they should be compelled to close the Session with so many important measures unfinished, and so few brought to a completion, he should not do justice to her Majesty's Ministers if he did not declare his entire acquiescence in the propriety of the course proposed by them under existing circumstances of postponing the further consideration in the present Session of those measures. He agreed with his noble Friend in the difficulty, and indeed in the almost impossibility, of carrying forward and discussing measures of great importance, not only when the patience of the House was nearly exhausted, but when the near approach of a dissolution must render the attendance of Members un frequent and reluctant; since every man would feel that his private affairs and interests rendered his presence elsewhere necessary. As he agreed in the postponement of those great measures, so he agreed generally in the selection of the measures to be proceeded with. He thought the measures respecting the criminal law had been received with so much favour, and had excited so little difference of opinion, that they ought to be carried into practise;
1596
and he was sure that with respect to that and other necessary measures, every disposition would be shown to aid her Majesty's Ministers in closing the Session; and that no obstacle would be vexatiously thrown in the way of that object. He also thought it exceedingly proper that a bill should be brought in to enable the Commissioners to prosecute the tithe surveys, with the view of carrying into effect the measure of former years. There was one question to which, in adverting to various topics, the hon. Member for Middlesex had alluded as the grounds of difference existing between himself and her Majesty's Government; but he (Lord Stanley) thought that whatever might be the views which her Majesty's Government entertained, they had exercised a sound discretion in not pledging themselves in regard to any particular measures to be brought forward in a future Session. But he would beg to call attention to one or two topics, to which he thought more definite allusions and some provision should have been made. In the first place, the noble Lord had adverted to the circumstances of the late reign, and the necessity which then existed of making provision for the demise of the Crown. Undoubtedly the circumstances of the late reign and accession were very different from those which distinguished the present reign; but he was in no way certain that it would not be wise (little as it might be expected, and God forbid it should occur) that provision should be made upon the event of the demise of the Crown before the meeting of the next Parliament. He thought it would only have been wise to have made a provision for a contingency, even in the case of one so young, and he trusted so likely to live long, as her present Majesty. But though the immediate successor to the Crown were but a minor, yet in the event of the demise of the Crown the probable presumptive heir to the Crown would be absent from the country, he being an independent sovereign residing in his own dominions; and in the event of the demise of the Crown, and in the absence of the heir presumptive, there would be no person in whom the absolute dominion would vest until the heir apparent should return from a foreign country. He need not say that he hoped no such case would occur, yet it was a case in which, if the provision could be made, it should be made before the present Parliament separated. Undoubtedly, he rejoiced that his noble Friend had de-

1597
termined not to proceed on a question which he knew he was most anxious to pass this Session, namely, the Irish Poor-law Act. He was most anxious for one that that measure should be carried into effect this Session; but it was because he (Lord Stanley) thought it a measure which required the greatest consideration—a question on which such a variety of opinion existed—a question which no doubt the noble Lord was most anxious to see settled—one which those less acquainted with the difficulties of the case were most desirous to see made the law of the land, and that it was a measure, of all others, upon which the attention of the public mind would be directed more fully by the intervention of another Session, that he rejoiced at the determination of the noble Lord. There was another measure, however, which the noble Lord had abandoned for the present Session, and he deeply regretted this circumstance, though he did not mean to impute blame to the noble Lord or his colleagues—he meant the measure regarding Canada. He certainly thought it a misfortune that at an earlier period of the Session—his noble Friend having then obtained large majorities in that and the other House in support of the measure of his late Majesty's Government—should not have proceeded at once to carry into effect the resolutions of both Houses of Parliament; and that he had not given effect to those resolutions by the introduction and carrying through a Bill to enable the Government to evercome the difficulty in which they were placed. At this period of the Session he was not prepared to say that the noble Lord was not justified in not acting on the resolutions of both Houses, which involved the repeal of an existing Act of Parliament: and whilst he did not rejoice at, he did not mean to complain of, the course which the noble Lord had pursued, because he had accompanied his abandonment of the measure by a specific assurance with reference to Canada to maintain the position which he had guaranteed to the House. He had suggested the propriety of taking a vote of credit in the event of the Bill not passing, which he, for one, gladly concurred in, because he held that it would be satisfactory to the Canadians that these measures should be carried into effect. There was, indeed, one point upon which he regretted the course intended to be adopted by his noble Friend. He meant that he should propose, under existing circumstances, and at
1598
the present time, to nominate a committee on the subject of church leases, thus keeping alive the excitement which prevailed on the subject without in the slightest degree tending to the settlement of that great question. In saying this, however, he (Lord Stanley) was not disposed to throw any obstacle in the way of the measure which her Majesty's Government might bring forward at the close of the Session. He wished time to express a definite opinion; and he must enter a caveat against the nomination of this committee, and must reserve to himself the discretion of taking any step which he might think it expedient to adopt. He did not think it necessary to offer any observations on the concluding remarks of his noble Friend as to the spirit and temper in which her Majesty's Government were prepared to conduct the affairs of the country, because, having listened very attentively to the many well-rounded periods of his noble Friend, he was just as much at a loss to know in what possible way those great differences arose between one portion or side of the House and the other as he was before his noble Friend made his well-rounded periods. His noble Friend had told them that the measure for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act was not a dead letter—that the Roman Catholic Disabilities Removal Bill, the Municipal Corporations Bill, and the Reform of Parliament Bill could not remain a dead letter; and he seemed to imagine that in saying this he made an expression of opinion on the part of her Majesty's Government which was not accorded to by every one on the other side of the House. He was one of those who assented to the carrying of all these measures. There were those on that side of the House who had opposed those Bills, but he had not heard any one in that House, or out of it, express the smallest wish or disposition to trench in the slightest degree on these measures, and he had yet to learn who had done so. He recollected the declaration which had been made by his right hon. Friend the member for Tamworth (Sir Robert Peel), that trench on the Reform Act who might, he would not be the first to do so; and he doubted whether the first trenching upon it would not proceed from the other side. He should be sorry if the Reform Act could possibly be made a dead letter; the thing was impossible in itself, because the Reform Bill carried with it its own vitality—it being the Act for the representation of the people

1599
in Parliament, it carried with it its own existence, and therefore it could not be made a dead letter. "But (said the noble Lord) if you mean to tell me that this is to be made the precursor of further organic change, that having given to the democratic party for whom you introduced this great power (I supported that Act), it is now intended to still add to that power, and to interfere with the co-ordinate and equal rights of another branch of the Legislature, I tell you that that is not the spirit in which Earl Grey's Government brought forward the Reform Act. I tell you that that is not the spirit in which I adhered to it. I tell you that in the spirit of Earl Grey's Government I will adhere to the Reform Act as a living Act, but not as the precursor to means affecting further organic changes." Then, with regard to the question of religious liberty, the noble Lord proceeded to say, that he had supported very willingly the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act; and when, in the year 1827, it became his lot to take a subordinate office under Mr. Canning and under Mr. Huskisson, the condition which he had ventured to assert for himself in taking office was that, be the course of the Government what it might, he was at liberty to separate the questions of the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act, the Roman Catholic Disabilities Bill, and the Reform of Parliament Bill. With regard to the latter measure, particularly, it went to sweep away all distinctions with regard to civil rights and privileges, and therefore he had supported it. He did so honestly. He adhered to that measure still. He wished to see any Ministry which might sway the government of this country adhere to that measure; but he could not conceive himself hound to sanction anything which went to infringe upon the rights or possessions of the Established Church. He wished not to introduce topics of discussion relative to Dissenters, but when the noble Lord spoke of the extinction of civil and religious liberty, he (Lord Stanley) would say that, as he had supported the Reform Bill, so he would not give further power than what was given by the Act itself. He supported the Act for the relief of the Dissenters so far that he felt they would resort to no means to overthrow the Established Church. So far he was prepared to go—further he would not go, one way or the other; and as he would endeavour, in whatever situation he might be, to see affirmed that fair,
1600
full, legitimate, construction of all these measures, as strenuously would he resist any attempt which might be made to pervert them from the legitimate purposes for which they were intended. In respect to the concluding observations of the noble Lord, he presumed that the course intended to be pursued by her Majesty's Government was that of the juste milieu between different parties, and he wished them success in their attempt; but looking to the language of the hon. Member for Middlesex, he thought there seemed as many difficulties raised on that side of the House as there were on the side which was occupied by those who were called the opponents of the Government and their supporters.
Mr. Roebuckexpressed his dissent to the observations of both the noble Lords who had preceded him with respect to Canada, which was in a state of combustion similar to that of the United Provinces of America in 1774. The Canadians had, by public resolutions, boldly declared their intention of throwing off the authority of this country, and he would tell the noble Lord that they would treat his Act, whenever he passed it, as they had treated his resolutions, unless, indeed, their rights and liberties were secured by it. Her Majesty's Ministers seemed to take up their present position on the supposition that the feeling out of doors was in their favour. It was true that the accession of the young Sovereign to the Throne might naturally excite the enthusiasm of the people, but there was sufficient discernment abroad to discover that her Majesty's Ministers wished to turn that feeling to their own profit. But there was reason to believe that her Majesty was well acquainted with the real character and state of parties in that House, and that she understood the difference between what were called the Liberals and the Conservatives. Both her Majesty and the people, he believed, knew that the one side wished for certain improvements, while the other side was opposed to all changes. He thought the people of England entertained a belief that the education of her Majesty had been such as to make her fully capable of understanding all matters relating to the political condition of the people, without having recourse to the vague modes of expression which were used in that House. The enthusiasm out of doors went a great way, but it would not carry her Majesty's Ministers through, unless they attended to the wishes of the people. The Ministers had now a new lease of the people's

