Sitting of 4 March 1844

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.–2o. Prisons (Scotland). Private.–1o. Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway; North British Railway; Slamannan Junction Railway.
2o. Berries Navigation; Manchester and Birmingham (Macclesfield and Poynton Branches) Railway (No. 2); South Devon Railway; Edinburgh and Glasgow Rail-
516
way; Edinburgh Poor Assessment; Bolton and Preston Railway.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Aberffraw, against Union of Sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
Mr. Gladstonerose to call the attention of the House to the following Report, agreed upon by the Select Committee on Railways:—

"1. That in each case, where Bills are now pending, to authorise the construction of new Railways, competing with one another, such Bills be respectively referred to one Committee.

"2. That the Committees for the consideration of such Bills be specially constituted.

"3. That Bills now pending to authorise the construction of new lines of Railway, which will compete with existing Railways, be in like manner referred to Committees specially constituted.

"4. That such Committees be composed of five Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, who shall sign a declaration that their constituents have no local interest, and that they themselves have no personal interest, in the Bill or Bills referred to them; and that they will not vote on any question which may arise without having duly heard and attended to the evidence relating thereto; and that three shall be a quorum.

"5. That a Select Committee be appointed, to consider which of the pending Railway Bills shall be deemed competing Bills according to the foregoing resolutions.

"6. That such Select Committee be composed of five Members, of whom three shall be a quorum, and that the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.

"7. That such of the Standing Orders as relate to the composition of the Committees on Private Bills, and the orders consequent thereon, be suspended, so far as regards competing Railway Bills pending in the course of the present Session."

The right hon. Gentleman said he would in the first instance, call the attention of the House to a particular Railway Bill, which at present stood committed for Thursday: namely, the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Bill, with respect to which the question might fairly be raised whether it ought not to be considered as a competing Railway with another line; and he should take the opportunity of proposing that the Committee on that Bill be deferred for a reasonable time unless the promoters of the Bill would take that step themselves in the event of the House adopting the Resolutions of the Committee. The Resolutions which he was about to propose, in conformity with the instruc-

517
tions of the Committee of which he had the honour to be the Chairman, had been in the hands of hon. Members two or three days; and as they were not very long, he trusted hon. Members were fully aware of their nature. He did not know, that there was anything on the face of the Resolutions requiring any statement from him; but as there was some departure from the usual practice of the House with respect to the appointment of Committees on Private Bills, he wished to make a few observations. The Committee, on proceeding to examine that part of the subject which was referred to them, relating to the Standing Orders of the House, of course, had to take into their view that some of the questions requiring their investigation had been already raised in a special form by some of the Bills now before the House. The question, for instance, of competing Railways, was one which, although not raised on a very large scale by the Bills of the present Session, was raised in a very considerable number of instances, generally speaking, on short. Railways of secondary importance. The Committee, he believed, were unanimously of opinion that there were some considerations applicable to Railways which rendered it desirable to try whether some experiment should not be made, at all events, for the purpose of dealing with those Railway Bills. These considerations summed themselves up in this main position—that Railway Bills, although they are in respect to interference with private rights, and in respect to the accommodation they afford to particular districts and localities, of the nature of Private Bills—yet they do enter so directly and so closely into communication with other great lines that constitute the main arteries of the traffic of the kingdom, that they do partake virtually, and as to their end and policy to a considerable extent, of the nature of public Bills, that theme are many reasons why public interests should be largely represented in the Committees that have to deal with those Bills. At the same time, the House having adopted it as a principle, that its Committees on Private Bills should be composed in part of a very limited number of selected Members, and of Members more or less connected with local interests, he was very far from calling upon the House, in its present state of information, to depart from that principle; but be did, as the organ of the
518
Committee on Railways, invite the House so far to depart from that principle as to constitute its Private Railway Bill Committees for the present Session on different principles from those which had hitherto obtained. Now, there were some considerations which presented themselves to the Committee, en which he thought he might say the Committee were unanimous it was quite obvious, and it was acknowledged by every Member of the Committee, that it would not do to allow all the Railway Bills in the present Session, whether competing Bills or not, to go forth in the usual course prescribed by the rules of this House. It was felt that it would be quite absurd in cases where it was proposed to make two railway form nearly the same terminus and for the accommodation of the same district and the same traffic—it was felt that it would be quite preposterous to allow these Bills to go before two different Railway Committees of the House. The first step was, that Bills competing with one another should be referred to the same Committee. And then came the question of the constitution of the Committee; and there was a case which he would now mention to the House—a case of two railways proposed to be made from the town of Ashton-under-Lyne to Staleybridge, both having for their object the accommodation of that town and its connection with the great manufacturing district of Manchester. One of those Railways proposed to join he Manchester and Sheffield Railway and the other the Manchester and Leeds Railway. The two Railways were intended to go through different counties, and although they started from the same town their termini in that town were in different counties. It so happened that the town was situated in two counties. Now, there was no rule of the House to determine to what list a Bill of that nature should be referred. In former years he believed the experiment had more than once been tried of constituting the Committees, where more than one county was concerned, of Members for different counties. He believed, that it was the opinion of the House that the experiment worked in a most unsatisfactory manner, and ought not to be continued. That, at all events, was the unanimous feeling of the Committee on Railways, because it created a Committee so large and so cumbrous, and so vague, and raised a contest of local

519
interests so disproportioned to the share of public interest, that it was difficult to know how any Private Bill could be dealt with satisfactorily in that manner, much less a Railway Bill, which was to a certain extent a public Measure. The Committee were almost unanimously of opinion, that it was necessary that the representation of local interests in cases of competing Railway Bills should at all events be very materially restricted. It was their opinion, that if the House were to be called upon to depart from its usual course of practice, that the wisest plan would be to ask the House to try an experiment which would be likely to put fairly to the test the principles upon which it was founded, so that when that experiment should have been tried the House would be more advanced in its knowledge, and, whether it failed or whether it succeeded, they would at all events have the advantage of something to refer to as a guide for their future proceeding. The Committee, therefore, thought that in deviating from the usual course of a somewhat large and promiscuous Committee, it would be necessary in reducing the number of the Committees, to appoint them so that there might be a strong sense of individual responsibility; that there might be a disposition on the part of Members of the Committee to take a close and immediate interest in its proceedings, and as nearly as possible to attend throughout the whole of those proceedings. He had described the proceedings of the Committee on Railways as nearly unanimous up to this point. He did not mean to say that the resolutions which had been laid upon the table, and which he now proposed for adoption, were carried without any difference of opinion. Considering the nature of the subject, and the details which it involved, it would be a bad compliment to the Committee if those resolutions had been carried without any difference of opinion, because it would have led to the idea that they had been hastily adopted. Certainly there was considerable difference of opinion; but there was a general and almost unanimous concurrence in the opinion, that the usual course must be departed from—that the number of Members of Committee on that class of Bills must he reduced—that local influence must be a subordinate element in their composition, and that public interests and public motives must be more prominent. But it
520
would be seen that the resolutions went further than the description which he had up to that moment given of them. The resolutions recommended, by way of experiment, the exclusion of local influences altogether. He thought the Members of the Committee would bear him out when he stated that there was a very strong disposition on the part of many Members to arrange, from time to time, something like a limited representation of local interest—to retain the local interest as subordinate, but denying it the predominant power which it now possessed in private bill Committees. The practical difficulties attending the working out of that proposition induced the Committee to abandon it. They thought it their duty to communicate with the highest authorities of the House, and with that Committee which had been appointed by the House for the purpose of superintending the composition of its Private Bill Committees—he meant the Committee of Selection—a body which he believed had discharged its duties in a manner that had tended to win for it, in no ordinary degree, the confidence of the House; and they found, after consulting with such authorities, that to attempt a considerable limitation of local interest would deprive them of the advantages which they sought without conferring others. It was found that the difficulty of selecting a limited number of persons to represent local interests would, in the opinion of the best qualified persons, be almost insuperable. It was apprehended that the jealousies of parties would be excited, and that apprehensions would be raised to a still greater degree if a very narrow and partial representation of local interests were given, than if they had no representation whatever of local interests. Therefore, after mature consideration, the Committee on Railways came to the conclusion which he (Mr Gladstone) unhesitatingly recommended to the adoption of the House, that, upon the whole, looking to the limited sphere on which they proposed to try the experiment with regard to a particular class of Railway Bills, and for the present Session, the best chance of its success would he found in recommending the constitution of Committees for this special purpose on public grounds, and on public grounds alone. The Committee, therefore, recommended in the first instance, that a select Committee should be appointed who

521
would have a very short and simple duty to perform, namely, to go over the list of Railway Bills standing for consideration during the present Session, and to determine which of those Bills should be considered as standing in the category of competing bills. They then proposed that that Committee having so determined the Bills belonging to such class, the Committee of Selection should proceed to provide for the consideration of those Bills in their respective Committees, by the choice of five gentlemen unconnected by personal interests, unconnected by the local interests of constituents with the Bill to be brought under their consideration. Of course he was not able to say precisely in what number of cases this measure would come into operation, but he thought the number of competing Bills would be eight or ten. The form of proceeding upon these Bills—the degree of expense that might be occasioned to the parties, as compared with the expense under the present system—the time that might he occupied in the investigation—the satisfaction which the decisions would meet with in different quarters,—all these were most important elements for the consideration of the House; and he trusted when the experiment had been tried that the House would be in a much better position for considering in what way it would be better to deal with Railway Bills in general, than it was at present. He did not think there was anything further in the resolutions to which it was necessary to advert. They were framed for the purpose of giving effect to the general views which he had stated. He believed he was correct in stating that they conveyed the impression of the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving that the Resolutions of the Committee be read.
Resolutions read. First resolution read a second time; Motion made and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said resolution."
Mr. Laboucheresaid, the right hon. Gentleman the Chairman of the Committee on Railways had so clearly stated the views with which the Committee recommended these resolutions that it was quite unnecessary for him to go over the same ground. The most important point involved in these resolutions was much beyond the convenience of dealing with these par-
522
ticular Bills,—it was a question whether the House would try the experiment of conducting the private business of the country upon principles totally different from those which had hitherto prevailed. The principle which it was now proposed to affirm was one of the utmost possible consequence. It was this: to try an experiment at first for special purposes in particular cases, which, if found successful in those cases, might afterwards be enlarged and more generally adopted. The object was to try whether those tribunals could not be so formed as to invest them with somewhat of a judicial character,—whether they could not be purged of all local and personal interest,—and whether, by diminishing the number of members on such Committee, a greater degree of individual responsibility could not be fixed upon them. He was convinced that the best results would follow the adoption of such a course, and that the public would hail it with the greatest satisfaction. The adoption of such a plan would tend to diminish the length of contests upon Private Bills,—would tend to the diminution of that fearful expense to individual parties which those protracted contests had hitherto caused,—and would ensure for the decision of these Committees a greater weight for their known responsibility than Committees upon Private Bills, as at present constituted, could calculate upon. He was not insensible of the difficulties in the way of the successful conduct of this experiment. He was glad to find that it was to be made upon a limited scale, and applied in special instances. The House would be able to see the manner in which it worked in those instances, and would then be able to judge with what degree of confidence it might extend the principle hereafter, if it should be found to work successfully. But there was one point of such importance to the working of the scheme that he could not help calling the attention of the House to it. The right hon. Gentleman proposed to constitute a certain number of Committees upon this new plan. He stated that there were about ten Committees, and these of course would require the services of about fifty Members. The main difficulty in the way of the working of this system would be the danger of not finding Members who would devote their time to the consideration of Private Bills, in which neither they nor their constituents had any direct

523
interest. The successful working of the experiment must mainly depend upon gentlemen, from a sense of public duty, devoting their time to Private Bills under these circumstances, and consenting to investigate them. If the House was really anxious to see the experiment tried, he hoped that Gentlemen would consent to sit upon Committees for Private Bills, and would give their constant and regular attendance in cases where their own constituents were not concerned. They should recollect that they would by this means become exonerated from attending other Committees of more protracted duration, in which they might otherwise be engaged. He was quite sure that hon. Gentlemen who attended to the private business of the House, would feel greater satisfaction in the discharge of their duty, when it could be done without any possibility of suspicion that his judgment was biassed by local interest. He hoped there would be no difficulty in finding fifty Gentlemen who would undertake to serve upon these Committees. It was upon this point that the whole chance of the successful result of the experiment depended; and he had, therefore taken the liberty of calling the attention of the House to it at this moment. He could only say that he gave his hearty support in the main to those resolutions. In some points he did not agree with them, but they were not points of essential importance; in the main spirit and tenour of these resolutions he entirely concurred. They were a great experiment, and a novelty that he was desirous of seeing fully tried. He hoped they would have a fair trial, and he should not despair of this being the first step towards putting the private business of the House on a sounder and fairer foundation. If the House could effect this they would effect a very salutary change, and do that which would greatly tend to raise the character of the House in the eyes of the public.
Mr. Hodgson Hindesaid, when he first read these resolutions he was of opinion they were a mere experiment; and the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman who introduced them, and of the right hon. Gentleman by whom they were supported, confirmed him in that opinion. Those Gentlemen who sat on the Railway Committee might have had sufficient evidence before them to justify them in coming to these Resolutions; but as far as the body of the House was concerned they had no
524
information whatever to enable them to come to a contrary decision to that to which they had come on former occasions. He did not mean to say that evidence might not be given which would change his mind on the subject; but before he was called upon to give a vote with the Members of that Committee, he was entitled to see the evidence which had influenced them in coming to the decision which had been reported to the House. He thought the House ought to have a little more time for consideration. Notice of these Resolutions was only given on Friday last, and between that day and Monday the attention of Members was least likely to be directed to the subject, and he did hope that at all events the right hon. Gentleman would allow a few days for consideration, to enable individual Members who entertained different views to give counter-notices, if they might think them necessary. The right hon. Gentleman said there were certain Bills before the House to which he wished to apply this principle. Now he (Mr. Hinde) had no objection to the passing of the first of the Resolutions without any discussion. He thought that competing lines ought to be referred to one Committee; but before coming to any general decision on that point he would rather adopt the course proposed with regard to these individual isolated cases. This would be better than to bind the House to any general regulation on the subject; and he would just remind the House that the alterations which had been made, with regard to the standing orders on Railway Bills, had not always been the most felicitous. For instance, one regulation with regard to notices, which was carried almost by universal acclamation, was soon afterwards repealed; and another with respect to the 10 per cent. deposit, it was recommended to rescind. If more time was not to be granted, he called upon the Committee for some explanation of their fifth Resolution. Why was it considered necessary to appoint a select Committee to ascertain what should be considered competing lines? It might in some cases be necessary to appoint a Committee to inquire into the circumstances connected with these Bills, so as to enable the House to come to a resolution upon them; but he thought it would be entrusting too large a power to five individuals, to allow them to determine competing lines. He could assure

525
the right hon. Gentleman that the northern companies never considered the Lancaster and Carlisle railway as a competing line; and he could not see why hon. Members should seek an occasion to declare a line to be a competing one, when the parties interested in the matter made no such objection. He objected to the fifth Resolution more than to any other. He thought that the House ought not to give away its jurisdiction to a Committee, by allowing a Committee to determine the nature of a competing line. He had not the slightest objection to the Resolution now before the House; but, with regard to the others, he intended to move an Amendment if they should be pressed by the right hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Ewartheard with the greatest satisfaction the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, and he believed the House and the country would join with him in that satisfaction. He agreed with the hon. Gentleman who spoke last, in the opinion that when a new principle was introduced, it ought to be worked out; and he entertained not the slightest doubt that the principle of justice contained in these Resolutions would at length be applied to all private business. He felt bound to vote with the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, and his predecessor, and he was only sorry they did not give him their cordial support when he brought forward a proposition on this subject two years ago. On that occasion he had the misfortune to be opposed by the First Lord of the Treasury and the whole power of the Government. He did not blame them for that, nor did he blame the right hon. Gentleman for thus introducing gradually, and perhaps discreetly, a principle which ought to be introduced in all Railway, and all Private Bill Committees. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded to the principle of removing locally and personally interested parties from these Committees, and he thought such a proposition reflected great credit on the Government. He also thought that it was very desirable to diminish the number of the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman did not state that this very principle had been introduced into the House of Lords, and most successfully. He believed that every Member of their Lordships House would acknowledge that, when they reduced their Committees to five, and ejected every person locally or
526
personally interested, they greatly improved their tribunal. The Parliamentary agents were satisfied that it had worked in a very satisfactory manner, and were of opinion that a similar principle ought to be applied to all Bills before the House of Commons. Such a principle ought not to be confined to competing lines, but ought to be extended to Bills relating to rating and other matters, where not only local but political interests were introduced into the decision on Private Bills; and from this all Committees ought to be purged. If he wanted a high authority on this point, he might refer to that of the right hon. Gentleman the Speaker, who, to his honour, in conjunction with Mr. Greene, was the first person to call the attention of the House to the subject. The principle of diminishing the number of Members in a Committee, of increasing their responsibility, and of removing them from all local or personal interest, was some years ago advocated by the right hon. Gentleman who now tilled the Chair in that House; and so highly did he (Mr. Ewart) approve of that principle, that he felt quite certain the Resolutions proposed by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade would be sanctioned, not only by the House, but by the country. He hoped to see the principle extended to the whole of the private business of the House.
Colonel Sibthorpthought that the proposed Resolutions required more deliberation than had been bestowed on them. He would not say that it was the intention of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade to take the House by surprise, but he thought that he ought, in justice to the country, to accede to the proposal which he (Colonel Sibthorp) meant to make to the House. It was very well known to the House and to the country, that he had great objections—great suspicions—with regard to these railroads, especially with regard to the manner in which they encroached on private property. The right hon. Gentleman proposed to limit the number of the Committee to five Members, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton said, that he highly approved of such a limitation. He (Colonel Sibthorp) did not mean to impugn the character of any one, but he thought it was hardly fair that the great Local interests of the country should be left to the decision of five

527
hon. Members of the House. He should not be surprised if, after what had taken place, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton were to propose to limit the number of a jury, and to reduce it from twelve to five. He called on the right hon. President of the Board of Trade to grant them a delay of eight days before agreeing to this Report. To attain that object, he would at once move that the "Debate be now Adjourned" with a view to a consideration of the Report that day week.
Mr. Wallacethought there could be no doubt that the principle involved in the Resolutions was a good one, and would, if carried out, be the means of ensuring a better Committee than at present. With respect to competing lines, it appeared to him, that they were about to have that principle limited, which was the only safeguard to the country. If competing lines were to be in any way restricted, he should object to the whole of the resolutions. He was, however, decidedly of opinion, that they ought to postpone the consideration of the Report in order that they might have time for further inquiry. Being of that opinion, he would support the Motion of the hon. and gallant Member for Lincoln.
Sir J. Hanmerbegged to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, to a subject connected with Railroads. He had that morning received a communication from (as we understood) some of his constituents, stating that considerable alarm and discontent were felt among persons interested in Steam Navigation, in consequence of sonic attempts which were said to have been made by certain Railroad Companies, to obtain a Power from Parliament to apply a portion of their capital to the establishing of Steam-Packet Companies in connection with particular lines of Railroads. They represented that such a power would interfere very materially with the interests with which they were connected.
Mr. Estcourtconsidered the adoption of the resolutions a total abandonment of the principles upon which they had heretofore acted with regard to a certain class of Bills, but was not averse to the experiment being tried. He thought there would be no difficulty in obtaining Members to act on the proposed Committee, nor would their duty be at all different from that which was performed by the selected Members of former Committees.
Mr. Stuart Wortleysaid, that the fact
528
of the Committee having expressed a decided opinion in favour of these resolutions, had great weight with him, and he was quite ready to agree to the experiment being tried, but at the same time he wished it to be understood, that he would vote on the ground stated by the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, in his opening speech, and not on those assumed by certain hon. Members. He was prepared to vote for those Resolutions, in order that an experiment might be tried, but he was not prepared to affirm, that the mode of proceeding proposed was the best which could be adopted. It was rather too much to say, that in questions of this description, all local knowledge and experience should be excluded from the Committee; but, recollecting that in consequence of the strong sense entertained of the evils of the previous system, the House had proceeded to regulate the mode of dealing with the Railroad Bills, he had no objection to giving the new method a fair trial.
Viscount Sandonbelieved, that there were one or two points upon which the Committee were not unanimous. He was perfectly prepared to allow a larger infusion of what might he considered as independent judgment into the Committee, but he was not prepared to go the length of saying that no local influence or knowledge should be allowed in that Committee. The duty of hon. Members was no doubt to look to the general interests of the people, but they were also the representatives of their respective constituents, whose interests they were bound to attend to, either in the House or in the Committee if they were excluded from being represented in Committee, they had no other alternative than an appeal to the House. He thought that great injustice would be done to the smaller constituencies if they should lay it down as a right principle that all local influence or local knowledge should be excluded. He did not wish to object to the resolutions of the Committee, but he wished to protest against their being considered as bound by them on every occasion. He doubted whether they would be able to find a sufficient number of impartial Members to attend regularly on the proposed Committee. For these reasons he gave a reluctant consent to the scheme then under their consideration. He did not wish to raise any opposition to a plan of which a majority

529
of the House and of the Committee on Railways had approved.
Mr. Greenesaid, that the present system was open to great objection. Under that system they had agents, and witnesses, and counsel, and they had, in addition, the interested parties acting as judges. It was absolutely necessary that they should have tribunals of a more impartial character. They should render those Committees as nearly judicial as possible, and they would by that means render an essential service to the public. That was the principle for which he had for years urgently contended. The hon. Member for Greenock seemed to think, that by the plan then proposed, an end would be put to competition. But if two competing lines were referred to the same Committee, it would not follow that the Committee might not decide that both should be adopted.
Dr. Bowringsaid, the present system had the effect of often placing hon. Members in a very disagreeable position by exposing them to the solicitations of persons representing contending interests. He did not approve of the principle of allowing interested parties to sit on Committees. He was sure that the opinion of the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Greene) was the right one; and that the more they excluded private interests from Committees the more elevated and the less embarrassing would their condition become. It was desirable to give those tribunals as much as possible a judicial character, and a judicial responsibility.
Mr. Struttsaid, that the noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool (Viscount Sandon) had stated that the adoption of the resolutions then under their consideration would increase the number of appeals from Committees to the House. But he was of a different opinion. He believed that many of the appeals from the decision of Committees were made from a conviction that injustice had been done by those Committees, in consequence of the preponderance of powerful local interests. They had often heard parties saying, that although a majority of the Committee was against them, they had a majority of disinterested Members in their favour; and he believed that such statements had more weight with the House than any other arguments advanced on those occasions. It was because the resolutions before the House would do away with the possibility
530
of such representations, and because they would make the Committees impartial tribunals, that he believed that appeals, so far from being increased, would be considerably diminished by the adoption of those resolutions. Several hon. Gentlemen had spoken of the difficulty there would be in obtaining Members to serve on these Committees. It had been said that five Members would not be found to serve throughout on Committees of the kind. But as he had been for several years a Member of the Committee of Selection, and as he had some experience on the subject, he could confirm the statement of his hon. Friend, the Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Estcourt); and he could say, to the credit of the House, that they had hitherto found no difficulty in obtaining the services of Members for Committees. He believed that no difficulty would be felt on that head in carrying out the resolutions. He believed, too, that by the adoption of these resolutions the call for the services of Members on private Committees, so far from being increased, would be considerably diminished. He had further to observe, that although some hon. Members had objected to these resolutions, no one had proposed any plan which could be adopted as a substitute for them. He was fully persuaded of the propriety of the resolutions, and he should give them his most cordial support.
Mr. E. B. Denisonsaid, that the Committee which had recommended the adoption of the resolutions before the House had not passed over the consideration of the propriety or the impropriety of excluding local influence. In fact, the question had formed one of their difficulties. They had, however, come to the conclusion, that it would be better to exclude local interest from the Committees. He felt persuaded that the public would be better satisfied with the perfect independence of those Committees.
The House divided on the question that the Debate be adjourned.—Ayes 3; Noes 200:—Majority 197.

List of the AYES.

Hodgson, R.

TELLERS.

James, W.

Sibthorp, Col.

Wallace, R.

Hinde, H.

[It seems sufficient to preserve the List of the Ayes.]
Resolution agreed to. Subsequent re, solutions agreed to.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES.
Mr. O'Connellwould put one or two questions to the right hon. Baronet at the head of Her Majesty's Government, to which he should be glad to receive an answer. The first was, whether it was in the contemplation of the Government to bring in any Bill in the course of the present Session to alter or amend the law respecting the management of Roman Catholic Charities in Ireland, and of property devised for the purposes of Roman Catholic worship in that country?
Sir R. Peelentertained a confident and sanguine hope, that Government would be enabled to bring forward, in sufficient time to allow of its passing during the present Session, a Bill respecting the management of Roman Catholic Charities and property devised for Roman Catholic religious purposes in Ireland, with the view of carrying into effect the objects stated by Ministers in the recent debates.

POOR LAW (IRELAND).
Sir D. Norreysasked whether, in the Select Committee which, it was understood, would be appointed to inquire into the operation of the Poor Law in Ireland, the general subject of valuation for the purposes of local taxation, as connected with the Poor Law, would be considered? Or, whether the Government would themselves undertake to examine the existing system of valuation in Ireland, with the view of introducing some general measure sufficient for all the purposes of local taxation?
Sir J. Grahamreplied, that the hon. Baronet rightly apprehended what had fallen from him on a former occasion in regard to the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the operation of the existing Poor Law in Ireland, the Government, considering the recent date of the law, and the extensive change which had taken place in it last year, were not of opinion that they should originate such an inquiry as that to which the hon. Member had adverted. Still, it had been understood, when the Act passed last year that if it should be the general wish of the Irish Members in that House, and of the Irish Peers in the other, that an inquiry into the operation of the law should take place during the present Session, the Government would not oppose it. To that statement he adhered; and should it appear that a majority of the Representatives of Ireland, of both Houses, desire the ap-
532
pointment of such an inquiry, he, on the part of the Government, would not refuse it. Still, upon the whole, considering the large number of Irish Members now absent at the Assizes in Ireland, it was a question for their discussion, whether it would not be expedient, and conduce to the general benefit, to postpone the investigation until after Easter. With regard to the valuation question, that was an important part of the operation of the Poor Law in Ireland. He had before expressed it as his opinion that it would be advantageous, if it could be effected, that there should he one uniform system of valuation in Ireland, based on the principle of a fair annual rent. But the subject was, as the hon. Baronet well knew, one of great importance and great difficulty, and he had already stated that Government had been in communication with Mr. Griffiths in regard to it; and there was no one more conversant with the subject, or more competent to give sound advice upon it than that Gentleman, and between the present time and Easter, the Government would feel it their duty to enter into further communication with Mr. Griffiths, with the view of arriving, if possible, at the object he had stated—that of providing one uniform system of valuation throughout the whole of Ireland, and that a tenement valuation, based on fair annual value.

PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES.
Sir R. Fergusonwished to put a question to the right hon. the Home Secretary in regard to a subject which had given rise to considerable discussion and anxiety in the north of Ireland—he alluded to the question of the legality of Presbyterian marriages. The House would be aware that that question had been adjudicated upon in the house of Lords, on an appeal from the decision of the courts of law in Ireland, but they might not possibly be aware that great difference of opinion existed among those who pronounced judgment on the appeal—the Judges and three law Lords having given an opinion against the validity of such marriages, whilst two other law Lords had decided that they were valid. The question he had to put was, whether there was any objection on the part of the Government to lay the judgments which had been given by the House of Lords, for the present and last Sessions of Parliament, on the Table; and, secondly, whether Government had

533
made up their minds to proceed to legislate, and, if so, in what manner, on this important subject?
Sir James Grahamreplied, that the hon. Baronet had rightly stated the opinions of the English Judges, and of the law Lords, relative to the subject of Irish Presbyterian Marriages. He was quite ready to acknowledge that it would be very desirable that the judgments in question should be laid upon the Table of the House, therefore, if the hon. Gentleman moved for them there would be no difficulty in the way of their presentation. As to the second question, he agreed with the hon. Baronet that it was impossible to overrate the importance of the subject. No final judgment had been yet pronounced upon the subject, but upon consideration of all the circumstances, his belief was that the judgment of the Irish Courts would be confirmed. In that case, it was certainly the opinion of Government that legislation would be indispensable. He knew that it was the intention of his colleagues in the other House of Parliament to propose the re-appointment of the Committee of that House which sat upon the subject last Session. It would ill become him to state what would probably be the course of proceeding adopted by that Committee, but he would state that the fullest consideration would be given to the facts of the case, and to any legislative measure which might be proposed.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
On the Motion that the Order of the Day for a Committee of Supply be now read,
Mr. W. Williamsrose to bring forward the Motion which he had announced at an earlier part of the evening. No one objected more than he did to bringing forward Motions without giving proper notice; but the time since the Estimates had been submitted to the House was so short, that he was not able to give the ordinary notice of his intention. If, however, any objection should be taken, in point of form, to his amendment, he would not press it. Looking, then, at the Estimates before him, he must say that he was much astonished at the amount proposed. He had examined the Army Estimates since the time of the battle of Waterloo down to the present day, and he found that the number of men proposed for the service of this year was larger than had been provided for in
534
any one year since 1818. He must confess that when he saw the tranquillity of the country, and the vast amount of the forces proposed to be maintained, he was much astonished. The number proposed for the Army this year was 129,677 men, to which might be added 10,000 embodied pensioners, for whom provision was to be made. Artillery and engineers 8,811 men; Marines on shore 6,000 men; Irish Police 9,000 men; thus making altogether an effective military force capable of being called into action at any moment of 163,488 men, and this, after twenty-eight years peace, and when we were on friendly terms with every nation of the earth. He would maintain that the Irish Police was really a military force, and he had the evidence of Major Browne, the military inspector of that force, in support of the fact. This Gentleman stated that the Police was "one of the most noble forces that ever was seen. I am satisfied that they will do anything that could be expected from the bravest men. I wish I was out of Dublin at the head of such a force, for I believe that there is not a man among them that would not arrest the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury, if necessary." Now, the Lord Lieutenant had the power of augmenting this Police force to any number he thought proper, without reference to any Vote of this House. Hon. Gentlemen opposite might not be aware of this—but the power was conferred by the 6th of William IV., chap. 12, sec. 13. He would now pass to the non-effective force. There were first the Yeomanry, amounting to 14,263 men; the Militia on half-pay and those on service numbering 6,000 men; general and other officers on half-pay, 4,574. The none-effective privates of the regular Army amounted to 51,777 men, deducting the 10,000 pensioners; the retired Artillery on pensions to 8,586 men. Then there were the Marines, amounting to 6,000 men, the Metropolitan Police, and the Borough and County Police. The Police might be armed, and some of them had, in fact, been sent armed to South Wales. He made the non-effective force amount to about 102,590 men, which, when added to the regular army, made altogether the number of men amount to 266,078. He would ask, if the maintenance of such a force as that was at all to be justified? Looking at the state of the country, and the extreme suffering of the great mass of the people, upon whom the weight of taxation must necessarily fall to support

535
this enormous force—looking at the increase of taxation which had taken place within the last ten years, which amounted in the whole to not less than 8,000,000 l. sterling—looking at all those things, he asserted, that if they were determined to maintain such a force, it was impossible that they could give up the Property Tax next year, according to the promise given by the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government. They were expending the 8,000,000 l. of increased taxation in supporting this large and unnecessary force, and other extravagant expenditures. In 1822 and 1823 the average amount of the Military force was 92,000 men, independent of the Artillery, Engineers, and Marines. In the present year the regular Army amounted to 129,677 men; and taking the embodied pensioners to the amount of 10,000 men, the increase of 2,500 men the Royal Marines, and the 9,000 Irish Police, he found that there were about 59,000 effective men this year more than the average of 1822 and 1823. What, he again asked, was there in the condition of the country to justify this increase? The average of the army in 1836 and 1837 was 101,000 men, in the present year the increase of the effective force over that average was about 41,000 men. For the last twenty-four years, from 1820 to 1843 inclusive, the average of the Army was 108,735 men, and comparing that amount with the present effective force, including the additional Marines and Pensioners, &c., the excess of the present year was upwards of 33,000 men. He thought it the duty of the Government to show to the House the grounds on which this increase was proposed. He had expected this year that there would have been a considerable reduction on the numbers voted last year; and the right hon. Baronet opposite on that occasion stated that there was a difficulty in reducing the number, as a large amount of force had been required for the war with China; but that in the course of the year a reduction would be made. At present there was no war with any country excepting it was with Ireland; but even that circumstance was not sufficient to account for the increase in the present year. At first, on looking at the Army Estimates of the present year, he thought there had been a diminution in the Expenditure. The cost of the Army last year amounted to 6,225,000 l.; and it appeared this year to amount to 5,984,000 l. There appeared then to be
536
a reduction of about 241,000 l. But on inspecting these Estimates more closely, he found that there was a sum of 202,000 l. transferred from the Army Estimates last year to the Commissariat department. [Sir H. Hardinge: "It is so stated in the last page."] Yes; but he naturally looked at the first page, and so on, in examining those Estimates. He certainly could not withhold from the hon. and gallant Gentleman the credit which he felt was due to him for the manner in which his accounts were set forth. He could not find any complaint with these accounts, as they appeared perfectly plain and intelligible. He was, however, convinced, that no case could be made out for this increased demand now to be made upon the country. They ought to appoint a Committee to examine closely into those details, as it was impossible that the House could arrive at any satisfactory conclusion upon the matter. In a Committee the facts could be ascertained. Another point of great importance which a Committee could inquire into was that regarding the cost of the Life Guards, which appeared to him to be astounding. Admitting that the Life Guards were necessary for attending upon Her Majesty, there could be no justification for their costing 130 l. each man per annum. There was no ground for the vast increase in the cost of the Foot Guards over the Regiments of the Line. There were three Regiments of the Foot Guards, and the number of men was 5,253. The cost in the various charges attendant upon them amounted to no less a sum than 58,400 l., more than the amount necessary for the same number of Regiments of the Line. The amount of pay given to these Foot Guards beyond the Regiments of the Line created much discontent and dissatisfaction among the latter. One of the Lieutenant Colonels of the Guards received 1,200 l. a year, and two of them received 1,000 l. a year each; but in the Regiments of the Line forty-eight Colonels received but 600 l. a year, and fifty-four only 500 l. a year. This he thought was a most unfair disparity, when it was considered how much severer the duty was of the commanding officer in the Regiments of the Line to what it was in the Foot Guards. Generally speaking the latter did not perform any colonial service; they were not sent to India for a period of fourteen or fifteen years, nor were they exposed to the same dangers and vicissitudes of climate as the former, The Majors of the Foot Guards