1601
affection, but they must pay a price for it; they must give something for the goodwill of public support. He might be told, that the House of Lords must not be coerced; be it so. It might be said, that the House of Commons was the same as before the passing of the Reform Bill, and that its relative power was unaltered. But if the Reform Act were not to remain a dead letter, the object of it should be fully carried out. What was that object, but that the people should be equally represented, and not a section—not that a mere party in the country, but that the interests of the whole people should be fairly represented? That had not yet been done; and there was one great proof of the non-accomplishment of that object, the failures of the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), both in the present and in the former Session. Some fears were entertained that the stability of the Church would be affected in Ireland by the establishment of Municipal Corporations there, and they had been refused, because it was said, that Roman Catholics would become recipients of the civil rights which they would confer. What was the cause of the failure of that measure? Why, the weakness of the noble Lord's own principle in that House. The principle of the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act was, that civil rights should be extended to all, and how could the noble Lord and the hon. Gentlemen opposite carry out the principle of that Act, if he opposed the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill? The noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, had cited fine words, and the imagination of each party might be pleased therewith, but the people would ask for something more definite, and would want to know, with the hon. Member for Middlesex, whether they were going to reduce the public expenditure and the standing army, whether they would remove that plague-spot, the Tory Government of the army, and why the noble Lord at the head of the army was continued in the command of it? If the noble Lord wished to continue in office six months after the meeting of the next Parliament, he must do something to advance cheap and good government. If he did not, there would be no excitement or inducement out of doors to support him. [Cheers.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to cheer that sentiment; but he must tell them, that if the noble Lord would secure the affection of the people, he must regard the hon. Gentlemen as his most decided enemies. If the noble Lord wanted to secure the support
1602
of the country, he must not be terrified by denunciations against organic changes. We must have an extended suffrage, and we must have the hon. Gentlemen opposite put down. That was the programme of the coming Session, and it must be acted up to the letter. The noble Lord had on the present occasion attempted to conciliate all parties, but he had stated nothing in fact. He hoped that, before the close of the Session, the noble Lord would be more definite, for if he were not, whatever course he proposed to pursue, he might be certain that he would defeat himself.
Sir G. Clerkdid not rise to oppose the motion of the noble Lord, having been one of those who supported a similar one in 1830, and he congratulated the noble Lord that the powerful arguments which failed to produce a conviction in his mind had now so far satisfied him that he had been induced to make use of them himself. The noble Lord had endeavoured to chalk out a middle course, but, as a natural result, in attempting to please everybody, he had given very little satisfaction to any one. The noble Lord, had, however, made one discovery, which, though late and unexpected, afforded some gratification to those who wished to see the stability of the Church maintained. He had acknowledged the necessity of doing something to remedy the great evils which prevailed in Scotland in consequence of the want of sufficient religious instruction, and he congratulated her Majesty's Government that they were able at last to give an unqualified admission (an admission which hitherto it had been difficult to obtain) that it was the bounden duty of the Government to provide sufficient instruction for the people out of the Established Church. The hon. Member drew a broad distinction between those who sat on that (the Opposition) side of the House, and those on the other (the Ministerial) side, whom he characterised by the more popular name of Liberals, as being anxious to promote the improvement of the institutions of the country, while the Conservatives were opposed to every thing in the shape of change and amelioration. The justice of such a representation he altogether denied. They were doubtless opposed to hasty and reckless changes—to crude and undigested legislation, which either gave rise to tedious and interminable discussions so as altogether to suspend the other public business of the country, or became law in

1603
so imperfect a shape as to require two other Bills to be immediately afterwards passed (which had actually occurred this Session with regard to the Births, Marriages, and Deaths Bill,) in order to explain, suspend, or modify its operation; but, at the same time, they were not backward in advocating and supporting measures calculated to effect a real improvement in the institutions of the country, and adapting them fairly to the spirit of the age in which they lived.
Mr. Wakleysaid, when his constituents asked him, as they soon would, why so little had been done this Session, he should be compelled to answer, it was because the Tories would not allow, practically, good measures which had been proposed to become law. It was in consequence of the opposition of the Tories that the Irish Municipal Bill, the Imprisonment for Debt Bill, and every other excellent measure had not passed. In fact, while the House of Commons continued as it now was, Tory-logged, no advance in legislation need be expected by the people. He complained that the noble Lord (Russell) had not been sufficiently candid in the expositions of his intentions to his supporters on that (the Ministerial) side of the House. He did not see why the present Parliament should be dissolved with such extreme haste. He did not see why it should not sit till November; besides, a Parliament about to be dissolved was of all others most likely to work well for popular interests. If Parliament were dissolved in a month they might be called upon to meet in November; and if the Conservatives were to join with the Whigs, the Radicals would have to go to the other side of the House, and be content to remain there for the next six years to come. An amusing prospect, no doubt, which he saw excited the merriment of the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department. He wanted to know, then, what the noble Lord meant to do with respect to the Ballot, with respect to the repeal of the Corn-laws, and with respect to the extension of the franchise. He had supported the present Ministers because he could not get better; from a Tory Government he expected nothing. Hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite had not popular virtue enough to make even a bidding for place. They would not announce to the people the measures they would support, while in the mean time, with civil equality of rights to all classes of her Majesty's sub-
1604
jects on their lips, they withheld the blessings of self-government from the Irish people merely because they were Roman Catholics. Under these circumstances he, for one, was extremely anxious to get all he could out of the present Ministers, and he hoped they would be induced to come forward with some substantial measures. When the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) returned to Stroud, as he must shortly do, he hoped the good people there would not be satisfied with such a speech as that which the noble Lord had addressed to the House that night. He hoped the people of Stroud would apply the Reform screw to the noble Lord's head, and extort from him an appearance of better and more substantial things. He was anxious that the present Ministry should continue long in office if they were really disposed to carry out the principle of reform with integrity and zeal. But if they were inclined to slumber, if they evinced a spirit of tardiness and indifference, he trusted that under a new Parliament they would not be allowed to retain their places, but that they would be succeeded by a Minister who, without hesitation or delay, would apply himself to the working out of all those great measures which the people so ardently desired to see adopted.
Mr. G. F. Younggave credit to the noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for the course he intended to pursue, and could not help thinking, if Government would but discard the support, feeble as it was, and utterly, as he believed, foreign to the sympathies of the people of England, which they received from the Radicals in that House, and throw themselves on the good sense and feeling of the country, they would find, in a gain of twenty for one, abundant compensation for their loss.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, it was impossible for him, consistently with his duty, not to express disapprobation at the conduct of the noble Lord with respect to Lower Canada. He was willing to admit, that in the present state of affairs, considering the unexpected demise of his late Majesty, no other course was now open to him; but the noble Lord had really shown too much vacillation and delay upon this subject. After bringing forward the resolutions, and obtaining such a triumphant majority in their favour, it was not fair, it was not right to allow them to remain for several weeks a dead letter on the votes, and now to call for a vote of credit in order to pay the arrear of salaries

1605
to the civil officers in Lower Canada. Why should the people of this country be called on in the present expiring Parliament to pass a vote of credit for 100,000 l., while the money, out of which the officers should be paid, was lying in the chest in the colony? That was a most unwise and undignified course. With respect to the other branches of the business of the country, he could not help observing, that he thought there was too much party spirit evinced in all the proceedings and measures of that House. He belonged to neither Whig nor Tory; he had no predilection for either; he wished to see that party in office most likely to work at good government for the people. But although on a whole he had given a general support to the present Government he must own his hopes had been grievously disappointed. Nothing whatever had been done for the people; and he did not see how the evil arising from the state of parties in that House could be remedied but by the constituencies taking care not to pledge their representative to those party objects which too much engrossed the attention and determined the movements of the present Parliament.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that in adverting to what had fallen from some hon. Gentlemen opposite he thought he should be able to show, and he would on that point appeal with confidence to public opinion, that much exaggeration had been indulged in with reference to the measures which had engaged the attention of Parliament. With respect to the public importance of the measures it had passed he would refer to the Municipal Reform Bill, which had been passed by the present Parliament, a measure second only in importance to the Reform Bill for the good which it had created, and for the evil it had destroyed; if it had done nothing else it had destroyed an irresponsible authority, and if its advantages had not been equally extended to all classes of her Majesty's subjects, the fault did not lie with her Majesty's Ministers, who had carried a Bill for that purpose through the House of Commons. He said this as much in defence of the House of Commons as of her Majesty's Ministers. Did hon. Gentlemen think that in passing the Tithe Bill a question of great importance had been settled? The Bill was one that had long been desired by the agricultural classes, and from which he anticipated much good. They had also brought to an amicable close the claims of the Dissenters.
1606
After a struggle prolonged through many years, was it nothing to have passed a law regulating the marriages of that portion of her Majesty's subjects? Whatever might be said to the contrary, he thought the people of England would accept those measures as some of the fruits of the Reform Bill, and think with him that the hon. Member had misrepresented the House when he said that it had done nothing for the benefit of the public. He would now very briefly advert to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Finsbury, who generally addressed the House with so much point and good humour, although he did not then see the hon. Member in his place. The hon. Member for Finsbury had found fault with the statement of his noble Friend because he had not gone into an enumeration of each measure that he intended at a future time to advocate. Now, he thought the House would agree with him that if his noble Friend had gone into all the acts which he might at a future time recommend to the adoption of Parliament, such a course would fairly have been considered as premature and imprudent. In reference to the advice which an hon. Member opposite had tendered to Government, he could only say, that they had never attempted to frame their measures so as to catch the votes of either one side of the House or the other; they proposed such measures only as they felt it their duty to the public to bring forward, and he did not think it was their duty on the one hand to carry their measures further than they thought advisable to secure the votes of their Radical supporters, nor, on the other hand to pare down liberal measures to suit the views of hon. Members opposite. If they had pursued such a course he did not doubt but that there were many hon. Members in that House who would have seen through and exposed such an insincere and trimming policy. As the House seemed inclined to accede unanimously to the proposition of his noble Friend, it had better proceed to the order of the day for a Committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. Macleanrose only to draw the attention of the Government to some points connected with the Poor-laws. He wished them to take some step in the appointment of chaplains to the various unions. He had stated his intention on a former occasion to move for a return of those unions to which chaplains had been appointed, and of those unions in which permission was not given to paupers, being Dissenters,

1607
to go to chapel. It was a subject which had excited great interest, and though he should not move for those returns under the present circumstances, yet he would express an earnest hope that the noble Lord would not allow so many months as must elapse before the meeting of another Parliament to pass over without giving those Dissenters who were in so unfortunate a situation the opportunity of leaving the unions on the Sunday for the purpose of attending divine worship at whatever places their consciences might lead them to select. The next point to which he wished to draw the attention of Government was the amelioration of the criminal code. He wished that those ameliorations had been carried further than was contemplated by the Bills already proposed. He very much wished that the punishment of death should be done away with altogether.
Mr. Sharman Crawfordwished to call the attention of the noble Lord to the state of the poor in Ireland. As the Poor-law Bill must now be unavoidably postponed, and as there was, unfortunately, great cause to apprehend extensive destitution amongst the poorer classes in that country, he thought it would be advisable for the noble Lord to ask for power to expend some money in relieving those unfortunate people who might require it, which advance might afterwards be repaid out of the Poor-rates.
Lord J. Russell: In consequence of what had fallen from the noble Lord opposite in the course of the debate, in which the noble Lord had made allusion to a contingency which he earnestly hoped was a most improbable one, that the throne of this country might be vacated, and the crown might be inherited by a foreign sovereign, and that it might be necessary for Parliament to provide for the government of the country in the interval that must occur in that case, he felt it necessary to say, that a Bill to provide for that unfortunate contingency would be brought in before the close of the present Session. An hon. Gentleman near him, had alluded to the sudden distress that might be expected among the poorer classes in Ireland, and had recommended the Government to ask for power to administer relief. He did not think it prudent to adopt that course. It was not necessary nor advisable to commit further powers to Government than those they were already possessed of. With respect to himself, he would only say, that in the course of that Session he
1608
had brought forward every topic that could at all agitate the public mind. At the same time, he thought the House would acknowledge that he had never shrunk from the expression of his opinions; and if those opinions were not in accordance with those of the people of England, it was not fit that he should remain in power; but if they were, he thought he might fairly act upon them, without making any attempt to captivate hon. Gentlemen opposite.
Question carried.

WAYS AND MEANS.—SUGAR DUTIES.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerin moving the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, would make some reference to the motions that stood upon the paper; and he trusted, that if his statement were satisfactory, hon. Gentlemen opposite would not go into any discussion on their respective motions. Part of that statement might be anticipated from that which had fallen from the hon. Baronet, the Member for Edinburgh—he referred to certain parts of the Queen's hereditary revenues in Scotland, which were derived from bishop's lands and teinds. He should say, that it behoved the present Parliament not to take any steps affecting any particular portion of her Majesty's hereditary revenue; and he thought there was no Gentleman in that House who would not shrink from so indelicate and inexpedient a course as the raising of any discussion upon them. The same rule applied to the four and a-half per cent duties, appropriated as they were by the existing law, the whole of the expense of the ecclesiastical establishment in those islands where these duties were levied, being laid upon them. He should, at a future time, have an opportunity of explaining any alteration that it might be deemed expedient to make in them, and he thought it would be advantageous to all parties that the discussion of them should be reserved to a time when the whole question might properly be taken into consideration. In recommending hon. Members not to press their motions at present, he would only say, that that course involved no abandonment of principle. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means.
The House in Committee.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, it would be in the recollection of the Committee that he had last year, for the first

1609
time, proposed the equalization of the duties levied on Sugar grown in our East and West Indian possessions. The Bill of last year affected only the presidency of Fort William, and a strong desire had been expressed by the inhabitants of the Madras and Bombay presidencies that its provisions might be extended to those settlements. Petitions had been presented to the House from these presidencies, praying them to grant to the inhabitants a participation in the benefits of the equalization. The principle on which the Bill of last year had been founded was, that those parts of India alone into which the importation of foreign sugar was prohibited, should have the full benefit of that alteration. Their admission to the benefits resulting from the measure, depended on their consenting to exclude foreign sugar—a condition on which it had last year been thought necessary to insist, as foreign sugar might otherwise be imported into those parts and exported again to this country, as the growth of British possessions. The presidency of Fort William was the only one which had yet passed a law for the exclusion of foreign sugar. Supposing similar laws to be passed by the other presidencies, he proposed, that power should be given to his Majesty to extend, by an order in council, the provisions of last year's Act to all those parts of India in which the exclusion of foreign sugar should be made complete. When the inhabitants of the other presidencies placed themselves in the same condition as those of Fort William, the same privileges ought to be extended to them. The resolution he should now propose, was merely to continue the present Sugar Duties for the ensuing year.
Mr. Humethought the sum paid by Government by way of drawback or bounty was far too large. He wished to know if the right hon. Gentleman meant to bring the subject of drawbacks under the consideration of the House? The chymical experiments of Dr. Ure had, he thought, sufficiently proved, that drawbacks were allowed on a quantity far above the real amount. He thought the Board of Trade was very neglectful of its duties; it was an inefficient and useless establishment, and he strongly reprobated the keeping up an unnecessary board at a great expense. The Sugar Duties, he contended, should be reduced from 24 s. to 19 s. per cwt. He was convinced the loss to the revenue would be made up by the increased consumption.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid,
1610
that the subject of the drawbacks had been before Government, and they had determined to bring it under the consideration of the House, but under present circumstances such a step would not be advisable.
Mr. Huttsaid, that he had frequent occasion to communicate with the Board of Trade, and was happy to bear testimony to the ability, assiduity, and business habits shown by its members. He regretted the attack made on it by the hon. Member for Middlesex; and declared that he thought the Board of the greatest importance to the commercial interests of the country.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonwould not now say whether the duties of the President of the Board of Trade were properly discharged by himself or not, but he could not allow the attack made on it by the hon. Member for Middlesex, who denied its utility, to pass unnoticed. He had only to remind the House of the benefits conferred by it on the commerce of the country when a lamented friend of his presided over it. The hon. Member had on this, as on former occasions, exhibited the most perfect ignorance of the duties of that department. In fact, the hon. Member knew nothing whatever about the matter, or he would not condemn such a board as unnecessary. He concurred in his estimate of the difficulties attending the subject of drawbacks; there was no question more embarrassed, less understood by the House, or less easy to bring to a safe settlement. By a new arrangement a considerable sum might be saved to the revenue, but it should be recollected that the interests which had grown up under the present system were great and various. It would be unjust to attempt to carry through a measure relating to this subject in the short period of the Session which remained to them.
Dr. Bowringremarked, that the quantity of beetroot sugar consumed in France in the year 1828–29 had amounted to 4,000,000 of kilogrammes, while in the last year it had advanced to 70,000,000 of kilogrammes, and the duty it paid towards the revenue had reached 2,000,000 l. He felt that it would be impossible to collect a heavy duty on a foreign article, which article the soil of the country was capable of producing, and he appealed in support of his position to the embarrassments which the French government had met with when dealing with the subject. He was of opinion that the Government ought to prohibit the growth of beetroot.
Mr. Humeobserved, that generally those who were the most ignorant were also the readiest to cry out. What he wanted was, that the establishment of the Board of Trade should be directly connected with the Treasury, as, at the present moment, its proceedings were clogged by the necessity of communication with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He, however, had not denied the utility of the Board of Trade. He thought that the duty on sugar ought to be taken off as soon as sugar should be generally made from beetroot; he hoped that such a thing as a sugar excise would never be tolerated. If any reduction were practicable, the people ought to have the benefit of it.
Resolution agreed to.
The House resumed.