537
received 1l. 3s. per day, when those of the Line only received 16 s. The Captains in the same proportion 15 s. 6d. in the former, and 11 s. 7d. in the latter. The soldiers of the Guards received 1d. per day more than the soldiers of the Line. If this difference be made, the soldiers for the Guards should be chosen from other Regiments for their good conduct and general merit. They had 11,000 men receiving extra 2d. per day for good conduct and long service. These were the men of whom the Guards should be composed. By the adoption of such a system as this there would be a saving to the country of a very considerable sum. He disapproved, too, of the manner in which the soldiers were clad. He did not consider that they were consulting the comforts of the soldier by permitting the Colonels to have the privilege of supplying the clothing rather than having it done by contract. What was the object of allowing such a practice, but to give the Colonels profits? Those officers, he thought, ought to be remunerated in a more honourable way than to look for profits from such a source. The Artillery were not clothed in the same way; but by the Ordnance Department. The Yeomanry Cavalry, too, he thought should be abolished. They were a body of men who as soldiers, were perfectly ridiculous, and were laughed at by the people. He saw last year at Harrowgate, publicans and shopkeepers belonging to a Yeomanry Corps serving their customers with mustacios on their upper lip. He had been told that when one of these regiments was brought out and exercised, the officer in giving the word of command was particular in cautioning the men "not to cut off their horses' ears." This force seemed never to have been of any use, and he was convinced, that in any time of danger, it would be no protection whatever. As to bringing them in aid of the Civil Force, he was happy to find that Government had had too much good sense and feeling to make use of them for that purpose for many years past. They were out in Staffordshire last year, but kept at a pretty good distance from the rioters, or matters would have been much worse. He could point out a great number of items of expenditure not called for by the wants of the public service, or justified by the state of the country. It was true that the people were in a better state, that there was not so much distress and depression in some branches of trade as there was twelve months or two years ago; but he was very
538
much afraid that the present improved state of the country was not of a lasting character, and therefore he called upon the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not to allow himself to be misled by the present cheapness of money, as it did not arise from the exchanges being in favour of this country. He saw from the returns lately made that there was a great excess of gold in the Bank of England, but this arose from, and was produced by, the vast quantities of light sovereigns which hail been paid in, and not from the balance of trade. A return just made showed that in about a year and a half, up to the 1st of January last, 11,000,000 l. of light gold had been paid into the Bank of England, and he had no doubt that since the Proclamation which ordered the disfigurement of light gold had been promulgated, the increase had been greater in proportion. He would therefore advise the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not to make his estimates from the present condition of the Bank of England, but to look forward to periods of depression, which were as certain as that night followed day, and which he feared were not very distant. The right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had said, he would give up the Income Tax after next April twelvemonth. [Sir R. Peel: I have never made such a statement] The right hon. Baronet had distinctly stated he only required the Income Tax for three years. [Sir R. Peel: No, no.] He was very much mistaken if the right hon. Baronet had not held out the expectation that the Income Tax was only required to cure the disordered state of the Finances at that time, and, as he (Mr. W. Williams) had understood the right hon. Baronet, he stated it would require three years to bring the state of the Finances round. At any rate, the right hon. Baronet only asked for the Income Tax for three years. The right hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed to make good the deficiency by totally different means; and, if successful, by means infinitely less oppressive than the introduction of an Income Tax. He begged leave to move, that these Estimates he referred to a select Committee of the House before they proceeded to a Vote to-night; but, as he had stated before, if any hon. Gentleman objected to his doing so on the ground of not having given sufficient notice, he would not press his Motion.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that he should

539
be extremely sorry if the hon. Member should conceive that he was inclined to treat any of his remarks with anything like discourtesy. On the contrary, he wished to have an opportunity of answering hon. Gentlemen on some points; and it was well known that the most proper time for doing that was in a Committee of Supply, when various questions could be put and answered in a way which could not be done whilst the Speaker was in the Chair. He was sure the hon. Member would be of opinion that, so far as business was concerned, that was by far the most practicable form of proceeding. As to the Committee inquiring on the subject of the Clothing of the Army, that matter was debated in 1833, when Mr. Hume agreed that the clothing was better performed under the colonels of regiments than by general contract. As to the other points into which the hon. Member had moved for a Committee to inquire, a Committee sat for two years expressly to inquire into the force necessary for the public service. It sat in 1834 and 1835, and the hon. Member would find a vast variety of very good information in the reports of that Committee. The right hon. Gentleman in the Chair was one of the Members of the Committee. It consisted of members distinguished for capacity and intelligence, and they came to certain resolutions, which he (Sir H. Hardinge) had before him, as to the force which ought to be kept up in the colonies. He could assure the hon. Member that there was scarcely one single colony on which that Committee had reported in which there was not, at the present day, a smaller force than there was at that time. The hon. Member had also stated that he wished the Committee to inquire into the Yeomanry Cavalry, but all these subjects could be discussed in a Committee of Supply quite as well as in a Committee above stairs, and if the hon. Member would permit the House to go into a Committee of Supply, he would find that that was by far the most opportune method of discussing the questions.
Mr. Williamswould not divide the House.
Motion withdrawn. Order of the Day read.
On the question that the Speaker do now leave the Chair,
Mr. H. Baillierose to ask whether the right hon. Baronet had any intention of
540
bringing the subject of Military Pensions under the consideration of the House? If the right hon. and gallant Officer should be enabled to give an answer in the affirmative to that question he should most willingly leave the subject in his hands, and should not proceed with the motion of which he had given notice.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that the subject to which the hon. Member had called the attention of the House was certainly one of very great importance, as it concerned the provision to be made to the soldier when no longer able to perform his public service. He was, at the present moment, under the arrangement for paying pensioners, collecting a vast variety of useful information, by which more accurate data would be obtained, and by which Government would have the means of forming a more correct opinion on the subject of military pensions. He had every reason to believe that the course which they were about to take was that which the preceding Government intended to take—viz., to obtain every possible information, and then to ascertain by a scientific calculation on what system pensions ought to be given. They were now in the course of obtaining this information, and all he could answer for was this, that without pledging himself, in any respect, or exciting expectations which might end in disappointment, that as soon as the information was collected it was the intention of the Government to bring the whole subject under the consideration of the House.
Viscount Howickexpressed his regret at what had fallen from the right hon. and gallant Officer opposite on the subject of Army pensions. The right hon. and gallant Officer should have been prepared to state to the House, after being two years in office, some decided opinion. It was very well to say that he wished to create no expectations, but we all knew that the answer which he had just now made to the question asked of him, in the manner in which it had been asked, was calculated to raise expectations, which, if not hereafter fulfilled, might be extremely inconvenient and dangerous. He thought that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman should either have been prepared to state that he did mean to maintain generally the payment of pensions as at present regulated; or, on his own responsibility, as one of the Ministers of the

541
Crown, he should have come down to the House and recommended some distinct alteration. One or other of these two courses he (Lord Howick) thought would have been the proper and right course in the situation in which the right hon. and gallant Officer now stood; why he had adopted a different course he was totally unable to conjecture. He could not allow this short conversation to pass without expressing his great regret that, in answer to a question of this nature, now having stood on the books for a considerable time, asked in the manner in which it had been asked, distinctly pointing to some increase of pension, the right hon. and gallant Officer should have given an answer which left this matter undecided and vague. Having had some little experience in office, he could take on himself most distinctly to state that there could be no difficulty of the kind to which the right hon. and gallant Officer had alluded, with respect to information. It was now nearly five years since he (Lord Howick) had left the War Office. Even at that time great part of the information necessary for any change in contemplation would have been obtained in a short time; and that in the period which had since elapsed, there could be any difficulty in obtaining all the data necessary for the most complete and perfect examination of this question, and every part connected with it, was altogether impossible. Therefore, he said again, that the House and the country had reason to complain of the right hon. and gallant Officer, because he found, that when in office, it was difficult, consistent with his duty, to do those things which he had urged in opposition, and wished rather to put the question by altogether. He confessed it did appear to him that the manly and straightforward course would have been that the right hon. Gentleman should have taken one line or the other on this subject, and not have left it in abeyance in the manner he had.
Sir H. Hardingedid not think he was at all subject to the taunts which the noble Lord had thrown out. He had stated his belief to be, that the late Government intended to take some such course as that which he had taken; and his authority for saying that, was a letter of the noble Lord himself, which he had left in the office as a record of his opinion. In that letter he distinctly stated, that he expected to collect statistical information,
542
on which, when received, he recommended that the provision for pensioners should be taken into further consideration. The noble Lord expressly stated, that he wished to obtain information for that professed object. Was it not likely that, coming into office, he should feel all the difficulties of the question as strongly as the noble Lord; at the same time having his own opinion, but perceiving that the last act of the noble Lord, before he went out of office, was to recommend this course? The noble Lord now turned round, and taunted him with not having given a more manly and straightforward answer. The noble Lord must be aware, that whatever might be his (Sir H. Hardinge's) feelings on the subject, he had abstained from bringing forward the question at the request of individuals high in the Government of the clay. He had, on all occasions, supported Her Majesty's Government on the Army Estimates, and had declined to bring forward the question as to pensioners. He had strong feelings on the subject. When called upon to give evidence on Committees, he did not conceal his opinions, but he thought it was prudent not to bring the matter before the House. Whatever might be his opinions, as a Member of the Government, it was his duty, more guardedly than ever, to bring the question before the Government for their consideration; and if, therefore, he took the course which the noble Lord had chalked out in the letter which he had left, as the recorded expression of his own wishes, he was not at all amenable to the taunt which the noble Lord had thrown out.
Viscount Howickhoped, as the right hon. and gallant Officer had spoken a second time, that the House would indulge him in a few words in reply. He admitted that the answer would have been perfectly well-founded if it had been made last year, or the year before, instead of this year. There might be a difficulty about statistical details five years ago which could hardly continue to be put forward now. The right hon. and gallant Officer was perfectly aware that his letter was not with reference to a projected general increase of pensions, but was with reference to a scheme to which he attached great value—of facilitating the discharge of men at an early age from the Army and placing them upon the registry for deferred pensions.
Dr. Bowringregretted that the hon. Member for Coventry had withdrawn his Motion, and that estimates of such great importance, involving the application of so large a sum of public money, were not referred to a Select Committee for further examination. Two nights were occupied in the discussion of the Navy Estimates; the attention of the House was not called to the details, and the same thing appeared to be about to happen as to the Army Estimates. Generally speaking, neither these nor the Navy Estimates could receive the attention to which they were entitled. He wished the course to be followed here which was adopted in a neighbouring country, where every matter was referred to Special Committees charged with the investigation of all the details; not a sum was voted as to which evidence was not taken as to its necessity, nor was a single vote introduced to the Chamber till it had undergone a thorough preliminary investigation. One night the House had voted away five millions, and to-night they would vote away six millions. He did not think that they properly discharged the functions of legislation by allowing votes to be adopted in the way in which they were adopted in the House. Some opprobrium attached to both sides of the House. Six millions, or one-eighth of the public revenue, was to be disposed of in the presence of one-eighth of the whole House of Commons. He wished that his Friends whom he saw above, would lend more of their assistance. He had understood that the presence of strangers at the Bar was recognised; he for one always looked upon the publicity of the Debates, as one of the great securities for the good conduct of Members, and he only wished that the Public were better informed as to what passed. He had been very much struck with an observation of Mr. Cobbett, when a Member of the House, that the most important topic of paying taxes was sure not to excite the attention it ought to excite—that if more attention was directed to it, the public money would not be voted as it was. His hon. Friend, the Member for Coventry, might have acted judiciously in withdrawing his Motion, because something of irregularity was attached to his proposal, but he should be glad to find it a general rule that matters of this sort were to be submitted to a Select Committee before they came under the notice of the House.
Mr. S. Crawforddesired shortly to call the attention of the House to the unconstitutional nature of the immense standing army kept up for the home service. It appeared that there were 48,809 rank and file in the United Kingdom. He estimated the officers for that force at 6,000, which made the regular army amount to 54,809. Adding thereto the pensioners, 10,000, and the volunteer force, 14,000, make an army of near 79,000. The Irish constabulary, which was to all intents and purposes, a Standing Army, amounted to 9,000, which made the whole of this force combined, 87,809. There were other military and marines of the amount of which he had no knowledge. There was a military force kept within the United Kingdom to the amount of 88,000. He would ask the House and the Government, was it necessary to have a force of that amount within the United Kingdom? If it was necessary, why was it necessary? Were the people of the United Kingdom disloyal to the Sovereign? He was perfectly convinced they were not; he was perfectly convinced there never was a Sovereign on the Throne of these Realms to whom the people of every part of the United Kingdom were more attached. Were they disloyal to the Constitution? They were not so; they were only desirous to obtain the full benefits of the constitution. Then was it necessary for the protection of life and property, that this army should be kept up? If you said, that it was necessary for the protection of life and property, then he asked, how came that necessity to exist. How did it happen that you could not secure life and property in this realm without keeping up such an army as that? The reason was this, that justice was not done to the working classes. He did not now speak of political rights; he spoke of the condition of the working classes. He said, that this Government, and this Legislature, did not do justice to the working classes; they did not consider the wants of the poor, nor did they provide for the wants of the poor as they ought: they legislated for other interests than the poor man's interests, and the consequence was, that the poor man was discontented, and the consequence of that discontent was, that the Government was obliged to keep up that unconstitutional amount of force. In the 15th century, the working classes were deprived of the right they had in the land, which was