SUPPLY.—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply on the Miscellaneous Estimates.
On the sum of 120,000 l. having been proposed to meet the civil contingencies,
Sir E. Codringtonwished to ask whether there were any intentions to erect a statue to Lord Nelson at the public expense, instead of its cost being defrayed by private subscription?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that when the question had been put to him formerly he had given the necessary explanations. He was of opinion that the great name of Nelson deserved commemoration, and he knew no more appropriate place in which to erect a monument to him than the square which bore the name of the spot on which he had achieved his last victory. But from private communications he had learned that a private subscription had been raised for the purpose contemplated by his hon. and gallant Friend. When the question had formerly been mooted, he had said, that the Government would give every facility to the promotion of the object which the subscribers had in view; that he relied on the disposition of the public to add to the subscription; that, on that very account, he felt reluctant to interfere in the matter; and, that if the subscriptions should prove insufficient, then the Government might come forward.
Mr. Goulburndid not think there would be any difference of opinion in the House as to the propriety of erecting a monument to one of the country's greatest naval commanders. He must, however, draw the attention of the House to a report on the state of Switzerland, which had been drawn
1612
up by the hon. Member for Kilmarnock. He thought that nothing ought to be so much guarded against as the employment and payment of Members of Parliament, when the sums paid to them did not appear in the documents before the House. He did not mean to say, that Members of Parliament ought not to be employed; but he did mean to affirm, that the House ought to be satisfied as to the manner in which the funds voted by it were applied as to whether they ought to be applied according to the method he had mentioned, and as to what the remuneration given to Members of Parliament so employed might be. The country had in different states in Europe resident ministers, gentlemen of great talents, of great experience, and of perfect competency to give to the Government that information which it might require. When he himself had filled the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, and had found it necessary to obtain certain financial accounts relating to foreign countries, he had addressed himself, through the Foreign-office, to the resident ministers of Great Britain in those countries, and from them he had obtained most valuable information. As, then, this country had at present a minister in Switzerland; as that minister was a gentleman of whose competency he had personal knowledge; as that gentleman possessed those ingratiating manners which aided an individual in acquiring information; he was surprised at the fact, and indeed he was utterly ignorant of the grounds which had induced the Government to select and to pay a particular individual for collecting that information which Mr. Morier was able to furnish, which the hon. Member for Kilmarnock acknowledged that he was able to give, and which he had himself communicated to the hon. Member. The report was one which the resident minister was the fittest to give. It commenced with a general report on the state of the Swiss Cantons in the month of December, 1833. It then proceeded to speak of the commercial relations of that country, which Mr. Morier's letters would equally well have explained. It then went on to give a census of the population and the amount of the revenue of the Federal Government. There was one portion of it which was somewhat amusing, as it treated of watchmaking, and spoke in one chapter of the birth of watchmaking, in the next of the vicissitudes of watchmaking, and in the third of the maturity of watchmaking.

1613
Amongst the documents contained in the report of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock was a poem on the state of manufactures, which had originally been published in the year 1586. In truth, all the documents were of a public character, and easily accessible to the public. The Report filled 141 pages, and 115 of those were composed of public documents, the remainder consisting of the hon. Gentleman's conclusions from them. It was not his object to invalidate the arguments of the hon. Member, but the question he wished to put was, why the information contributed by the hon. Member had not been procured from the servants of the Government, and why, if it ought to have been procured from the hon. Member, the matter had not been brought under the cognizance of Parliament. He disclaimed any design of casting an imputation on the hon. Member, but a sense of public duty compelled him to bring the matter before the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequermust say, that when the hon. Member for Kilmarnock had been first employed by the Government, it had been by the direction of the right hon. Member for Harwich; that the next time that he had been employed was when the commercial relations between this country and France were under consideration. He had then been employed in conjunction with a gentleman, now her Majesty's Minister at the Court of Madrid, but then a Commissioner of Customs. It was not then considered derogatory to Lord Granville that those gentlemen had been sent out to perform particular duties. It had been for the purpose of following up the same course of inquiry with regard to commercial matters, that the hon. Member had been sent to Switzerland. With regard to the question of remuneration he could affirm that no sum whatever had been received for the Report; no sum had been received by the hon. Member, nor would any sum be received. If he pleased he might stop there, but he thought it right to add, that although the hon. Member had received no remuneration, yet he had received the amount of those expenses which he had incurred by travelling. These expenses had not, however, been arbitrarily awarded, but were dispensed according to the scale known in public offices and allowed to the Commissioners of Customs when travelling. The course of which his right hon. Friend complained was not only justified by former practice, but also by the proceedings of foreign governments. He
1614
himself during the last year had received several gentlemen deputed to this country by the government of France. So perfect was the analogy between their measure and that of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock, that it was a part of their duty on their return to France to publish in a book, or in other words, to make a report of the results they had arrived at. Such, then, was his answer to the complaints of his right hon. Friend, and he thought that he should lead the House too far astray if he were to go into the merits of the Report.
Mr. Humethought that the right hon. Member for the University of Cambridge had been so accustomed to payment, that he thought no good report could be made unless it were paid for. He however could assure the right hon. Gentleman, that there was a great difference of opinion as to the competency of the British resident Ministers abroad. The right hon. Gentleman did not appear to know what had been the object of the Report of his hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock; that object had been to make known the state of a country in which no restrictive regulation on trades obtained—to make known the commercial state of Switzerland. The conclusions to which his hon. Friend had come were most valuable, and if his hon. Friend had not been paid, and was not to be paid, then his hon. Friend would be a most ill-used man. He asserted that the labourer was worthy of his hire. What conclusion had his hon. Friend arrived at? At this—namely, that under circumstances of great inconvenience in every branch of trade, Switzerland had been enabled to compete with every other, country, and to supply France, England the United States of North America, and indeed every country which had pretended by restriction to protect its trade. His hon. Friend had acquitted himself admirably, and had shown the absurdity of all restrictions. The document before them proved that, and it related to the only country which afforded materials for proving that. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded to the title of certain chapters in the Report. He thought the right hon. Gentleman ought to know how very necessary it was in a document of that nature to classify every kind of information, and thereby to simplify references. He did not think that the right hon. Gentleman had been quite fair—he would not say kind in his remarks. He thought that his hon. Friend notwithstanding there were British Ministers re-

1615
sident abroad, had done some service, and he was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman opposite had expressed in so decided a manner his opinion that the document in question was of little value.
Mr. G. F. Youngsaid, that he would not follow the hon. Member for Middlesex in the line of argument he had adopted. He thought nevertheless, that the hon. Gentleman would have qualified his eulogy if he had reflected that any disciple of the restrictive system who might have been sent on a similar mission to that of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock, would have been equally successful in collecting facts in favour of his own theories. He did not think that either the right hon. Member for Cambridge or the hon. Member for Middlesex had met the objection of the right hon. Member for the University of Cambridge. That objection was founded on the constitutional jealousy with which that House had always regarded the payment of public money to it members, who, previously to receiving that money, did not vacate their seats. The right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), had alluded to the practice approved of by the French Government; the right hon. Gentleman ought to have told the House, first whether the gentlemen whom he received were members of the French Camber of Deputies; and secondly, whether it was the practice in France, that members of the French Chamber of Deputies on assuming offices of emolument were returned to their constituencies. The system which the right hon. Gentleman had defended was one of which there could be no other more corrupt or more insidious.
Sir Henry Parnellconsidered the document in question as one of great value, because it put beyond doubt the fact, that where the principles of free trade were acted on, the greatest advantage resulted to the country. In Switzerland it was no theory, but the law of the country; and the result was, that for a long series of time the trade of the country had enjoyed the greatest prosperity.
Mr. Kearsleyobjected to the expense of an excursion of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock being paid out of the public money, He had no idea that the hon. Member should be allowed to take his pleasure at the expense of the country. The hon. Member for Middlesex talked of principle, and yet he would pay the hon. Member for Kilmarnock the expenses of his excursion out of the public money. They would
1616
shortly have an opportunity of seeing whether the hon. Member for Middlesex was right or not. The hon. Member for Dundee had pronounced a high eulogy on the Report. He (Mr. Kearsley) objected, first that it was paying for a wild goose scheme; and secondly, that the Report was moonshine. Why should the hon. Member have 500 l. for going abroad and bringing home moonshine? He did not often agree with the Ministers, but he did agree with the right hon. Gentleman who had told the hon. Member for Middlesex that he was quite ignorant. Would the hon. Member go to Middlesex again, or to the boroughs—in God's name where would he go?
Mr. Goulbournstated, that his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had asserted, that the hon. Member for Kilmarnock had not been paid for his report; that he had been only paid his expenses per diem. But such a payment was as much a salary as an annual payment. The merit or demerit of the report was not the question before the House. The question was whether the hon. Member, being a Member of Parliament, should receive a payment not known to Parliament. The hon. Member might be intitled to it; but a payment received by a Member of Parliament should be either the subject of a vote in the first instance, or, after it was paid, should be in the civil contingences the subject of account. The matter ought to be in the control of Parliament.
Mr. P. Thomsonsaid, it had been at his suggestion, or that of his department, that the hon. Member had been sent to Switzerland to make these inquiries. He admitted that it was the duty of the Foreign Ministers to procure all the information in their power with reference to commercial matters, and he could bear testimony to the able manner in which of late years, since he had been acquainted with the proceedings, they had fulfilled this duty, and the valuable information they had communicated in their returns. But every man must be aware that there were kinds of information which a Foreign Minister, however disposed had not the means of procuring—a fact which the Report in question illustrated. This Government had understood that Switzerland was disposed to join the commercial union of Germany. Was it possible to procure the requisite information from a Foreign Minister, who was confined to one place, and unable to visit the different cantons and manufactories?

1617
He believed the course adopted had conduced to the public advantage.
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, there were matters which Ministers abroad could not be so competent to inquire about as the hon. Member. Any matters that could be stated in answer to questions from Government could be furnished by Ministers in their official capacity; but when it came to inquiries into details of commercial matters, these could only be made by persons well acquainted with the subject.
Mr. Wakleyobjected as much as any member to persons receiving money for secret services. He went farther, and thought that all pensions received by persons in that House ought to be discontinued, unless for public services expressed, acknowledged, or rendered to the state. Would the right hon. Gentleman agree to a list of pensions paid to persons in that House, being laid before it? He believed the right hon. Gentleman received a pension of 2,000 l. a-year. [Oh! oh!] Gentlemen might cry "oh," but it was a proper question when the right hon. Member disputed the payment of 500 l. to the hon. Member for Kilmarnock. It was a salary. He repeated it was not of the character of expenses; it was a salary. The right hon. Gentleman had received 60,000 l. of the public money during the time he was in office, and now he received a pension of 2,000 l. a-year, to be paid as long as he lived. The House had a right to consider the propriety of relieving him from the disgrace and annoyance of receiving this pension.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, if the hon. Member wished to know the grounds of his pension, he would find his length of services, whether good or bad, recorded in public documents; and if he referred to the Act of Parliament, he would see the reason why he received the pension.
Mr. C. Barclayobserved, that the hon. Member for Finsbury had said, that this was not a charge for expenses, but a salary; and the constitutional objection was, that a Member of Parliament was allowed to receive a salary, whereas if a Member took any office under Government of 10 l. a-year, he lost his seat. Yet, here was a secret mode by which a Member, on giving in a report to Government, might receive a salary without vacating his seat. This he thought an unconstitutional mode. His right hon. Friend had a right to a pension by Act of Parliament, and he knew no
1618
person whose services better entitled him to one.
Vote agreed to. The House resumed.

MINUTES.
Bills, Read a first time:—Mistaken References.—Read a second time:—Bridlington Harbour.

PUBLIC BUSINESS—ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN.
On the motion of Viscount Mel-

1565
bourne, the clerk at the table read the following paragraph from the Message which was delivered yesterday from her Majesty:—
"The present state of the public business and the period of the session, when considered in connection with the law which imposes on her Majesty the duty of summoning a new Parliament within a limited time, renders it inexpedient, in the judgement of her Majesty, that any new measures should be recommended for your adoption, with the exception of such as may be requisite for carrying on the public service from the close of the present Session to the meeting of the new Parliament."
Viscount Melbournethen said: My Lords, it is now my duty to call your Lordships' attention to the latter paragraph of her Majesty's most gracious message which I had the honour of bringing down, but which was postponed in order that no comment, observation, or proceeding whatsoever might mar the general feeling of condolence for the loss of his late Majesty. It is now my intention to move that your lordships do adopt an address in answer to that part of her Majesty's most gracious Message; and, if your lordships approve of it, to express our intention to pursue the course recommended by her Majesty. It is unnecessary for me to state to your lordships the actual state of the statute law on this subject, and the condition in which that law is. Your lordships are well aware that in former times—times anterior to the revolution—all authority being supposed to emanate from the Crown, emanating under the Sovereign's writ, was supposed to fall and become extinct by the demise of the Sovereign. All commissions, all authorities, all delegations, every thing ceased at once, and at once in that event Parliament was dissolved, and it was necessary to issue writs for the meeting of a new Parliament. This was a provision of the common law of the country, and this provision, which arose from the general nature and principles of that law, was found so generally inconvenient to the service of the country, and was found so peculiarly inconvenient in the time which succeeded the Revolution, when the succession was by no means so generally or decidedly established, or so generally recognised as it fortunately is at present—I say, my lords, that this provision was found so generally and peculiarly inconvenient, and so prejudicial to the public service, that in the reigns of King William the Third and Queen Anne acts were passed for continuing the puration of Parliament for six months after the demise of the Sovereign. In the
1566
case of the succession which immediately followed these acts of Parliament the period of six months, so allowed by law, was taken advantage of, and of those measures which were before the Parliament at that time sitting they dispatched those more urgent and immediate measures which were necessary to be passed, such as the settlement of the civil list, which was generally passed before the Parliament was dissolved. But on the occasions of the accession of George 4th., and his late Majesty the servants of the Crown at the time, pressed by strong reasons in favour of that course, in both cases recommended to the Parliaments of those times to depart from the course which had been formerly recommended, and to proceed only with that business which was necessary, absolutely necessary, for the public service of the country, and to leave all other measures, and amongst the rest the settlement of the civil list, till the meeting of a new Parliament. Upon these two precedents I call upon your lordships to proceed on the present occasion, and I think it is hardly necessary for me to point out to your lordships the great inconvenience that would necessarily result from following any other course. Your lordships are all aware what difficulties must attend the transaction of public business in a Parliament which must necessarily expire in the period of six months, and which probably would terminate before the termination of that period. With respect to the Parliament itself, your Lordships must be aware of the difficulties that would be found in obtaining the attendance of that Parliament and of obtaining the attention of Members to business in that Parliament, and the prejudice that might arise to the public service from the decision of such a House of Commons, and the want of that impartial and independent manner which ought to belong to all the decisions of the representatives of the people. I think it hardly necessary to expend much argument upon this subject: it is so perfectly self-evident that I feel I am not required to take up your Lordships' time with details of the inconvenience that must arise. I am very well aware that this course of proceeding being adopted, at the same time necessarily leads to the postponement of many measures which every body considers of great importance, and which I have myself acknowledged repeatedly to be of very great importance, and of peculiar urgency. I admit fully the importance of these measures; I admit