545
given to the rich; but, as a compensation, they obtained a Poor Law, which worked for their benefit. But what had been done since? They had broken faith with the working classes, they had deprived them of those rights which had been conferred upon them when their right in the land was estranged, and they were now told, that they could not obtain relief in any other manner than one which was revolting to their feelings. Still they maintained the Corn Laws, which greatly enhanced the price of the food they were obliged to eat. That was one of the great crimes which the Legislature had committed against the poor and the labouring classes—it was one of the causes of the insubordination which occasionally manifested itself, and then it was made a pretext for keeping up such a large military force. The taxation, which in former times was paid by the rich, was now imposed upon the poor; yet, this large force was to be maintained at their charge, and they were not to be allowed even to grumble. What was the reason they were now obliged to keep such an army in Ireland? They had imposed upon that country a most iniquitous Poor Law—a law which was repugnant to the feelings of all classes—a law which tended to shake that benevolent feeling upon which the poor had formerly subsisted, and drove all applicants for relief into a Poor House, which was abhorrent to their feelings. Surely it was no wonder that discontent should prevail, and that a very large army was rendered necessary for the purpose of levying the rates, from which the people derived no benefit [Question.] He was speaking to the question; he was showing why it was that they were obliged to keep up such a large Standing Army. They were giving the people education—he valued it much; but he would tell them that if they educated the people, without, at the same time, affording them the means of improving their condition, they would only add very greatly to the discontent which already existed. The injustice done to the suffering people was the cause of their asking for so large a force. It would be wholly unnecessary if the people were treated fairly and honestly. A large Standing Army was not required in the time of Alfred. The time was when the Sheriff, with the posse comitatus, was able to keep the peace; but dare they now entrust him with the duty
546
unless they backed him with troops of soldiery? He would not object to the volunteer system if the corps were raised from the body of the people; but he protested against the present system, as the Yeomanry Corps were composed entirely of one class, and that a class which was hostile to the working classes. It was the duty of the Representatives of the people to withhold from the Government an excessive military force, and by that means force them to consider and redress the grievances of the people. It was the duty of hon. Members of that House to make a stand against the demands of the Government, but he was afraid that he could not hope at the present time to make an effective one, because he was not supported by Members on his side of the House as he ought to be. If the large minority which voted upon the party question the other night would stand up upon that which was a far more important question to the poor throughout the country, no Government could withstand him. No individual could fight the battle unless he met with support both in that House and out of doors. He had mooted the question of the large and expensive Standing Army out of doors, and he was free to admit that there had not been such an exhibition of feeling on the part of the people as he had expected. Still he considered it to be his duty to move as an amendment,
"That the large amount of Standing Army, and every description of military force, now kept up for the service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, are contrary to the principles of constitutional liberty, and dangerous to the rights of the people."
Dr. Bowringhad much pleasure in seconding the amendment of his hon. Friend. In his judgment, with a popular Sovereign, a popular Executive, and a popular Legislature, there could be no necessity for a large Standing Army. He had, only a few nights ago, presented a Petition signed by upwards of 1000 of the inhabitants of the town he had the privilege to represent, complaining of the waste of money in keeping up such a military force. They protested, and he protested in their name, against such a waste of the money which was wrung from the poor. Out of doors, he would warn the House, there was a growing discontent against that House and its prodigalness. There were millions of discontented people out of doors who

547
were displeased with the conduct pursued by those who were called the Representatives of the people. It was their duty to allay that discontent before it was too late.
Mr. Fieldensaid, it appeared to him as if the hon. Gentlemen who were so anxious to vote away some millions of money, had totally forgot where the taxes came from. The large amount of force which was demanded by the Government was rendered necessary by the criminal neglect of the condition of the working classes by Government and that House. They were going to amend the Poor Law Bill—it was impossible; they could never make it acceptable to the people. It was brought in and supported on the plea that it would raise the wages of the labouring poor, and render them independent in character. Had it done so? Had wages been raised? Let the conflagrations which were, unfortunately, now so numerous throughout the country, answer. He warned the House that they were on the borders of a volcano; they must retrace their steps; they must put the working classes in an easier state, or Government and order would be at an end. The cry was always more force; the moment they got more force, they raised the cry of more taxes, and when they got more taxes, then they wanted more force again. There must come an end to such a system. He thought the people were right to insist upon their Representatives stopping the Supplies until the grievances of the people were considered and redressed. He would vote for the amendment.
The House divided on the question that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question.—Ayes 87; Noes 8: Majority 79.

List of the AYES.

Arbuthnott, hon. H.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Arkwright, G.

Collett, W. R.

Arundel and Surrey,

Copeland, Mr. Ald.

Earl of

Corry, rt. hon. H.

Baillie, Col.

Cripps, W.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Darner, hon. Col.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Dawson, hon. T. V.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Dick, Q.

Boldero, H. G.

Dickinson, F. H.

Borthwick, P.

Douglas, Sir H.

Botfield, B.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Browne, hon. W.

Duke, Sir J.

Bruce, Lord Ernest

Duncombe, hon. A.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Eliot, Lord

Clerk, Sir G.

Escott, B.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Flower, Sir J.

548

Fuller, A. E.

Marton, G.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Masterman, J.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Maxwell, hon. J. P.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Meynell, Capt.

Greenall, P.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Greene, T.

Paget, Col.

Gregory, W. H.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Grimston, Visct.

Peel, J.

Harcourt, G. G.

Plumptre, J. P.

Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H.

Pollock, Sir F.

Herbert, hon. S.

Praed, W. T.

Hodgson, R.

Pringle, A.

Hope, hon. C.

Rawdon, Col.

Hope, G. W.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Howard, P. H.

Scarlett, hon. R. C.

Howick, Visct.

Sibthorp, Col.

Hussey, T.

Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C.

Jermyn, Earl

Stanley, Lord

Jones, Capt.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Kemble, H.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E.

Trotter, J.

Langston, J. H.

Vivian, J. E.

Layard, Capt.

Wellesley, Lord C.

Lincoln, Earl of

Wood, Col. T.

Lockhart, W.

Wyndham, Col. C.

Lowther, J. H.

Young, J.

Mackenzie, T.

Mackenzie, W. F.

TELLERS.

Maclean, D.

Baring, H.

McNeill, D.

Freemantle, Sir T.

List of the NOES.

Blewett, R. J.

Wawn, J. T.

Butler, P. S.

Williams, W.

Elphinstone, H.

Fielden, J.

TELLERS.

Plumridge, Capt.

Crawford, S;

Scholefield, J.

Bowring, Dr.

House in Committee.
Sir H. Hardinge,in bringing forward the Army Estimates for the ensuing year, said he should take the usual course of stating the causes of the difference between the present Estimate and that of last year. It was not for the sake of keeping up a Standing Army at home, that the Government asked for a large force, and he would show the hon. Member for Rochdale opposite that the real cause was the necessity of affording relief to our troops abroad. The Vote was for 100,295 rank and file, and non-commissioned officers, exclusive of the force employed in the East Indies, 29,971 men, making 130,266. A corresponding Force must always be kept up at home to relieve troops abroad. In 1842 the Force was 122,516, and it was then the intention of Government to make a reduction; but scarcely had the Estimates passed when the events that took place in Cabul compelled them to send six battalions of 1,000 men to the East; these regiments had only completed four years' service at home. In 1843, a reduc-

549
tion of 2,000 was made. Government had contemplated a reduction of 3,500, and this intention would have been pursued, but such was the state of India, that notwithstanding the increased number of battalions sent out, the Governor General could not send home the regiments that ought in regular course to he relieved. These circumstances, combined with events that made it necessary to take measures for the preservation of public tranquillity at home, prevented Government from following out its intention to make the larger reduction he had stated. He might remind hon. Gentlemen who cavilled about expense, that a part of the expense was borne by the East India Company. The expense of nearly 30,000 men in the East Indies, amounting to nearly 1,000,000 l., sterling, was defrayed by the Company. Every Government had sanctioned the principle that ten years abroad and five years at home ought to be the order of service. He would now proceed to prove to the hon. Member opposite that the large Force kept up was not for the sake of maintaining a Standing Army, but to afford relief. In 1842, there were twenty-five regiments at home, and seventy-eight abroad. In this state of things it was impossible to keep up the requisite reliefs. No less than twenty-two regiments were abroad that year which had served more than ten years in the Colonies, exclusive of eight or nine regiments in the same situations in the East Indies. There were, in all, in 1842, thirty-two or thirty-three regiments that had served abroad more than ten years. Government felt it a duty to relieve these regiments. Between 1837 and 1842, an additional force of 21,000 men had been raised by Lord Melbourne's Government in consequence of various events, such as the insurrection in Canada, the hostilities in India and China, &c. Of the twenty-five regiments at home in 1842, scarcely any had been at home more than three years and a half, while more than thirty regiments were, serving upwards of ten years abroad. The course taken was to convert nine dépôts into nine second battalions, and to send them abroad, to relieve troops in the various Colonies. By the assistance of these battalions, and by withdrawing 5,500 men from North America, and one regiment from the West Indies, seventeen battalions were sent abroad, and twenty-two regiments in the Colonies withdrawn. It was satisfactory to be able to state that in con-
550
sequence of the measure adopted in 1842, there was not at present in the Colonies a single battalion which had been more than ten years abroad. This, unfortunately, was not the case with respect to the troops in India. There were now in India regiments which had served more than eighteen years abroad, and six regiments that had served more than twenty years. There were thus in India fourteen regiments which had served more than fifteen years in that country, and it was, therefore, important both for the health and discipline of the men, that they should be more regularly and periodically relieved. This object could not be accomplished, without keeping up an adequate relieving force at home, and he was, therefore, justified in repeating, that the object of Government was not the maintenance of a Standing Army in this country, but the necessity of proper relief to our soldiers serving beyond the seas. Take the case of some of the regiments in the East Indies, for instance. There was in that country, among other regiments, the 13th Infantry, commanded by Sir R. Sale, which after serving in the Cabool campaign, and defending most heroically the fortress of Jellalabad, was after twenty years service in India now on its march to Scinde, where, in all probability, it would have to perform very heavy duty. It was the same with the 55th, now in Hong Kong. That regiment had been twenty-two years abroad. Was it right or proper that such things should be? Arrangements had been made, however, to relieve these regiments, and he trusted that the latter would be on its return to this country in the course of the next autumn. Without the means of sending regiments from England, it was obvious that this relief could not take place, and, therefore, he (Sir H. Hardinge) claimed the support of the House for the propositions he should submit to them on the subject. There were now thirteen regiments which had returned from abroad, sonic of them since last November. These regiments generally arrived deficient in strengths, from sickness, casualties, and other causes; and it was, therefore, absolutely necessary to recruit them and make them effective. A large proportion of the Estimates about to be laid before the House was for these recruits. With regard to the Army at home, he had to inform the House, that out of thirty-six battalions, not one had been in this country four years. Her Majesty's Go-

551
vernment had now at home thirty-six battalions instead of twenty-four, which was the number at home in 1842; and thus they were enabled to relieve the regiments on foreign stations with more regularity. It was for that purpose, and not for the purpose of keeping up a Standing Army, he could assure the House that they were maintained. The hon. Member for Coventry had stated, that the country should return to the condition of the Army in 1822; but the hon. Member had forgotten to state, that it was an admitted fact, on all hands, that the force of that year was insufficient. Lord Castlereagh had come down to the House and said, in reference to it, that although the Government had consented to make the experiment of a large reduction in the Army, at that period it was absolutely necessary to increase the force in the ensuing year. The consequence was, that in 1823 the Army had to be increased by six new regiments, and, in 1825, the addition amounted to 25,000 men; an increase over and above the 21,000 reduced in 1822 of 4,000. Another bad consequence which accrued from that mode of reduction was the entailment of a very heavy expense on the public, by the half-pay and pensions of those officers and soldiers who had been reduced, and the bounties for the latter who had to be newly enlisted, It also deprived the country of the services of some valuable officers, while it nearly ruined others by inducing the necessity of repurchase. Then, with regard to the year 1836. The hon. Member said, that the Government of Lord Melbourne had kept up in that year only 101,000 men, while the force for the present year was 129,000; making a difference of 28,000 of all ranks. But if the hon. Member looked to the distribution of the forces in the colonies this year, as compared with that, he would find abundant reason to justify that increase. In India, there were 8,151 more rank and file than in 1836, in China, which was a new service, there were 3,000, in Australia 2,364, and there were other additions in various places to the amount of 20,000 men in all. There had been, however, a reduction of 5,000 men in the force of this year as compared with last on foreign service—in the Mediterranean, 1,794: in Jamaica, 1,300; in the West Indies, 200; in Ceylon, 716, &c. Taking that from 20,000, the real addition made to the Army abroad was 15,000 men. It had been urged that this augmentation was to create
552
a Standing Army, but what object could be gained by increasing the force in Australia, or at the Cape of Good Hope. In the former, officers were living in a state of wretchedness as compared with their mode of life in this country, or at better stations; at the Cape, unfortunate subalterns were stationed 300 miles up the country, with no one to speak to. Could Her Majesty's Government have any object in exiling these gentlemen, except the public service? In 1824, the force in Australia was 400 men; this year it was 5,000. There were, at this moment, 50,000 convicts in that country, while the whole number of free settlers did not amount to 150,000. In Van Diemen's Land, the convicts outnumbered the free settlers. It was requisite that the lives and properties of the latter should be protected, and thence the necessity of the increased force. Having, as he trusted, shown the House that Her Majesty's Government were entitled to support for bringing about more frequent relief to the troops in the colonies, and on foreign service, he should next advert to the arrangements of the forces of the line at home. Instead of twenty-five battalions, which was the number at home on the present Government coming into office, there were now thirty-six; and twenty-two, which were abroad, had been relieved. In the course of the ensuing year, he trusted that a large proportion of the twenty-three regiments in India would also be duly relieved. With regard to the other questions of the hon. Member for Coventry, as to the charge of the non-effective forces, inclusive of the general officers, he begged to remind the House that most of these gallant men were now old, and some of them very infirm. No less than forty-seven of them had died within the past year, and he was sorry to say that few of the survivors were in a condition to fit them for active service. In 1822, the number of general officers was 396; in 1844, it was 171, making a difference of 225. In 1822, the officers retired and reduced upon full pay, was 771; in 1844, it was 360, making a difference of 411. In 1822, the reduced and retired officers upon half-pay and military allowance numbered 9,744; in 1844, they were 4,035, making a difference of 5,709. In 1844, the officers receiving foreign half-pay were, in number, 466; while in 1822, they were 1,108, being a difference of 642. There were then, in all, officers receiving pensions:—

In 1822

12,019

£1,651,000

1844

6,032

909,000

Reduction of Officers

6,987

Reduction

£142,000

This was a large reduction in that part of the Estimates, in which the patronage of a Government could be most effectually exercised. If to that reduction was added the reduction in the Chelsea Hospital, and ordinary pensions to Negro soldiers and Militia, it would be found that while in 1822 they were in number 98,000, in 1844, they were only 73,101, making a difference of 24,899 in numbers, and in expense of about 320,000 l. On these two items alone the pensioners, the half-pay officers, and the general officers, called the dead weight of the Army, but which he (Sir H. Hardinge) should rather call the nom effective service, there had been a reduction equal to a million sterling a year—a reduction, too, it should be stated, which was not merely annual, but which would go on increasing in a large ratio each year. Was not that a strong proof of the manlier in which the present Government—and he would say, former Governments—had endeavoured to keep down the expense of the Army. Having stated these facts, he should proceed with the ordinary parts of the Estimate. The Estimate for the first Vote which he should propose was, 100,295 men; the Estimate for the second, which depended upon it, was 3,431,000 l. for their payment and expenses, being 191,859 l. less than the Estimate of the last year. That diminution, however, he was bound to inform the House was more apparent than real, as it principally rose from the transfer of the provisions, forage, fuel, and light abroad, as well as the passage of officers and men from one foreign station to another, to the Commissariat and Navy Estimates. In 1836 there had been a transfer of the former of these items from the Commissariat to the Army Estimates; but last year an inquiry was instituted, and the result was the re-transfer this year to the Commissariat. In point of principle it was much the better plan to place every ordinary service under the Army head, but the mode of putting provisions, &c., into the Army Estimates was not by any means free from objection in practice. Her Majesty's Government, under these circumstances, were of opinion that the preferable arrangement was for the Commissariat to take the Bushbrooke Estimate for the supply of provisions, &c.; and he fully
554
concurred with the Duke of Wellington on the propriety of maintaining that department of the Public Service. There was another item to which he should beg to call the attention of the House, namely, the libraries which had been established for the use of each regiment. This year there was 2,000 l. proposed for books for them. There were now thirty-eight libraries at home, and forty abroad, in the several regiments; and one had been recently sent out to Hong Kong. In fact, there was no foreign station which would be without a library, or which had not a library at present. He had also to mention the lunatic asylum for officers at Chatham. The spot on which it was placed was not a healthy one, nor fit for the purpose intended, and the Government had accordingly made arrangements to purchase the ground for another in the neighbourhood of Rochester. The third Vote related to the staff. After noting and explaining several items of the Estimates the right hon. Gentleman concluded by saying, he had now gone through the whole, and he would repeat that it was the most anxious wish and desire of Her Majesty's Government to give the House all the information possible upon the subject. The right hon. Baronet moved—that a force (exclusive of the troops employed in the East Indies) of 100,295 men be maintained for the service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from the 1st of April, 1844, to the 31st of March, 1845.
Captain Layardsaid, no doubt it would be in the recollection of the House, that for the last ten years, upon the Army Estimates being brought under discussion, he had thought it his duty, a duty he owed to the service to which he had the honour to belong—to state his opinion of the immense advantage it would be that men should be allowed to enlist for limited service, and receive a free discharge in ten years, as by such means a very superior class of men, he had no doubt, would be induced to enter the service, and by such means, a great deal of the crime which was now committed would be avoided. There was no greater or graver offence against military law than desertion, and that would, he felt convinced, be much less frequent when those who had enlisted, without consideration, and found themselves unfitted for the service, were assured that at a certain time, by good and steady conduct, they could claim a discharge. In the French service desertion was not so fre-