1567
their urgency, but I think that that importance must yield to greater importance, and that urgency must yield to greater urgency; and, therefore under these circumstances, I am unwilling to carry these measures into completion in the course of the present Session, and I think that her Majesty's Government is justified in recommending to your Lordships to forego the advantages of passing these measures. There have been, undoubtedly, upon former occasions difficulties in the way of this course of proceeding which do not exist on the present occasion. There have been difficulties arising out of the possible inconvenience in the case of the demise of the Crown during the interval between the dissolution of the one Parliament and the meeting of the next, and while the successor to the throne was yet under age. This is a contingency which it is not necessary to provide for on the present occasion. But, my lords, I apprehend there is another contingency which it is necessary to provide for, and which relates to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, who is the next in succession, and who is now an independent sovereign on the continent; and as the duties of that station, will necessarily call for the residence of his Royal Highness on the continent, it will be necessary to provide for the case that may arise out of the Crown during that absence of his Royal Highness. I apprehend that it will be for the public convenience to introduce and pass a bill for this purpose. My Lords, it will therefore undoubtedly be the course proposed by her Majesty's Government to pass the supplies of the year. If there are any measures which are likely to lead to discussion, which are likely to meet with any considerable resistance, or upon which there is likely to prevail any difference of opinion, of course it will be necessary to abandon them for the present Session, and to postpone them till the meeting of the new Parliament. But with respect to those measures about which there is a general concurrence of opinion, and about which there is a general feeling of the propriety of passing them immediately, of course it is the intention of her Majesty's Government to proceed with them. Upon these grounds, my Lords, I beg leave to move that an humble address be presented to her most gracious Majesty, acknowledging the communication which her Majesty has been graciously pleased to make to this House, and expressing to her
1568
Majesty the deep sense which this House entertains of her Majesty's consideration for the public convenience, and her Majesty's unwillingness to recommend to the House to adopt, in the present state of the public business, and at this period of the Session, when considered in connection with the law which imposes on her Majesty the duty of summoning a new Parliament within a limited time, any measures except such as may be requisite to carry on the public service from the close of the present session to the meeting of the new Parliament and only to bring forward such measures as without injury to the public service, will not admit of postponement.
The address having been read by the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Lyndhurstentirely concurred in the address proposed by the noble Viscount and he agreed to the terms of that address on the grounds so distinctly and ably stated by the noble Viscount. He thought that in the present state of business in the other House of Parliament, the number of important questions depending there, and considering the period of the year, it might be considered almost impossible for their lordships to proceed with the whole of them, and many of them must of necessity be postponed. But when he considered the circumstance to which the noble Viscount had adverted, namely, the near prospect of a dissolution, which must of necessity remove from the metropolis a large proportion of the other House, who must look to their individual interests; and when he further considered that even of those persons who should remain there, many would have their attention engaged about other matters in which they or their friends were concerned, he could not bring himself to think that these important measures now under the consideration of the other House were likely to be deliberately and calmly discussed if her Majesty's Government should persevere in pressing the consideration and discussion of them during the remainder of the Session. He, therefore, agreed in the view of the subject taken by the noble Viscount. He also agreed in what had been stated by the noble Viscount with respect to the consideration of the question relating to the civil list. It appeared to him, first of all, adverting to the period of the Session, that there could not be without considerable inconvenience sufficient time deliberately to consider that important question, which in more instances than one had occupied several weeks of discussion. But he was

1569
not prepared on that ground alone to agree to the suggestion of the noble Viscount. It was because he thought it would not be fair to her Majesty, it would not be fair to the country, to bring forward the consideration of such measures upon the eve of a dissolution of Parliament. It was not necessary distinctly to state the reasons for this opinion: they had been alluded to with sufficient distinctness by the noble Viscount; and he for one would never agree to make a provision for her Majesty, a permanent provision, under these circumstances, and at a period when those persons who would take part in the discussion of these questions might be fettered by the situation in which they would be placed. Those questions were much more likely to be fairly, impartially, and satisfactorily discussed by independent Members at the meeting of a new Parliament. He agreed also in the prudence and propriety of making provision for the state of things respecting the succession to the Throne to which the noble Viscount had referred. It appeared to him, from the practice of former years, that no difficulty would be found in passing a Bill of this description. He was prepared, therefore, to concur with the noble Viscount, and to support his motion with respect to the succession. But he must at the same time be allowed to refer to the situation in which they were placed—he meant the situation in which they were placed with respect to the legislation of the country. They were now at the close of the fifth month of the Session of Parliament, and not a single important Bill had been yet passed into law. They had literally done nothing during the five months they had been assembled. As far as legislation was concerned—and it was one of the most important duties of Government—they had done nothing. Let him for a moment call the attention of their Lordships to the state of business before Parliament at that moment. His late Majesty in his speech from the Throne recommended the consideration of the improvement of the laws and the administration of the justice of the country. In pursuance of that recommendation, in the month of May, nine Bills for the improvement of the criminal laws were introduced into the other House by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. They were read a first time. They were read a second time, a Committee was appointed, the Committee was successively postponed from time to time until the 19th of June, the present month; and then,
1570
when these important measures were to come under the consideration of the other House for their final adoption, at a quarter past four o'clock the House was counted out, because there was not a sufficient number of Members present to attend the discussion of these important measures referred to in the Speech from the Throne. Her Majesty's Ministers were, therefore, not inclined, or it was out of their power, to obtain the attendance of a sufficient number of supporters to proceed with the discussion of those eminently important questions. He was incorrect in one particular. There was one, indeed, of these Bills passed—he meant the Bill for the abolition of the punishment of the pillory. But his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) stated, and stated truly, that no practical effect would arise from that Bill. The punishment was in effect already abolished by the judges, who by the former Bill had the power in the cases to which this Bill referred to substitute fine and imprisonment for the pillory, and this was invariably adopted. Literally, therefore, with respect to these nine Bills upon the subject of the criminal laws no progress whatever had been made. Again, a most important measure, the Imprisonment for Debt Bill, had come up to that House during the last Session: it had also come up to their Lordships during the Session preceding the last, but the measure came up at so late a period that their Lordships thought, and justly and properly thought, that it was impossible at so late a period that a question of so much importance could be properly considered. They had then refused—they had wisely refused—to enter into its consideration; but it was with the understanding that in the present Session of Parliament the Bill would be introduced at the earliest possible period. The Bill was introduced on the 6th February by the Attorney-General, within a week after the Parliament had assembled. It was read a first time; it was then read a second time; it was then submitted to the Committee, and it was adjourned from day to day, until at last upon the 18th May, the day upon which the Committee was to have sat, the House was counted out at a quarter past seven o'clock, and from that day to the present they had not heard one word about that Bill. This was the course of legislation pursued by the Government on this great and important question, and to the recommendation of the King in his Speech from the Throne, namely, that they

1571
should manifest their zeal in the amendment of all that related to the administration of the law and the justice of the country. Again, he wished to call their Lordships' attention to this. There was a Bill upon a most important subject that had passed their Lordships' House in the last Session of Parliament—it was the Benefices Pluralities Act. That Bill went down to the other House—it was taken up by the Government—it proceeded up to a certain point. Opposition was made to it in certain quarters, and the Bill was instantly abandoned by the Government—abandoned in consequence of some negotiations in private; and in consequence of some secret stipulations it was not proceeded with. This was done, although it had been introduced by a most rev. Prelate, supported by their Lordships, and advocated by the Government in the other House of Parliament. In consequence of what had passed at that period, at an early period in the present Session, upon the 2d of March, the Bill was brought in by the Government to the other House, and read a first time; but from that moment to the present—from the 2d March—not a single step had been taken with respect to that measure? Was this creditable? If they had not the evidence of it in the votes upon their Lordships' table no man could believe it. It was unnecessary to comment upon such a proceeding when they had the fact before them that there was ready to be submitted to their Lordships' consideration a Bill directed to the same object, which had been proposed by his noble and learned Friend, and which had been postponed by him for the purpose of seeing what it was that the Government meant to do with the Bill that had been introduced into the other House of Parliament. There was another measure to which he had also to call their. Lordships' attention, for all were of the same character. Their Lordships knew that two Sessions ago the question relating to the settlement of the Irish tithes was considered to be of such infinite importance, that early in the Session it was the first measure called for, and the first thing done was a resolution being proposed on the subject of "appropriation," as it was called. No time was then to be lost upon the tithe question; it was a question of vital importance to Ireland. It was a question upon which the tranquillity of Ireland depended, and they were told that it was a subject that must be settled without the least possible delay. And yet it was
1572
not until the month of April or of May that the Bill respecting such tithes was brought into the House of Commons. All the early period of the Session had been allowed to elapse without the attention of the House of Commons being called to so important a subject. The Bill had been read once; it was read a second time; it was proposed to be committed on the l6th of June; it was postponed from the l6th of June to the present day, and, if they were not misinformed, he believed it was now to be postponed to a future day. So that this important subject—admitted to be of such transcendent importance, not only in that, but in the other House—was, in the first instance, postponed to the period he had stated, and afterwards progressed in the slow and creeping manner he had just adverted to. There was one subject, in his opinion, more important than all the rest—he alluded to the great question respecting the Canadas. Certain resolutions had been proposed which were of the utmost possible importance. They had come up from the other House for the purpose of meeting with their Lordships' approval and support. On the 18th of May, after having been well considered in that House, their Lordships, too, adopted them. If he referred to the debate upon those resolutions—if he looked to the language in the protest of the noble and learned Lord opposite, their Lordships must feel how eminently important were the considerations involved in those resolutions. When resolutions of such a description were past, it appeared to him to be absolutely necessary that they should be followed up by a law giving force to them. How otherwise would they be considered in these colonies but as mere threats, and threats, too, which they had no intention to carry into effect? Nothing could be more impolitic—nothing could be more weak, than such a coure of proceeding. It was, too, still more objectionable, when they remembered that their Lordships had directed a Bill to be brought in to carry these resolutions into effect, and that both Houses had agreed to the propriety of that course. He had given these examples of the course of legislation pursued by the Government of this country. He said nothing of the question of Church-rates—nothing of various others to which he might call their Lordships' attention; but these were striking instances that he had stated of the weakness and the neglect of Government with regard to what was its duty in measures of legislation. He had

1573
stated facts in detail. He wished now to be allowed to call their Lordships' attention to another subject. They were then at the end of the fifth month of the Session—in four or five days' time they would have sat five months complete. And what was the complement of Bills disposed of by them since their assembling? During that time sixteen Bills had received the royal assent; but it was not to be imagined that because sixteen public Bills had received the royal assent, they had been busily engaged with all of them. Of these sixteen, there were six that were but trifling amendments on Bills that had already passed. There were eight of the sixteen Bills that were mere Bills of routine, and that passed during every Session—such as the Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, the Transfer in Aids Bill, the Consolidated Fund Bill, and other Bills of this description. There were but two measures—but two distinct measures in legislation that had passed during the present Session of Parliament. One of these Bills was for regulating the Post-office contract; the object of the Bill, it might be recollected by their Lordships, was to transfer the contracts respecting the packets to the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Lichfield). The other Bill was for an alteration in the law with respect to the punishment of sedition in Scotland, and which was agreed to without one word having been said upon this subject. These, then, were the only two special and distinct acts of legislation that had passed during the five months they had been sitting there. This was a most extraordinary state of things. There was at that moment seventy-five public Bills depending in the other House. More than thirty of these had been brought in by the Government and the officers of Government; and of these a portion—a very large portion—might have originated in that House, if it had been the object of the Government to have done that which was their duty with respect to legislation, faithfully, actively, and serviceably to the country. He had at that moment lying before him a paper of the business before the other House for that night. He had counted the number of subjects for discussion in the other House for that night. There were fifty-seven public Bills, besides the consideration of the Message of her Most Gracious Majesty, and beside which there was, too, the consideration of estimates in a Committee of Supply. Such was the state in which the business of the country was allowed to be under the admi-
1574
nistration of the noble Viscount. Was he not justified then in saying, that, as far as related to the most important duty of the Legislature, they were literally without a Government? Never was the state of business in the other House of Parliament in the situation in which it was at present—never did a Government so neglect so important a part of its duty, that which it had to discharge in Parliament, as the Government had done during the last five months. He had taken occasion, during the last Session, of stating to the House that which was his opinion, that the noble Viscount and his colleagues were utterly powerless. They were powerless alike is that and the other House; they were utterly inefficient and incompetent as servants to the Crown; and, he must add also, they were equally powerless, incapable, and inefficient, as regarded the people. This much he had to say as respected their duty in legislation; he could, if he wished it, refer to other topics connected with their domestic policy. He was not, however, on that occasion inclined to do it; and still less was he disposed to allude to the foreign policy pursued by the noble Viscount and his colleagues. He could only say of it, that almost every feasible and reasonable man had but one opinion—but one idea was entertained regarding their conduct. It elicited the pity of their friends, and excited the scorn and derision of the enemies of their country. He gave them a picture of the present—he had also given them a picture of the past. What, then, were their hopes for the future? From the noble Viscount, and his party, literally nothing. Were they to judge from the past? Were they to profit and benefit by experience? If so, they could entertain no hope. But he did not entirely despair. There was one ray of comfort and consolation shining in upon them from another question. From the experience that they had had—from the observations that they made of the conduct of their most gracious Sovereign, in the first act of her administration—from the steadiness of her conduct—from her complete self-possession, and from her dignity—he augured much; and he trusted that at no distant period they should find that no countenance would be given for the alarm and apprehension on account of the danger to which the Church Establishment in this country was exposed, and that perfect security would be afforded to the Protestant faith, to which the people of this country were so strongly

1575
attached, and respecting which so much alarm had been excited. He assured their Lordships that it was to that quarter he looked with hope and confidence. He was sure that the hope and confidence would be shared by their Lordships, and participated in by the country, and he was sure that they would not meet with disappointment. With these explanations he assented to the Address moved by the noble Viscount. It was perfectly proper, and ought to be adopted. He could not, however, with satisfaction discharge the duty that he owed to himself and their Lordships, if he had said less than he had done.
Lord Broughamsaid, that in agreeing to the motion proposed by his noble Friend on the present occasion, he did not, he thought, pursue a line of conduct that was inconsistent with that which he had pursued upon a former occasion, when he had some years ago the honour of a seat in the other House of Parliament; and he did not think the present course inconsistent with that which the noble Earl on the cross benches had thought proper to take when the same question was before their Lordships in that House; for the grounds that were then adopted for resisting the proposition in either House were of a twofold character. In the first place, they were at that time unwilling, upon constitutional principles, that the Parliament should be dissolved before the question upon the civil list was brought before them; and, next, that the Parliament should not be dissolved until the more important question of the regency should be settled. To these two grounds there was to be added a third, namely, the state of the public business—that so little had been done, and that so much of an urgent nature remained to be done. Of these three grounds he certainly did not mean to deny that two now existed—the first and the last. The first was the same now as then—namely, the propriety of settling the civil list before the dissolution; and the last argument, that there were measures before Parliament, existing in a greater degree, and requiring a more speedy settlement now, than upon that occasion. As to the second objection that he had stated, that had been more eagerly pushed forward, and more importance was attached to it than to the others by the noble Earl on the cross benches (Earl Grey). It was on this, too, that some of his Majesty's Government chiefly resisted the adoption of such a course. They wished to provide against
1576
the demise of the Crown in the absence of the heir presumptive. That was the line which was required to be adopted. That course was at present proposed. He did not think that on the present occasion his noble and learned Friend treated with much courtesey the arguments of his opponents. He certainly had not treated them very gently. In the first ground he entirely concurred; but he admitted that the course pursued in not bringing forward the civil list was one to which be objected. The not allowing Members of Parliament, and particularly Members of the other House, to debate that question before going to their constituents, was that to which he was opposed. He entirely differed from his noble and learned Friend on the other side as to this point. He took it that the constitutional doctrine was not that laid down by his noble Friend. He should like that the debates upon the civil list should take place in the face of a general election, and not at a time when Members often considered themselves as irresponsible, and were about to sit for a period of six years. He adhered to that opinion; but under the present circumstances, and for reasons to which it was not necessary to advert, he was inclined, on the whole, if not to support, at least not to offer any opposition to the motion of his noble Friend. That brought him to consider the state of business in the present Parliament. There could be no doubt that the fact was so as it had been put by his noble and learned Friend—all measures were to be postponed—all, too, very great and important, and some of urgent necessity. It was, no doubt, equally true that few, that hardly any, measures had been adopted in the whole of the five months that this Session of Parliament had lasted. But his noble and learned Friend had omitted from his catalogue one of the measures which did pass the other House of Parliament, which did come into that House, but respecting which he thought his noble and learned Friend might form some conjecture why that measure was not proceeded with. He thought he knew some Members of that House who could tell why that measure was out of the catalogue of great, important, useful, and necessary measures that ought to have passed—a measure towards which the expectation of one country had been directed very much, and which had not yet received the Royal Assent. Perhaps in the other House of Parliament