555
quent as in ours, and it entirely arose from their having only to serve for a limited time, for no soldiers in the world, he was happy to state, had more care taken of them every way than ours. He felt convinced that the parents of young men in the middle classes would not then feel that aversion which was felt against allowing their sons to enter the service: for then, if a boy entered at eighteen and received his discharge at twenty-eight, he would be able to apply himself to any other calling, which would not be the case if he left the service at a later period of life. It had been stated as a reason against limited service, and it seemed at first sight an insurmountable one, that great expense would be incurred by sending home any considerable body of men, supposing the regiment to be abroad; but he considered the expense so entailed would be fully and amply provided for by those who had enlisted for limited service receiving no pension; and he believed that most of the men would remain with the regiment and would re-enlist finding themselves much better off abroad than at home, though of course, more exposed to the vicissitudes of climate. His opinion upon this subject was founded not only upon his own observation, but had been since confirmed by the opinion of many able officers, to whom he had spoken upon the subject: and he believed few, if any, would disagree with him, when they remembered that one, whose judgment upon such a subject must be one of the best, and whose anxiety for the well being of the soldier all must appreciate, agreed with him when he stated the same opinion last year. He alluded to the right hon. Baronet the Secretary at War. He, therefore, wished to ask that right hon. and gallant Officer, if there was any chance of its being carried into effect? In the second place, he wished to ask the gallant Officer if it was in contemplation to increase the bounty with regard to the infantry soldier, as he was most thankful to learn had been done in the case of the cavalry, as, from its inefficiency to supply the soldier's necessaries, the recruit, finding himself in debt had often deserted, believing that good faith had not been kept with him. The next thing he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Baronet to was, the advantage that would arise from making the band sergeant, the master tailor, and corporal, the pioneers belonging to the staff, and giving ten more sergeants and one corporal to each regi-
556
ment, as the companies to which those men belonged could receive no advantage from them, on account of their time being otherwise fully employed. He thought it would be a great encouragement, and one that was well deserved, if the lance sergeants and lance corporals were to receive—the first, three pence a-day, and the second, two pence a-day extra, They had an immense amount of duty to perform; and many of them having to attend school and to pay for it, it threw them into debt. He trusted this would meet with the consideration it well deserved. He must now allude to a subject that was a very painful one to all who were interested in the welfare of the Army—he alluded to the pensioners. A man receiving sixpence a-day might, indeed he a saving to the Poor Rate, but could be of little benefit to the man himself. He knew the soldier thought deeply, and felt deeply upon this subject, and he did trust that an alteration should take place. A sailor would get a pension now of a shilling a-day after twenty-one years' service, but it would take a soldier twenty-eight years' service, which few ever could perform. The badges for good conduct brought forward by the noble Lord the Member for Sunderland had proved of great advantage, and both for that boon, and for the greater allowance of fresh provisions to the troops in the West Indies, the Army felt grateful. He begged to thank the right hon. Baronet and those in authority at the Horse Guards for bringing forward the Savings Banks, which he believed would have in time an excellent effect; though he was sorry to say that a feeling had gone forth amongst the men, that the Government had formed Savings Banks to find out what the men could save, with a view to reduce the pay. Nothing could be more ridiculous; and he trusted by this time the men were disabused upon this notion. He thought praise was due to the gallant Officer the Member for Liverpool who had warmly advocated this Measure, as well as his noble Friend the Member for Chichester. He wished likewise to call the attention of the right hon. and gallant Officer, the Secretary at War, to the great hardship felt by married officers in not being allowed to draw coals and candles, when in lodgings; for instance, a non-commissioned officer, upon being given a commission, if married, which he generally was, must go into lodgings, and how could he live on his pay there, his allowances being stopped? He thought it was a great hardship, and hoped it would be soon

557
attended to. No feeling had actuated him upon such an occasion but the one that would, he felt assured, actuate all, both in and out of the House, a sincere and an anxious desire, at all times, taking into consideration the resources of the country to promote the comfort, the happiness, and the well-being, of those who undismayed by the vicissitudes of climate, undaunted by the sword of the enemy, maintained, as they always had done, the glory and independence of the counrry.
Sir H. Hardingewould endeavour, as briefly as possible, to give an answer to the question which had been put by the gallant Officer opposite. He doubtless was aware that the plan of giving a free discharge after certain periods of service, and affording facilities to obtain discharges, was established in the year 1829. He (Sir H. Hardinge) felt a great interest in that mode, because he always considered it cheap and useful, and one which reconciled private families to their sons entering the Army. It had had that effect, and taking into consideration the number of men who had received free discharges, and also making a fair calculation of the saving of pensions on the single item of the warrant of 1829, there had been a saving of nearly half a million. He believed the actual amount was 497,000 l. With respect to bounties, he believed that the bounty and equipment for a cavalry soldier were now sufficient to pay all the expenses of a recruit. With regard to staff- surgeons, the expense was rather heavy, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer would scarcely be a party to the arrangement proposed. On the subject of Savings Banks, he felt bound to say that arrangements for them were in progress when he came into office; and whatever credit was due to those who established them belonged to his predecessors. If any soldier deposited his savings in these banks it would not at all affect his pay. His pay would not be altered, and those who imagined so were labouring under a very great error. With respect to coals and candles, he so far agreed with the gallant Officer that every possible arrangement had been made to carry the plan into effect.
Mr. W. Williamswas far from being satisfied of the necessity of the large force proposed. The right hon. Gentleman had pointed out the necessity of shortening the period of the soldiers' servitude abroad. The right hon. Gentleman naturally felt for the service, and only looked at one side. He (Mr. Williams), however, looked
558
at the condition of the people who were to heavily taxed to maintain this force. It was true there was at this moment less distress than was seen some time ago, but he was afraid the people would soon be in as bad a state as before. There was uniting to justify the keeping up of so large a number of men, and he therefore proposed as an Amendment, that the number be 80,295 instead of 100,295, being a reduction of 20,000 men.
Viscount Howickdid not rise for the purpose of supporting the proposition of he hon. Member for Coventry, because he did not think it would be at all politic to make such a reduction as the one now proposed; but he did not consider the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman to be justified by the necessity of affording relief in our colonial possessions. He certainly admitted, that the pressure on the Infantry was stronger than it ought to be; but still if the demand at home, and especially in Ireland, were not so large, this object might be accomplished without keeping up so large a force; and even with that large force, he was of opinion, that in justice to the soldiers of the British army means ought to be taken still further to diminish the pressure of that service upon them. Several measures might be adopted with that view. In the first place, he retained the opinion, which he long ago expressed, that much might be done by diminishing the proportion of each regiment at home. He was persuaded that more efficient depots might he formed by having two companies instead of four. But beyond this he could not help saying, that while the demands upon the Troops of the Line were so heavy, it was very unfortunate that another description of force, upon which the pressure was much less, were not required to take a greater share of duty than they were at present. When he (Viscount Howick) filled the office of Secretary at War, at the time the insurrection broke out in Canada, and when there was an increased demand for troops in the Colonies, he pressed upon Lord Hill the propriety of sending out as a portion of that increased force two battalions of the Guards. That course was adopted. The Guards had now come home, and he was not aware that any other portion of that force had since been sent to our colonial possessions. He was far from saying the Guards ought to take

559
a share of colonial duty like the regiments of the line, but so far as service at such a distance was concerned, and in healthy climates, they might do something. He thought that two battalions of the Guards might be kept abroad, in the Mediterranean, as a regular arrangement. The officers in the Guards had a great advantage over those in the line, inasmuch as they rose to the rank of general officer much more rapidly, and any one in the habit of looking at the brevets could not fail to notice the circumstance, and it was not unreasonable to expect them to take some share of foreign duty. If two battalions were kept abroad, the only effect would be this, that two years out of seven would be passed by them in perfectly healthy colonies. Something might also be done by having a larger proportion of marines, and if a battalion of these were employed in the Mediterranean or at Gibraltar, it would tend to diminish the amount of colonial duty. The hon. and gallant Officer who spoke from that (the Opposition) side of the House adverted to the subject of pensions, saying that it was hard that a soldier retiring after long service, and entirely worn out, should receive only 6d. a day. He could not allow it to be said, that that was a fair representation of the case. That was not the amount to which a really worn out soldier was entitled. It was easy to say, that a larger and more liberal pension ought to be granted; but he hoped, before adopting any such plan, the Government would consider the state of things with which they had to deal a few years ago, and the grounds on which the change took place. Formerly the practice was this:—A soldier had no right to retire on a pension, unless he was unfit for further service. If pronounced unfit for service by a medical board, after serving for twenty-one years, he might retire on a pension of 1s. a day. That regulation was liable to great inconvenience. A multitude of men only thirty-nine years of age had the right to claim this pension. A man was not allowed to claim it unless disabled; but his pension was within a small amount of his regular pay; and he naturally desired to receive 1s. for doing nothing, rather than 1s. 2d. or 1s. 3d. for going through the fatigue of service. The moment the men passed that age, and on representation being made, that they were unfit for
560
longer service, they were discharged. The hon. and gallant Member himself, when Secretary at War, under the Duke of Wellington's Administration, felt the evil so strongly that he endeavoured to check it. He adopted a regulation to prevent a man retiring at the age of thirty-nine, unless he were bonâ fide disabled, and no longer fit for duty. He established the rule, that the certificate of the regimental surgeon should no longer be sufficient; he required that the man should go to Chatham, remain there a certain time and obtain a certificate of his unfitness, and then he required him to appear before the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital, previous to obtaining his discharge. Even these regulations were found to be inefficient. When the man wanted to go he generally contrived to elude all these precautions. In a letter addressed by a very able medical officer to the right hon. and gallant Member, the Secretary at War, it was stated that men who had never had chronic rheumatism, invariably found themselves attacked by it the moment they reached the age at which they became entitled to a pension, and that numbers had become qualified, on the ground that they suffered from chronic rheumatism. In this manner the Pension List became a growing burthen to the country. According to that system a man who had served his twenty-one years might for thirty years receive a pension nearly equal to his pay as a soldier, and an undoubted proof of the extent to which the abuse was carried was to be found in the fact, that a large number of these pensioners were found to a certain extent to be fit for military duty. [Sir H. Hardinge.—Not for service in the Army.] No; for duty of a different description, for the performance of which the right hon. and gallant Member had organised them to serve for a period of five years. The modified warrant had not come into operation, and great difficulty was found in checking the practice, and it was perfectly notorious, that large numbers of men who had been discharged, on the ground of their being afflicted with fatal complaints, such as consumption, were drawing pensions from the fund. His right hon. Friend had endeavoured to guard against this abuse, by providing that the pension of 6d. a day only should be granted when the soldier was unfit for active duty in the Army, and could largely contribute towards his

561
own maintenance. If not capable of doing anything to maintain himself, it appeared, that his pension could be increased to the same amount as it was under the former I warrant, and that he would be entitled to 1s. a day. It was a delusion, therefore, to say that his right hon. Friend had provided that a man should be discharged from the Army, after he was entirely worn out, with a pension inadequate for his support. Another evil under the former system was one with which the noble Lord, the Member for London, was much struck when he was Paymaster of the Forces, and, as such, was a member of the Board of Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital. Men repeatedly came before the Board whose characters, according to the report of their officers, were bad; yet these men, however notoriously bad their characters might be, were entitled to their discharge and pension after the regular period of service; and although their disability might have been the effect of drunkenness, still, if they had never fallen under the sentence of a court-martial, the Commissioners had no power to refuse them the same pension as that enjoyed by the best and most deserving soldier. To check that abuse, and, at the same time, to increase the pension to the good soldier, he, when Secretary at War, suggested, with the full concurrence of the late Lord Hill and the military authorities of the Horse Guards, that what was called good-conduct pay should be given to the soldier. The soldier whose conduct had been such as to entitle him to it—whose name did not appear in the defaulter's book, obtained on his discharge the good-conduct pay in addition to his pension, and became entitled to receive 1s. 2d. and sometimes 1s. 4d. a day. These facts ought to be considered before they condemned the measure formerly adopted. In his opinion, the country ought to be very jealous of any measure which went to increase the expense of the dead weight of the Army. Much might be done to better the condition of the soldier. They might improve the terribly inefficient barracks in many of our distant Colonies; they might still improve the provisions which they receive in those climates, and they might carry further measures for facilitating an easier discharge of men from the Army; this last improvement would encourage parents to send their sons into the Army, for at
562
present if a young man entered the Army he was seldom able to return from abroad o visit his family. Though he was aware here were strong prejudices against such n alteration, he yet hoped the right hon. and gallant Gentleman would turn his attention to it. In doing so, however, he entreated him not to adhere to the warrant of 1829. One part of that warrant vas very objectionable, that part which enabled a man, after certain periods of service, to obtain his discharge, and a gratuity on his discharge. He had proposed, that instead of a gratuity, the soldier should have the right to have his lame registered at Chelsea with a view to afterwards being entitled to his pension. There was another point to which he wished to call the attention of the House, lamely, the change made in the Estimates of this year as to the mode of charging he expense of provisions for the troops serving abroad. The manner in which this change had taken place was rather extraordinary. He thought the right hon. Gentleman ought to have laid on the fable of the House the Treasury Minute, and any other documents which could show the propriety of the change. In the absence of any such documents, he disapproved of the change, not merely because the whole charge did not now appear in the Estimates, but because he thought the charge was not a proper one under the head of the Commissariat Department. He must say that the administration of the Commissariat Department had always been, in his opinion, both under Gentlemen on his side of the House, as well as under Gentlemen opposite, in the highest degree unsatisfactory. It had fallen into the hands of a certain number of the clerks of the Treasury who performed the duties without any proper supervision, and without knowing much about the business, and the consequence was that the health and comfort of the troops were materially neglected. He would state to the House some startling facts on this point. From statistical accounts of the Army laid on the Table of the House, when he held the office of Secretary at War, it appeared that during the twenty years following the peace, that was up to 1835, the annual mortality of our troops in the West Indian command was, on an average, 93 out of every 1,000 men; the annual mortality of the Forces at home being only 15 out of every 1,000.

563
No doubt this great mortality in the Windward and Leeward Islands was the inevitable consequence of the climate. But when they found that the total number of deaths in the troops employed in the West Indies for the twenty years following the peace amounted to no less a number than 6,800, not one of whom was killed in active service, but all perished from disease, a danger requiring more real courage to face than actual war—when they found that such a number had perished from the effects of the climate he thought they would agree with him when he said that every prevention which human prudence could dictate ought to be taken to reduce that mortality to its lowest amount. What would the House think when he told them that during the last twenty years it had been the routine practice of the Commissariat to issue salt provisions to the troops in those Colonies five days in the week? Now, without being a medical man, but knowing the tendency which salt provisions had to create thirst and to increase the disposition to drunkenness, he must say he thought that to give our troops in the West Indies salted provisions five days in the week was a system the most injurious to their health. It was common sense to suppose that it was injurious, and he knew, from a careful examination of the reports of every medical officer in the West Indies, that they confirmed his view of the subject. He had, however, a stronger case. Would the House believe that during the six years in which we kept up a large garrison in St. Helena, when Napoleon Bonaparte was a prisoner, no fresh provisions whatever were issued to the troops, their uniform food consisting entirely of salted provisions. What was the consequence? Diseases of the stomach and dysentery, which medical men agreed in attributing to their habitual use of salted food, prevailed among the troops, and the annual mortality among them during the six years was no less than 34 in every 1,000, being rather more than double the rate of the mortality among the troops who were kept in this country. It appeared, too, that that great mortality must have been owing to the treatment which the troops received; for during the same six years only one officer out of sixty-three had died of disease. It was further remarkable that whenever the troops were employed on any special service, during which they had an oppor-
564
tunity of eating fresh meat, they enjoyed good health; so that there they had the most undoubted evidence that it was to the manner in which the troops had been provisioned that that fearful mortality should be traced. It was, no doubt, true that in the Island of St. Helena fresh provisions were very dear. But he would ask the House whether they would begrudge any little additional expense that might be necessary to preserve the lives of British soldiers? He was sure that there was not one Member of the House who would regret any expenditure that might be necessary for such a purpose. It was a remarkable fact that that system of giving the troops salt provisions had been adopted in cases in which, so far from being an economy, it was the very reverse. He found, that to troops in the Mauritius salt provisions had been issued on alternate days, although fresh meat could have been had at the time actually cheaper. The same system had also been in operation in Gibraltar, although there also, fresh provisions would have been the cheaper of the two. He could show the House, that not only as regarded the comfort and the health of the troops, but also as regarded expenditure, the administration of the Commissariat Department, when unchecked by the Treasury, had been exceedingly injurious. That was no party question; and the statements he had made, concerned equally the government of Lord Liverpool, the government of the Duke of Wellington, and the Reform Government of the year 1830. It was not individuals whom he blamed, but the system, a system which placed the important duty of managing the supplies of provisions in the hands of persons who had no other military business to discharge. The correspondence with the medical officers and with the officers commanding the troops did not pass through their hands; there was a division of authority and of responsibility; and that had led to the melancholy results he had detailed. The effect of the change made in the year1836—but which change had since been unmade by the right hon. and gallant officer—the effect of that change was to apply a partial remedy at least to the system of which he complained. By the plan of the year 1836 all the accounts with respect to the provisions of the troops, came to the War Office; they were there closely scrutinized; and the result of that scrutiny in the very first

565
year in which these accounts had been sent to the War Office, was, that it was found that an unnecessary expence had been incurred by the faulty arrangements for provisioning the troops. With these facts before them, seeing that for a long series of years, under Governments of the most opposite politics, the management of that business exclusively by the Treasury, had been satisfactory to the degree he had described—seeing that the change which had been made in the year 1836, although not so complete as he could have desired, had supplied a partial remedy, and had enabled the War Office, to impose a considerable check on the prevalence of abuses, he doubted the policy of reverting to the old system. Under the now existing arrangement, the War Office could know nothing of the price of the bread issued at the different stations, and would therefore have no means of checking the expenditure in that respect; and yet, it was only by a knowledge of such details that any improvement in the general management of the Commissariat Department could be effected. He should not, however, trouble the House by any further allusion to those subjects; and he had only, in conclusion, to express his determination to support the original proposition of the right hon. and gallant Officer.
Mr. P. Howardsaid, that he should on that occasion vote with Her Majesty's Government. He entirely approved of the suggestion of the noble Lord who had preceded him, that battalions of the Guards should be stationed in Gibraltar and in Canada. He believed that such an arrangement would be attended with beneficial effects among the people of Canada, inasmuch as it would be a mark of their connection with the British Empire.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdid not mean to enter into a discussion of the military topics introduced by the noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland. But as the noble Lord had made some rather severe observations upon the Commissariat Department, and upon the arrangement for managing the business of that department, which had of late been introduced, the House would, he hoped, allow him to state the principles upon which that arrangement had been founded. He should, of course, be ready to lay before the House, the Treasury Minutes respecting the arrangement in question; and when the Commissariat Estimates came before
566
the House, he should be prepared to discuss the propriety of the mode of proceeding. The Commissariat Department was strictly a Department of Accounts, and in that respect, it came directly under the control of those who had the management of the financial concerns of the country. He was perfectly confident that the establishment of the Commissariat Department on the footing on which it now stood, had, without impairing the comforts of the troops, contributed to the saving of an enormous amount of public money. That saving was owing, he believed, to the establishment of the connection between the Commissariat Department and the Treasury. The noble Lord objected to the change. But the change was one which appeared to him not to be in any degree improper. It was perfectly true, that, previously to the year 1836, the rating and the pecuniary allowances in lieu of them, had been provided for in the Vote taken for the army extraordinary, which Vote had been administered through the Commissariat Board. In the year 1836, it had been thought proper to abolish altogether the Vote for the Army Extraordinaries, and then it had been deemed advisable to regulate the expenditure of the several departments on two distinct principles—the one was, that the War Office, the Ordnance and the Commissariat, should each take the whole expenditure for its own Department; and the other principle was, that every Department should be held responsible for the performance of the duties that devolved upon it. But that arrangement had not been fully carried out until the present time, when the transfer of the rations from the Army to the Commissariat Department had been carried into effect. There had been at first three distinct Votes taken for rations in the Estimates for the Army Extraordinaries, for the Ordnance, and for the Commissariat; and those three Votes had all been under the control of the Commissariat Board, which had to divide the sums allowed among each of these three Departments. But that arrangement had led to great inconvenience, as it had been found very difficult, if not impossible, to determine the expenses and to apportion out the allowances to those different departments. It had been found impossible, for instance, accurately to decide upon the amount of the expenses of transport in each case. The

567
present Government had therefore determined on leaving the accounts relative to the expenses for rations to one general department. The consequence was that they had now an uniform system; and that appeared to him to be a far better plan than to separate the Estimates. One consequence of separating them was, that it was impossible to arrive at any accurate calculation as to the amount of those Estimates. There were no other means of coming to any conclusion on that subject than by taking the expenditure of the preceding year. But that was a very fallacious test; whereas, under the present system, much more accurate information was obtained by means of the accounts furnished by the officers of the Commissariat Department, who were acquainted with the prices of provisions in any particular year in each country. He had further to add, that those officers had, as far as he had any means of judging, discharged their duty in a most satisfactory manner. He believed that the system now in operation had contributed both to the purposes of public economy, and to the great end of securing, as far as possible, the comfort of the troops.
Mr. F. T. Baringsaid, that he should leave it to military authorities to decide whether the present system of managing the business of the Commissariat Department was or was not satisfactory. He was bound, however, to say that he had never met with officers more intelligent and zealous than those of the Commissariat Department. When the charges referred to were made under the head of "Army Extraordinaries," those Estimates contained many things that did not legitimately belong to them. During the war these Extraordinaries were necessary; but, during a time of peace, there were many of the Estimates under that head which would have much better come in other services. One of the first things he did when he came into the Treasury was to remove the item of "Payment for the Church in Canada" from the Army Extra-ordinaries. He would press upon the Government to give to the Secretary at War the same power of checking which had formerly existed, and then it would not much matter under which head of Estimates any particular Vote might come. The accounts of the Commissariat would be kept all the more correctly for the check. He should like to be informed,
568
if the improved system which had been recommended by a Commission some time ago had been extended to the Ordnance, as it had previously been to the Army and Navy accounts.
Sir J. Hobhousetrusted the gallant Officer opposite would hesitate long before he made any change in the arrangements of 1832. The scale of pensions fixed at that time was settled after the fullest deliberation, with the full consent of Earl Grey's Cabinet. He trusted that no false impression would be allowed to go abroad with respect to the sixpenny pension. When that pension was granted there was still labour left in the soldier sufficient to assist him in gaining his livelihood. Of course, if the gallant Officer found that the former calculations had been made on insufficient data, he would be perfectly justified in making an alteration, but he implored him to hesitate before taking such a step. He had always held that a certain confidence should, in regard to these matters, be reposed in the Ministers of the Crown, and thought that discussions on such subjects should not be encouraged.
Sir H. Hardingehad stated only that it was his intention, in the performance of his duty, to lay before the Government, as soon as he should have collected it, certain information respecting the longevity of pensioners, and various other circumstances having reference to their condition, which by means of officers stationed in various districts, he had been enabled to accomplish in a satisfactory manner. He had carefully abstained from pronouncing any opinion as to whether the warrants ought to be altered or not. Ninety-nine soldiers out of a hundred were discharged because they were no longer able to march with 60lbs on their shoulders. They had no option. He could prove that some of the best soldiers in the Army, who had three marks, would only receive a shilling a day after twenty-seven years service. Out of 27,000 men in the Army in England there were only two men at the present day who had served twenty-eight years.
Dr. Bowringobjected to so large a Vote for the Army after a peace which had endured a quarter of a century. He entertained a strong feeling on the subject, and wished to minimise the Army. He would therefore support the amendment of his hon. Friend in favour of reduction.
The Committee divided on Mr. Williams's amendment. Ayes 12; Noes 114: Majority 102.

List of the AYES.

Bernal, Capt.

Scholefield, J.

Blewitt, R. J.

Thornely, T.

Brotherton, J.

Trelawny, J. S.

Crawford, W. S.

Wawn, J. T.

Duncombe, T.

Elphinstone, H.

TELLERS.

Fielden, J.

Williams, W.

Hastie, A.

Bowring, Dr.

List of the NOES.

A'Court, Capt.

Hanmer, Sir J.

Antrobus, E.

Hardinge, rt. hon. Sir H.

Arbuthnott, hon. H.

Hawes, B.

Arkwright, G.

Hay, Sir A. L.

Arundel and Surrey,

Hayes, Sir E.

Earl of

Heathcote, Sir W.

Astell, W.

Herbert, hon. S.

Baillie, Col.

Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J.

Balfour, J. M.

Hodgson, R.

Bankes, G.

Hope, hon. C.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Hope, A.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Hope, G. W.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Howard, P. H.

Bernal, R.

Howick, Visct.

Boldero, H. G.

Hussey, T.

Borthwick, P.

Jermyn, Earl

Botfield, B.

Johnstone, Sir J.

Bramston, T. W.

Jolliffe, Sir W. G. H.

Bruce, Lord E.

Jones, Capt.

Cardwell, E.

Kemble, H.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Knight, H. G.

Colborne, hn. W.N.R.

Layard, Capt.

Collett, W. R.

Lincoln, Earl of

Copeland, Mr. Ald.

Lockhart. W.

Corry, rt. hon. H.

Lowther, hon. Col.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Mackenzie, T.

Cripps, W.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Damer, hon. Col.

Maclean, D.

Davies, D. A. S.

McNeill, D.

Dickinson, F. H.

Marsham, Visct.

Dodd, G.

Masterman, J.

Douglas, Sir H.

Maxwell, hon. J. P.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Meynell, Capt.

Duncombe, hon. A.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Eliot, Lord

Packe, C. W.

Escott, B.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Fitzmaurice, hon. W.

Peel, J.

Flower, Sir J.

Plumptre, J. P.

Fuller, A. E.

Pollock, Sir F.

Gardner, J. D.

Praed, W. T.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Pringle, A.

Glynne, Sir S. R.

Rashleigh, W.

Gordon, hon. Capt.

Rawdon, Col.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Rendlesham, Lord

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Greenall, P.

Russell, J. D. W.

Grimston, Visct.

Sanderson, R.

Grogan, E.

Sandon, Visct.

Hamilton, W. J.

Seymour, Sir H. B.

570

Sibthorp, Col.

Wellesley, Lord C.

Smith, rt. hon. T. B.C.

Wood, Col. T.

Smollett, A.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Somerset, Lord G.

Wyndham, Col. C.

Stuart, H.

Yorke, H. R.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Young, J.

Trench, Sir F. W.

TELLERS.

Trevor, hon. G. R.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Trotter, J.

Clerk, Sir G.

Original proposition agreed to.
House resumed, Committee to sit again.
House adjourned at a quarter past twelve o'clock.

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.—la. Judicial Committee of Privy Council Bill Amendment.
Private.–2a. Bow Brickhill Estate.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Earl Powis, from Dyffryn Clwyd, and 17 places, against Union of Sees of St. Asaph and Bangor; and from Bistre, for the same, and in favour of a Bishopric at Manchester.—From Nettlecombe, Treborough, and Stogumber, against Alteration of the Corn Laws.—From Haslingden Union, against Poor Laws Amendment Act.—By the Marquess of Normanby, from Ballysax School, complaining of the Board of Charitable Donations (Ireland).

REPEAL AGITATION (IRELAND).
The Marquess of Westmeathwished to direct the attention of their Lordships to a statement which he made during the debate on the Motion of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Normanby). He stated on that occasion, that in a certain parish in the county of Westmeath, in Ireland, a Roman Catholic clergyman, who had since died, was suspended from the exercise of his clerical functions in consequence of his having refused to assist in the collection of the Repeal Rent, and the Agitation of the Question of a Repeal of the Union. From the statement which had been made to him (the Marquess of Westmeath) on that subject, he assumed its truth; but when the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Normanby), on a former occasion in that House, read a letter in contradiction to that statement, he appeared to hesitate in reiterating the statement, for, with the courtesy that was due from one Member of their Lordships House to another, he felt that it would be well to write to Ireland after that contradiction, in order that he might ascertain
488
if the statement which had been made to him would be still maintained. He had, since that period, referred to parties in Ireland on the subject, and he found, by that reference, that what he had stated on a former occasion was substantially the fact. He had stated that the clergyman was suspended, but if he had used the word superseded he would have been more correct in what he said. That clergyman had exercised his influence in preventing the collection of money amongst his parishioners for the purpose of being applied to the furtherance of the Repeal Agitation. He had also refused to assist in that Repeal Agitation, or to aid in one of the monster meetings which had taken place in Westmeath last year; and the consequence of his adopting that line of conduct was, that the Roman Catholic bishop of the diocese sent word to the clergyman (the Rev. Mr. Murray) to the effect that he would send a curate to officiate in the clergyman's chapel for three subsequent Sundays. The curate did, according to that intimation, attend and officiate at the chapel for three subsequent Sundays, and immediately preceding the monster meeting in Westmeath he preached in that chapel; so that the clergyman (Mr. Murray) had been superseded in his own parish. The noble Marquess opposite might ask on what authority he made that statement, but the noble Marquess must be aware that political addresses from the Altar became publicly known in Ireland throughout the surrounding districts, and were very freely talked over whilst they possessed novelty. In order that their Lordships might understand what the nature of the meeting was, at which Mr. Murray refused to assist, he (the Marquess of Westmeath) would describe to them the language which two Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church used on that occasion. The meeting took place on the 14th of May last, and it was stated by the papers which advocated a repeal of the Union, that fifty-one priests attended, and that the Roman Catholic Bishop was in the chair. At the dinner which took place after the meeting, Dr. Cantwell, the Roman Catholic Bishop, said that the Irish deserved and should have self-government, and he congratulated the meeting on the glorious demonstration which they had on that day made, and which showed that Westmeath was fully alive to the hopelessness of England

489
rendering justice to Ireland, and it also showed that they were determined to cooperate with their countrymen, under the peaceful guidance of their wise leader, removing the degrading stigma of inferiority, and raising Ireland again to the dignity of a nation. That was the language of Dr. Cantwell, and he was followed by another Roman Catholic Bishop, who used language of a similar nature and import. He felt it his duty as a Magistrate to bring this subject before their Lordships, and he trusted that he had done so with sincerity, perhaps with earnestness, hut with a perfect freedom from party feeling.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, that the substantial portion of the case be best met by reading to their Lord ships a denial with which he had been entrusted on the part of the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell of any interference with the Rev. Mr. Murray in the discharge of his clerical functions. The noble Marquess seemed to have a strange mode of making out his case. The noble Marquess had made a specific charge, which was met by a specific denial, upon which the noble Marquess retorted, by reading not only a speech of the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell, but the speech of another titular Bishop also. Certainly that was carrying the doctrine of conspiracy rather farther than it had been carried even of late years. He had received by this day's post a letter from the Right Rev. person, Dr. Cantwell, who assured him that he had never either spoken or written a word to the late Dr. Murray, parish priest of Clonmellon (four miles from the residence of the Marquess of Westmeath), and that for the fourteen years that he had been Bishop of that diocese, in which Dr. Murray had been forty-five years the incumbent of a parish, he had lived with the Rev. Gentleman on terms of the closest friendship, and had always regarded him with respect, esteem, and affection. He stated that he had never written a word to the Rev. Gentleman on the subject of Repeal, and he concluded his letter by stating that though the season when the Rev. Gentleman died was one of great severity, he (the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell) travelled thirty miles to attend the solemn offices of the Church at his funeral, at which a large number of clergymen and 1,500 laymen attended, and on that occasion he expressed the greatest regret
490
for the loss of so exemplary a pastor, and one characterized by such zeal in the discharge of his duty. That would show that the Rev. Mr. Murray had not incurred the displeasure of the writer. Now, after that letter, what grounds remained for the charge of interference with the Rev. Mr. Murray? The only ground on which the charge rested was, that a curate had attended the chapel of Clonmellon for three Sundays. Why the aged and Rev. Gentleman after having performed the duties of parish-priest upwards of' forty years, left his duty to be performed by his curate for three successive Sundays, shortly before his death. The letter further stated that the Right Rev. Prelate perceived that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Westmeath) said the statement was generally believed in the neighbourhood of Clonmellon, but he (Dr. Cantwell) believed that, so far from its being generally accredited, no man of respectability in that part of the country entertained the opinion that such was the fact. Having acquainted their Lordships with the contents of that letter he would not make a single remark on the subject in addition, as he thought the letter itself was a sufficient answer.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, that their Lordships would be able to decide between the two statements. He believed that it would not be safe as regarded the person who gave him the information if he mentioned his name; and therefore he would sooner have himself exposed to the suspicion of having exaggerated the circumstances than to state the person's name. He had heard the matter at the time, and he still firmly believed it notwithstanding the contradiction which had been read to their Lordships, who would give it its full value when they recollected the language which he had just read as having been used by the Right Rev. person. Their Lordships would judge whether he (the Marquess of Westmeath) would be inclined, without what he considered sufficient ground, to make an attack on an individual with whom he had no acquaintance whatever. There was another thing which he had to state, The noble Marquess opposite alluded to what had taken place as having occurred, in the living of Clonmellon, whereas it was in another chapel, under the jurisdiction of the Rev. Mr. Murray, that the Curate officiated, namely, Kilallen.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid the denial had no reference to any particular chapel, for it was a distinct and positive denial, on the part of Dr. Cantwell, that he either spoke or wrote to Mr. Murray On the subject of Repeal.
Subject dropped.