1577
they had heard by what means it was, that measure had been disposed of? What mode of proceeding had been adopted with respect to it their Lordships well knew, and none better than his noble and learned Friend? He was so little disposed to impede the public business in Parliament that he could not deceive the just expectations of the country in producing the delay that had taken place, and prevented the forwarding of that measure—a measure, too, it was to be remembered, which had proceeded to its second reading, and yet means were taken to prevent its becoming law. But he had lately, in moving for a Committee to consider the state of public business, discussed this subject so much at length that he was not inclined to enter upon it at present. He could not, however, but think that a great deal, if not the whole, of the delay in carrying on of the business—the obstacles that that business met with—was to be looked for elsewhere than to her Majesty's Ministers. He might add, he did not say it to their Lordships, he did not say it to a majority of their Lordships, but he was bound then in common candour and in common fairness to the House to admit, that with the exception—with that most important exception—the most important of the whole—but with that exception, of that one measure to which he had already referred, their Lordships were not answerable for the stoppage which had been brought upon the public business this Session. No doubt of it that the manner in which their Lordships had dealt with that one measure might be taken as of very great weight with others, and as affording to them a very distinct indication as to the manner in which other measures would be dealt with and dispatched, and hence in part the present complaint might have arisen. That, however, was no justification for the stoppage of measures in that quarter. What he complained of was the system; it was by that the interruption of public business had been occasioned. His noble Friend said, that at present there was all but a desperate aspect of affairs, but for a light which it seemed had broken in upon him from a high quarter. He, too, joined most respectfully, and reverently joined, in all that had fallen from his noble and learned Friend with respect to that illustrious individual; but, together with that beam of light he had spoken of, there was another, and he did not think a crossing, beam, but he hoped and trusted one that would be found moving in the same direction—
1578
he meant by one measure to facilitate that of which they had such auspicious promise at the present moment; that was, by dissolving the present and electing another House of Commons. And he could not help thinking, that if his noble and learned Friend really spoke out, and if he really were disposed to treat her Majesty's Government with that candour with which he treated the adversaries of her Majesty's Government, he would, instead of vituperating them—instead of charging them with incompetency—instead of denouncing them for their vacillations and their unfitness for discharging their duties, and declaring they were in such a position as to be the pity of their friends and the scorn of their political enemies. [Earl Fitzwilliam: The scorn of the enemies of their country.] And, as the noble and learned Lord had said, the scorn of the enemies of their country (now, being the scorn of the enemies of one's country is no disgrace to any Government;) but if, instead of levelling against them this vituperation, his noble and learned Friend had turned round to the Commons' House of Parliament, for there it was that he would find the cause of all obstruction, and therein he would find the reasons why it was impossible to carry on the public business; and if, finding that his noble Friend said to them, "House of Commons! you a House of Commons! I tell you you are no House of Commons; the Lords have done with you—the Lords will have other instruments than you to do their work—get you gone, and give place to better men"—if his noble and learned Friend had thus delivered his opinions, and thus directed his observations to that quarter, then he would have stated that which was not so distant from the fact as that which his noble and learned Friend had actually stated. His noble and learned Friend would thus have stated what he felt in his own mind but to be the truth; but which if he did not feel, then he (Lord Brougham,) without meaning to cast any discredit on the House of Commons, and not meaning to use any disrespectful expressions, but qualifying them so far, while he participated in such a feeling, would say, that he declared he looked forward to another House of Commons for supplying the present, and which would give to her Majesty's Government a real and efficient majority; for it had been the want of an efficient majority that was the cause of all the obstruction.
Viscount Melbournereplied: The noble

1579
and learned Lord had taken the present opportunity of pouring forth his long-stored-up invectives. There had come from him one of those harangues which he was in the habit of generally delivering at the end of the Session. The noble and learned Lord had said that the course of their domestic policy was entirely condemned, and as to their foreign policy he had marked his opinion of it in a sentence that had been alluded to by his noble and learned Friend. He had no intention at that moment of entering into a discussion which the noble and learned Lord wished to provoke, nor should he give a contradiction to the many invectives that the noble and learned Lord had given utterance to. All he could do was to point out to their Lordships that the most of that which the noble and and learned Lord had delivered was composed of accusation—it was general abuse—an attack unsupported by any argument. He was sure that if the noble and learned Lord had any grounds for his attack it could not be otherwise than unfitted and unbecoming for the present occasion, although the noble Lord had taken care to deal out his invectives in an unsparing manner. With respect to the details into which the noble and learned Lord had entered as to the sitting of the Houses, and the business done by Parliament up to the present period of the Session—as to his stating how many bills had been brought forward and not proceeded with—it was, as far as the censure of the noble and learned Lord extended, one he must acquiesce in, because it equally applied to others, because he and his colleagues were not the only sufferers, and because the censure that was urged against them had been equally applied to the ministry of the noble Duke and the noble Lord. When they proposed the same measure that he had now the honour of proposing, he found in 1830 the noble Duke was reported to have stated: "My Lords, it is not necessary for me to draw your attention in detail to the present state of the business before Parliament; it is sufficient for me to request your consideration of the state of the votes of the House of Commons, and the state of the votes of this House, and your Lordships will see that so much business remains to be done, that were it all to be completed, and were any new business to be brought forward at this period of the Session, it must necessarily postpone the dissolution to a distant day." This was nearly a detail exactly of what might be said at the present day.
1580
But he found also that his noble Friend (Earl Grey), who had left his place on the cross benches, also said upon that occasion: "There is a necessity for an immediate dissolution, the noble Duke says. But why is there this necessity? Apparently it arises from the circumstance that during the long and afflicting period of uncertainty as to the issue of his Majesty's illness, when the minds of men have been directed to that event, the Ministers who have had the business of Parliament to forward, of whatever nature it may have been, have shown themselves quite incapable of conducting it." That was the argument urged against the present Government by the noble and learned Lord. The noble Earl continued—"The business of Parliament, at a period of the Session which, in ordinary circumstances, would be drawing to a termination—after five months' consideration, and though recommended from the Throne at the beginning of the Session—the business of Parliament has been in fact neglected." In fact the business of Parliament at the time alluded to by his noble Friend was nearly in the state that it was at present. The business of Parliament had yearly been going on in such a manner that the Houses of Parliament were actually unable to get through it, and to discharge it all in a manner that could be quite satisfactory to Members. It was not his intention to enter into a consideration of the various measures that had been referred to. That part of the subject had been ably handled by his noble and learned Friend. But the fact was, that discussions were conducted in the other House of Parliament—he must say it in defence of the other House of Parliament, that the mode in which its discussions were conducted afforded no proof of indifference to the subjects before it—that there was no want of proof of its diligence. They must believe that it had considered well the business that was before it—they had to look and to be guided by its long sittings. Perhaps it had been counted out upon particular occasions because there was an indisposition to hear a particular motion; or it might have happened in another manner—it might have been the result of fatigue. There were in the present Session no less than seven adjourned debates—some continuing for four nights, others of three, and all, of course, of two nights duration. Every one knew that on former occasions an adjourned debate was a thing of most unusual occurrence. It arose either from

1581
the greater importance of the business, or the greater anxiety of Members of Parliament to deliver their sentiments and opinions upon the subjects before them; and if it were an evil, and he did not know that it was—if delay were in fact an evil, then it was to be remembered that it was an evil that arose from the nature of things—it was inherent to the present state of society. It was an evil as matters stood at present, and it was impossible for them to find a remedy. He should not, however, make any statement as to the measures to which the noble Lord had alluded. With respect to one, he hoped the means would be found of preventing the evil that existed, and of carrying the intentions of Parliament into efficient execution. The noble Viscount concluded by saying: The noble and learned Lord has expressed great hope that he derives from circumstances that he particularly described. I do not think, considering the bitterness to be found in the speech of the noble and learned Lord—considering not only the vehemence but the acrimony that marked that speech—I do not think that the topic was very happily or very opportunely introduced; and I beg leave to say, that it was introduced in terms in which he, in his admiration for the present and the future, did in a great degree forget his respect for the past.
The Address was then agreed to.