SLAVERY IN LOUISIANA.
Lord Broughamsaid, that he had recently received many applications upon a very painful subject, and though he refused to present any petition on that subject, he wished very shortly to state to their Lordships the reasons which induced him to refuse to take any part with reference to it. Nothing could be more delicate than any interference of either House of Parliament, or any Member of either House, with respect to any matter or thing which belonged purely to the domestic policy of any foreign country, or belonging to the administration of the Municipal Law of that country; and he thought it no reason for breaking through that rule, that we considered a law to be improper to be enacted, or that it was in its nature or character revolting to our feelings. That would form no reason for our interference, because we had nothing to do with any domestic law, but our own law and its administration; and we had no power to interfere, nor had we had any mission to interfere with any law of whatever character in any foreign country, whilst that foreign country confined itself to its own law and the administration of that law. He held that rule to be of so sacred a principle, that he had refused to take any step with respect to the subject to which he now adverted, although it had been of late frequently brought under his notice, and although it was a case which greatly interested his feelings. A man had been condemned to death in the Criminal Court of Louisiana, for abetting the escape of a slave, and the sentence had been passed upon that man by the learned Judge in every respect as if the man had committed a murder—with the same appropriateness of language to the solemnity of the occasion—with the same lecture upon the enormity of his crime—the same admonition to the unfortunate criminal to make a proper use of the interval that would elapse before he died upon the gallows to make his peace with an offended God—with the same accustomed reference to the
492
sacred truths of religion, as if the man so sentenced had impiously and irreligiously committed a cruel and barbarous murder—that was the case to which his attention had been so frequently attracted, and his answer was, that he had no authority to interfere, or call on the Government of this country to interfere with the laws of other nations. He was bound to suppose that the American law had been duly considered—he was bound to suppose that the American, or he should say the law of Louisiana, had been justly administered—he was hound to suppose that it was under such a just administration of the law of his own country that a criminal ad been sentenced to lose his life, and he had no right to impeach the judge's construction of the law, or his ignorance of it, or to accuse him of any mal-administration of the law, or any perversion of it in condemning the man to die for aiding in the escape of a slave—that was the law of Louisiana—that was not the law of England. God forbid! but when he said that he had no right to say one word against the law or those who administered it in Louisiana, he might humbly, however, and respectfully towards the legislature of Louisiana, express his fervent hope that advantage would be taken of the long interval between the time of passing his sentence and the 26th of April, which was the time appointed for carrying it into execution—that advantage would be taken of that period for the sacred purpose of extending mercy to that criminal; for he spoke of him as a criminal because the laws of his country had so dealt with him; but he hoped and trusted that the humane and merciful consideration of the government of Louisiana would be extended to that unfortunate individual. With these observations he would quit this painful subject, and he trusted he should be considered as having completely vindicated himself for having refused to interfere in the way he had been urged.

BOARD OF CHARITABLE BEQUESTS—SYSTEM OF NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND).
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, he rose for the purpose of presenting the petition of which he had given notice, and wished to call the attention of their Lordships to the statements which it contained, and the important nature of the subject. It was a petition from John and Elizabeth

493
Ryan, who were the teachers of the Parochial School at Ballysax, in the County of Kildare. The Petitioners stated that for the last twelve months they had not received the annual interest on a sum of 200 l. left by a former Rector of the parish, the Rev. Mr. Tew, it having been unjustly stopped for the last seventeen months by the Board of Charitable Bequests in Ireland, in consequence of the introduction of the National System of Education into the School. The importance of the subject was not however to be considered as confined to the interests of the petitioners themselves, or the alleged injustice they suffered in consequence of the stoppage of a portion of what they considered to be a fair reward for their services. They lived in a remote district, and they were individuals who were unknown and obscure, and whose income from their occupation amounted to about 40 l. a year; but to those who were
"Passing rich on forty pounds a year,"
the stopping of the interest of the sum of 200 l. small as it might appear, was of much importance. It was not, however, as regarded the interests of those individuals alone that he brought forward the subject, but in consequence of the course which the Board of Charitable Bequests in Ireland adopted, in order that they might see how far that conduct was likely to gain credit for sincerity on the part of those who professed to support the System of National Education in Ireland. The rev, gentleman, the Rector of the parish in which the school is situated, when he found that the payment of the interest of the legacy to which he alluded was stopped, appealed to the authorities on the subject, and stated that unless it was paid he would bring the subject before Parliament; and the prayer of the petitioners on this occasion was, that their Lordships would appoint a Committee to inquire into the constitution of the Board of Charitable Bequests. They complained that the interest of the legacy was withheld because the System of National Education in Ireland had been introduced into the school, and. they prayed an inquiry into the constitution of the Board. He (the Marquess of Normanby) would make no statements which be could not prove; and if Government did not, after his statement, direct an inquiry into the subject, he would after Easter move for a Committee to institute that inquiry. In the year 1764 a Committee of the House of
494
Lords took upon themselves the examination and control of Charitable Bequests and Donations in Ireland, and they instituted prosecutions with a view to the restoration of sums which had been misappropriated. Just previous to the Union it occurred to the Irish Parliament that something should be done with reference to these trusts, as this Committee would no longer exist, and one of the last Acts of that Parliament was to establish a Board of Charitable Bequests and Donations. That Board was to be composed of the Lord Chancellor, the Judges of the Prerogative Court, of all the Common Law Judges in Ireland, of all the Bishops, and of the nineteen Rectors of the different parishes in Dublin. But its exclusively Protestant character gave rise to many complaints on the part of the Roman Catholics. In 1829, under the Administration of the Duke of Wellington, a Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to consider this subject, and much important evidence as to the effect of the Protestant constitution of the Board on the Roman Catholics was given by Mr. O'Connell, among others. That hon. and learned Gentleman mentioned that in the course of his professional practice he had been several times consulted by persons who felt themselves aggrieved by, and distrustful of, this Board in consequence of the circumstance referred to, and that he had every reason to believe that considerable sums had been left away from schools which would have been bequeathed by Roman Catholics for the beneficial effect of education, had they felt more confidence in this Board. The impression made upon the Commit tee by this and similar evidence was such that it presented a Report recommending that the laws regulating the Administration of Charitable Trusts in Ireland should be revised. Nothing, however, was done until 1838, when the hon. Member for Waterford brought in a Bill to alter the constitution of the Board, which Bill passed through most of its stages in the other House, but did not reach the Upper House, in consequence, probably, of the state of public business, the attention of Parliament being then greatly occupied with the Municipal Reform Bill, which was then in the third year of its Parliamentary struggle. The facts of the case now before their Lordships, were simply these. The Rev. Mr. Tew, formerly Rector of Ballysax, by his will, left to the then Rector of Ballysax, and

495
his successors, the stun of 200 l., in the following terms:—
"I leave and bequeath to the Minister of the parish of Ballysax, in the diocese and county of Kildare, and to his successors, Ministers of the said parish, for ever, the sum of 200 l. sterling, in trust, nevertheless and to the intent, that the said sum, when paid, shall be vested and laid out by him in the purchase of such Government Stock, as shall at that time be deemed the most eligible and advantageous, and shall yield and bear the highest rate of interest payable at the Bank of Ireland, which interest only it is my will shall be applied by him and his successors, Ministers of the said parish, towards the establishment and support of a Parochial School therein, and to the payment of the salary or salaries of a Protestant schoolmaster and schoolmistress for instructing the children of the poor inhabitants of the said parish, to be nominated and appointed by him and his successors, and the sole management of the said School to be vested in them, or their licensed Curates assistant, on the express condition, however, that they shall at every annual visitation of the Lord Bishop of Kildare, present a report in writing of the state of the said Parochial School of Ballysax, containing an account of the number and names of the children educating therein, and of the receipts and disbursements thereof for the past year, together with any other particulars relating to the same, which may be considered either necessary or interesting."
By a codicil to his will, the testator says:—
"With respect to that part of the foregoing will, which vests the sole management of the Parochial School of Ballysax in the Minister of the parish, I mean thereby, that the sole management of the pecuniary concerns of the said School, and the nomination and appointment of the schoolmaster and schoolmistress should be vested in them; but it is not my intention to preclude such benevolent persons as subscribe towards the support of these schools, from visiting them, or forming such rules and regulations as they may consider conducive to their interest and prosperity, provided they are concurred in and fully approved of before they are adopted by the Minister of said parish."
He (Lord Normanby) was well acquainted with the parish in question, having spent much of his leisure time there when he held office in Ireland. At that time he frequented the place it was supposed to contain about 3,000 inhabitants, but by the more recent Population Returns it appeared that the number was tinder 1,300, of whom only 40 were Protestants, and these mostly of the upper class. The present Rector of the parish, Mr. Bermingham, had exerted himself in a praiseworthy
496
manner to make the School what it was at present. The former state of the parish was this—there was a schoolmaster who received the interest of the gift, but there was no school or scholars. At the present period, the school contained seventy Roman Catholic boys and girls, and four Protestant children, all of them educated according to the system of the National Board, to which the parents of the Protestant children made no sort of objection; but, on the contrary expressed themselves as perfectly satisfied. Such was the state of the parish of Ballysax. Now, with respect to the Rev. Mr. Bermingham, he was originally Curate of St. Bride's, the laborious duties of which he always discharged in the most exemplary manner. That gentleman had been appointed Chaplain to the Lord Lieutenant, by the Marquess of Wellesley; he had been continued as Chaplain by his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Haddington) and by himself. Under the present Ministry the appointment to the chaplaincy had been, he was bound to say, of a more exclusively political character, and Mr. Bermingham had been no longer continued Chaplain. Mr. Bermingham had been appointed by him (Lord Normanby) to the Rectory of Ballysax, and had carried out in this School the system of the National Board of Education, which had been attended with the utmost success, and met with no impediment until the spring of last year, when, in reply to a letter wherein upon their application he communicated to the Board of Charitable Bequests, a lease of some lands which had been granted by the proprietors of the Ballysax estates, for the erection of a School-room, he received from the Bishop the following letter:—
"Dublin Castle, April 7, 1843.
"Sir—I have had the honour of laying before the Board of Charitable Donations and Bequests the lease of the land granted by the proprietors of the Ballysax estate for the erection of a School-house thereon, together with your letter by which the lease was accompanied.
"And I have been ordered to communicate to you that it is the opinion of the Board that the trusts of the will of the Rev. Wm. Tew have not been properly fulfilled, inasmuch as the School has not been conducted as a Protestant Parochial School, and the express condition imposed by the testator, that the Minister shall at every annual visitation of the Lord Bishop of Kildare, present a report in writing of the state of the said Protestant School, has not been complied with; and, in conclusion, I am to intimate to you that so long as this

497
state of things remains, the interest in the fund produced by Mr. Tees's bequest will not be paid.
"I am, Sir, &c.,
"WM. MATTHEWS, Secretary."
Now, the Resolution wherein the Board here, for the first time, took upon itself to interfere with this system in that instance of this School, was moved and supported by two personages who had just been admitted members of the Board, ex officio, as being Judges, then newly appointed by the present Government, namely, Mr. Baron Lefroy and Mr. Justice Jackson, men notorious for violent party feelings, who took a strong part in the meeting at the Mansion House in 1837—men looked upon as vehement political agitators. The presence of these persons—these ultra-Protestant agitators—had thus made itself felt at that Board The resolution, in fact, originated with Mr. Baron Lefroy, and Mr. Justice Jackson, and was passed in spite of a strong opposition; the Archbishop of Dublin and the Chief Baron Brady forming part of the minority. He (Lord Normanby) had the very strongest doubt as to whether the decision of the Board, withholding the payment of the interest, was legal. The terms of the bequest would show that the control was limited to the Minister and Clergyman of the parish; for the terms of the bequest stated that it was to be applicable "in such mode or under such plan of education as shall be ordered by such Minister or his successor." He had already expressed his doubts as to the legality of the act of the Board of Charitable Bequests, for he doubted whether they had any such power to interfere. The Act itself, passed in 1800, 40 Geo. III., cap. 75, sec. 2, Irish Statutes, ran thus:—
"And be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that the said Commissioners, and their successors, by the name aforesaid, may sue, and they are hereby empowered to sue, in every Court in this Kingdom, either of law or equity, for the recovery of every Charitable Donation or Bequest which may or shall be, withheld, concealed, or misapplied; and to apply the same when recovered to charitable and pious uses, according to the intention of the donor or donors; or, in case it be inexpedient, unlawful, or impracticable to apply the same strictly according to the directions and intentions of the donor or donors, then to apply the same to such charitable and pious purposes as they shall judge to be nearest and most conformable to the directions and intentions of the donor or donors; and the said Commissioners are hereby authorized and em-
498
powered to deduct out of all such charitable donations and bequests as they shall recover, all the costs, charges, and expenses which they shall be put to in the suing for, and recovery of the same. The first section recites that a Committee of the House of Lords had superintended the Charities, but that new provisions was rendered necessary by reason of the Union, and then it constitutes the Board and creates a corporation."
Sect. 3. Quorum Clause, Sect. 4. regulates and prescribes certain returns to be made under an Act mentioned in the title of the 3 George III. The above was the substance of the whole Act. The only expression in this Act establishing the Board which could at all seem to leave the matter within the discretion of the Board was the term "inexpedient;" but here was a case where the term could not apply, the donation being carried out in perfect conformity with the will of the testator and the law of the land. The only way in which it could at all be alleged that the will of the testator had been deviated from was this—the will directed that a statement of the condition of the School should be made to the Bishop on each of his annual visitations. Mr. Bermingham, not being aware of this obligation, neglected, in the first two years of his administration to make this statement; but, in all the three last years, having been made acquainted with the condition he had scrupulously fulfilled it; and, at the very time when the Board of Trusts came to the resolution that this condition had not been complied with, it had received the annual statement supplied by the rev. incumbent, indeed it was upon the Table before them at the very time that they passed this resolution. If this had been the cause of dissatisfaction on the part of the Board, how did it happen that not a word had been heard about it in the two years when the omission actually did take place? How happened it that it was reserved for Mr. Baron Lefroy and Mr. Justice Jackson to discover an omission which occurred so long before they had anything to do with the matter, and three years after the omission had been amply supplied? The next stage of the proceedings to which he must advert was the communications that passed between the Rector of Ballysax and the Bishop of the Diocese of Kildare. He had every desire to show respect to a Rev. Prelate, and more especially to one who, like the Bishop of Kildare, had reached his eighty-sixth year; but, at the same time, there were faults which, proceeding from whatever

499
quarter, exhibiting somewhat of the spirit of oppression, ought to be animadverted upon. The letter would tell its own story, arid needed slight comment. It ran thus:
"June 29, 1843.
"Reverend Sir—On Monday, the 26th of June, inst., the Board of Charitable Bequests and Donations met according to appointment, his Grace the Archbishop of Dublin in the chair, and with Judges Burton, Jackson, and Baron Lefroy, some conversation took place, and Baron Lefroy stated the grounds of the former decision, adding some strictures concerning your delegation of your trust, which you will do well to hear from other persons than myself. A motion having been made the Court broke up, by an adjournment sine die. By the judgment of the Court, as it stands, you will and may soon incur die consequences of this, unless you take timely means of restoring the Parochial School to its proper uses. I refer you in this respect to some other person to expound the Penal Statute of Henry VIII., in his 28th year, Statute 13th, no trifling matter you may be assured.—I remain, Your faithful servant,
"CHARLES KILDARE."
"No trifling matter," said the Bishop minaciously. He (Lord Normanby) when in Ireland, had had occasion, from circumstances then engaging much public attention, to pay a good deal of attention to the Statute in question; and, having a perfect recollection that the only section which applied to this particular point was the 9th section, he at once saw that the Bishop had been egregiously misinformed. Those who were acquainted with the Statute would at once call to mind that it was framed with no sort of intention, at that time, of changing the ritual or form of worship; its object was, not to encourage Protestantism, but to promote the spread of the English language. As a proof of this, he need only remind their Lordships, that one section of it commanded the Roman Catholics of Ireland "to tell their beads in the English language." There were other provisions in the same Act against wearing saffron shirts, against the mode of wearing the hair called "glibbs," and against wearing hair on the upper lip; none of these provisions he thought that the Rev. Gentleman in question was likely to violate. He could not conceive, therefore, what connection this respectable but very aged Prelate could have seen between the matter in hand, and "the Penal Statute of Henry VIII., in his twenty-eighth year, Statute 13th," as he quaintly phrased' it. In the course of this letter, it would have been observed,
500
the right Rev. Prelate used the expression, "delegation of your trust." In no respect could this imputation be borne out; in all respects had Mr. Bermingham complied with the provisions of the will. But perhaps, considering the circumstances, this was a mere carelessness of expression—the expression, however, was one which should have been weighed more carefully. He would only read a portion of it, as he did not wish to dwell upon any incautious phrases of the Bishop. The next communication ran thus:—
"July 1st, 1843.
"Reverend Sir—Being desirous of taking the Roman Catholic children of Ballysax parish into the system of our Church Education School as to Religious Instruction, I have opened a negotiation with the parent society in Dublin, and also with our diocesan like society, for providing at my own cost, for one year, a proper master and mistress (the same, if amenable), as already are employed. Provided you resume your proper charge, and rescue the property and place from the hands of the National Board.
"If there were no better system to be had I should not oppose the National Board. So far as they go I am favourable to them. But I can do both with your help; and if you will take prudent and bland means to rescue this School; and add it to our Church Education Society, I shall hope to carry this good measure, without any stringent measures.
"I remain, &c.,
"CHARLES KILDARE."
Now, in reference to the expression here, about "rescuing the property and place from the hands of the National Board," Mr. Bermingham distinctly declared that the National Board had no more property in the school than any other of the subscribers, or any more share in the management than was pursuant with that part of the will, which permitted donors, by themselves or their representatives, to act as visitors, and to propose regulations for the management of the School, subject to the approval and concurrence of the incumbent. He had understood that threats had been conveyed to Mr. Bermingham, to the effect that if he proceeded in this way, to bring the case before Parliament, it was very possible that the temporary license for non-residence, which had been obtained on account of the ill health of his wife, the mother of seven children, would be withdrawn by his diocesan; but the character of the right Rev. Prelate rendered it impossible to suppose that he would consent to any such monstrous step. This case of Ballysax presented an epitome of the state

501
of Ireland. Nothing had happened here which might not be predicated of five-sixths of the parishes of that Kingdom. Here was presented a striking instance of the struggle going on there between two principles of Government, or he ought rather to say the struggle between the principle of governing with the concurrence and good will of the great mass of the population; and the other, the principle by which the country can only be held and occupied without the golden link of the affections of the people. The system carried out by Mr. Bermingham was one which tended to the diffusion of Christian knowledge, to the establishment of Christian practice, to the reciprocation of Christian good will; under it preeminently in this instance the priest and the clergyman were seen acting in cordial concurrence, the former not seeking to intrude himself into the School, but co-operating to his utmost in his own sphere. That system, let him remind their Lordships, was not the creation of the late Government, whom enemies had falsely accused of being indifferent on the subject of religion; it was not the work either of Lord Stanley, that prominent champion of the Church: it dated from the 14th report of the Education Commissioners, a report bearing the signature of the late Primate of Ireland, the Archbishop of Cashel, and drawn up by Mr. Leslie Foster, whom no one could accuse of lukewarmness to the cause of Protestantism. It happened most unfortunately, that there was now a Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whose spirit in the matter might be judged not only from all his clerical appointments, but from the warm acknowledgments which he had made in answer to an address from a hot Protestant body, which contained sentiments most uncharitable, most obnoxious to the Roman Catholics: while the Irish Secretary, however good his intentions, seemed altogether disposed to let, "I dare not wait upon I would." Mr. Bermingham, under the circumstances thus stated, had thought it necessary to address a letter to Lord Eliot explaining the whole matter. The answer he received ran thus:—
" Irish Office, July 25, 1843.
"Sir—I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th instant.
"I must acquaint you that the Government has no power to take cognizance of a decision of the Board of Charitable Bequests—a Board of which the Lord Chancellor and the Judges are members, The only appeal from it is to a Court of Equity.
I would, however, suggest that you should lay a statement of the case before the Lord Chancellor who might induce the Board to reconsider it.
"I have the honour to be, Sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"ELIOT."
Acting upon the suggestion of his Lordship, Mr. Bermingham then addressed a letter to the Lord Chancellor, who made the following reply:—
"Boyle Farm, August 3, 1813.
"Sir—I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, with its inclosure. It is not within my province to review the decisions of the Board of Charitable Bequests, of which I am a member; and it would not be proper for me to give an opinion upon any act of theirs. Your point, I observe, is a want of jurisdiction. If you desire to bring this again before the Board, I will willingly attend when the case is heard, and give my best attention to it. This is all I can undertake to do. You will of course exercise your own discretion in appealing to Parliament. There can be no meeting of the Board until the Judges return to Dublin after the vacation.
"I have the honour to be, Sir,
"Your very obedient servant,
"EDWARD B. SUGDEN."
"The Rev. J. A. Bermingham."
Here, then, had applications been made to the two officers of the Crown, to whom application was most fitly to he made, and from that time to this no satisfaction whatever had been obtained from this most unjust, and as he felt convinced, altogether illegal proceeding on the part of the Board of Charitable Trusts. The reverend complainant, then, surely could not be charged with having prematurely called the attention of Parliament to this subject, when, after so long a time, nothing had been done to redress those poor people, or to restore to them that annual stipend to which they were entitled. To resist the hostile influences that were constantly at work in Ireland—to thwart the professed intentions of the Government here—required a firm hand and a strong will. And he was sure that at this moment, when they could induce the Roman Catholic priesthood to go hand in hand with the Protestant clergyman of that system of Education by which Christian feeling and Christian precepts could be diffused amongst the people of that country by discouraging those attempts to interfere with that system, the Government would do a great deal to put the people of that country in that state in which they should desire to see them, and an union of opinions on such subjects

503
amongst such a population was the most likely way to confirm their union with the English nation. He was convinced, that after the statement which he had made, the attention of the Government would be drawn to the subject, and that they would take steps to check in time such injudicious attempts to interfere with the system of National Education in Ireland, which he was satisfied that both the Government and the Legislature desired to see carried out in a fair and impartial spirit. He was afraid that he had taken up much more of the time of the House than it was usual to occupy in the presentation of petitions; but the peculiar circumstances of the case must plead his excuse. He left the matter with confidence to the consideration of the Government, knowing as he did that he had said nothing which he was not able to prove. If he found that the Government, after a certain period had elapsed, did not interfere, he should consider it to be his duty to call upon the House to appoint a Committee to inquire into the subject.
The Duke of Wellingtonobserved that the noble Marquess had truly said, that he had commented at considerable length on the contents of this petition, which he on Friday gave notice that he should present to the House. As was his duty, he (the Duke of Wellington) had taken great pains, since the noble Marquess had given notice of his intention to present this petition, to endeavour to obtain every information on the subject matter of this petition, and he had taken away a copy of the notice given by the noble Lord, so as to prevent delay in his inquiries; but he confessed that he had not been able to obtain much information on the subject; he, therefore, could only give a very short explanation on the present occasion. He rose now merely to state that he had seen a letter from Mr. Bermingham, from which it appeared that the statement of the noble Marquess was nearly accurate as to the facts which he had stated. It appeared that the rev. Gentleman in question became entitled to the administration of certain charitable funds for the education of the poorer children in the parish, in conformity with the bequest of a testator, and he established in his parish, in conformity as he conceived with the instructions of the bequest, a school on the National System of Education; and upon the subject coming under the notice of the Board of Charitable Bequests in
504
Ireland, that body, which had the power, thought proper not to approve of the establishment of this school, thinking that it was not established according to the will of the testator. In consequence of this rev. Gentleman being directed by this Board to apply the funds which were at his disposal in a manner more in conformity with the intentions of the testator, he wrote to the noble Lord the Secretary of the Government in Ireland. Upon this subject, it appeared to him, that he had only done that which he ought to have done when it came under his consideration. He informed the party that if he considered himself aggrieved, he ought to have recourse to a Court of Equity; that there was no other course that could be adopted, and that a Court of Equity alone had control over the Board of Charitable Bequests, which was formed of the Lord Chancellor, the Bishops and Judges, and other eminent persons in Ireland. In the first place, however, he recommended this rev. Gentleman to apply to the Lord Chancellor, who was a member of this Board, to bring the subject under the re-consideration of the Board, and this was stated in the letter which was read by the noble Marquess. The party accordingly applied privately to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and received a reply, dated from this country; and under these circumstances the noble Marquess chose to throw out a taunt against the Lord Chancellor for being absent from Ireland during the vacation in his Court. It should be remembered that this rev. Gentleman did not apply to the Lord Chancellor as the head of the Court of Equity, but applied to him in his private capacity, as a member of the Board of Charitable Bequests, and got an answer accordingly. He (the Duke of Wellington) knew nothing more of the case, but he was informed that the charge against the rev. Gentleman was, that he had not supported such a school with the receipts of this bequest, as it was considered by the Board that he ought to have done, until the bishop of the diocese had ordered him to do so. It was all along said that it arose from ignorance, and not from intention, that the rev. Gentleman had supported an improper school in the first instance, and it was only when he was subsequently better informed on the subject that he made these changes which he was called upon to make. With respect to the decision of the Board of

505
Charitable Bequests, and as to the letter of the Bishop of Kildare, and as to all the other matters which the noble Marquess had thought proper to bring forward on this subject, he had no knowledge whatever; but he contended that the noble Lord, the Secretary of the Irish Government, had done his duty in pointing out to this Gentleman the course which he should take to obtain redress for the alleged grievances which he had stated, and for the complaints which he had made. If this Gentleman did not choose, for some reasons of his own, to follow the advice of his noble Friend, he had no ground of complaint, for it was for him to judge of his own conduct. He did not, however, conceive that while this course was open to that Gentleman, the noble Marquess was justified in calling for a Committee of the House to enquire into a matter of this kind; but he could assure the noble Marquess that if he could furnish him with a copy of this petition, he would take care that the attention of her Majesty's Government should be called to the subject, but the whole matter would be properly investigated if this Gentleman would only adopt the suggestion offered to him by the noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, and apply to a Court of Equity for a remedy.
Lord Cottenhamsaid, that if the rev. Petitioner would take his advice, he would not apply to a Court of Equity on the subject. He had had some experience of Courts of Equity in charitable cases, and he would at once declare that the rev. Gentleman would best consult his own interests by not taking any such step. There were also peculiar circumstances in connection with this case which should make parties extremely cautious before they resorted to a Court of Equity; for it appeared by the Act constituting this Board of Charitable Bequests that the Commissioners were authorised by Parliament to pay all charges of any suit in equity in which they might be engaged out of the funds of the charity involved in the case. Now, in this case, where the amount of the bequest was small, all the money would be gone before any proceedings could be brought forward in a Court of Equity, and when it was, the rev. Gentleman might find that he would have to pay his own costs. The question also was, whether, under the Clause of the Act empowering the Commissioners to defray
506
the charges of suits of equity, that it did not give the enlarged power which was supposed, for it had to determine as to the inexpediency of proceeding in the case or not. The Clause in the Irish Statute of the 40th Geo. III., c. 75, s. 2., was—
"And be it enacted by the authority aforesaid that the said Commissioners and their successors, by the reason aforesaid, may sue, and they are hereby empowered to sue in any Court in this Kingdom, either of Law or Equity, for the recovery of any charitable donation or bequest which may or shall be withheld, concealed, or misapplied, and to apply the same, when recovered, to charitable and pious uses, according to the instruction of the donor or donors: or in case it be inexpedient, unlawful, or impracticable, to apply the same strictly according to the directions and instructions of the donor or donors, then to apply the same to such charitable and pious purposes, as they shall judge to be nearest and most conformable to the directions and instructions of the donor or donors, and the said Commissioners are hereby authorised and empowered to deduct, out of all such charitable donations and bequests as they shall receive, all the costs, charges, and expences which they shall be put to in the suing for, and recovery of the same."
It was obvious that the Commissioners had a very despotic power under this Act, and greater, probably, than Parliament would be disposed to confer in the present day; and it was a question whether, under such a case as the present, a Court of Equity or any other jurisdiction could interfere. If it should appear to some parties, that there had been a misapplication of charitable funds, and if an Equity suit were instituted, it would be a matter of difficulty, as he read the clause, to get over the word "inexpediency," with respect to which such a large discretionary power was left with the Commissioners. It was well known, that at present, by a form of suit in equity, termed ces pres, when it appeared that the instructions of a donor could not be carried into strict effect, that a power was given to a Court of Equity to enlarge the authority or province of the trustees; but, as to the "inexpediency" or not of applying the funds of a charity, strictly according to the directions and instructions of a donor, he did not think that it was a power that should be entrusted to this Board of Commissioners. Such a power given by this clause would be equivalent to allowing the Board of Commissioners to defeat the object of the donors of cha-

507
bequests merely on the ground of their determining as to the expediency or inexpediency of applying charitable funds according to the intentions or directions of the donor. It was obvious under this clause the Commissioners could apply the funds of a charity to purposes very different from the intention of the donor. He was sure, that as the attention of the House was here called to this subject, it would consider whether such a power should be entrusted to any Board of Commissioners. After all, he was anxious to caution this Gentleman to well consider the consequences that would ensue before he went into a Court of Equity on this subject, for it was clear that all the funds of this charity would be lost before any advance could be made in the suit. He hoped that Her Majesty's Government would take into its consideration the object and intention of this clause, and determine whether it was not of such an extent, and gave such powers, as ought not to be allowed to stand on the statute book any longer, and which affected not only this but many other cases.
The Lord Chancellorwas anxious to remind his noble and learned Friend, that the clause in the Act of Parliament to which he referred, was in an Act of the Irish Parliament of 1800, and that it was not an enactment of the Imperial Legislature. He agreed with his noble Friend, that it would be hopeless, in a case like the present, to resort to a Court of Equity, for it appeared that the annual funds of the charity amounted to only 7l. 10 s. a-year, and such a fund would, long before a decision could be obtained, be exhausted. His noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland, had truly stated the Government had no power in this case, but that the jurisdiction rested in a Court of Equity, but he recommended the petitioner to apply to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, as a member of the Board of Commissioners. Mr. Bermingham accordingly did apply to the Lord Chancellor, who, in his reply, did not say this was a proper case to bring before a Court of Equity, but he told the petitioner to bring the subject again under the consideration of the Board of Commissioners, and he added that he should be at Dublin within a short time, and if the matter was brought forward he would take care to attend the meeting of the Board, and that the matter should be examined into. He believed that the subject
508
had not again been brought before the Board, but if it was, he would venture to say, that his right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor of Ireland would pay every attention to it. For his own part, he felt that it would be hopeless to bring the matter before a Court of Equity, not only on the ground of the expense necessarily attending it, but also, as some doubts existed as to the powers given to the Commissioners by the clause of the Act referred to by his noble and learned Friend.
The Duke of Wellingtonthought he had better read an extract from the letter of his noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland to the petitioner in this case, as that would prevent any misunderstanding.
"I must acquaint you that Government has no power to take cognizance of a decision of the Board of Charitable Bequests, a Board of which the Lord Chancellor and the Judges are members. The only appeal from it is to a Court of Equity. I would, however, suggest that you should lay a statement of the case before the Lord Chancellor, who might induce the Board to re-consider it."
Such was the reply of the noble Lord, he Secretary for Ireland, to this Gentleman, and he thought that it was a most a satisfactory one.
The Marquess of Normanbyobserved, that he had not found fault with the note read by the noble Duke; and Mr. Bermingham had followed the course which was suggested by that noble Lord, and tad applied to the Lord Chancellor, and, subsequently to the communication which he had received frem the Lord Chancellor, Mr. Bermingham had made another application, and he never could get any information as to when here was to be a meeting of the Board.
Lord Wharncliffewished to know whether Mr. Bermingham had renewed his application to the Lord Chancellor?
The Marquess of Normanbywas not ware whether he had or had not.
The Lord Chancellorremarked that it as essential that the House should know whether the petitioner had, since his communication with the Lord Chancellor, lade any further application to the Board of Commissioners, and if he had what had en the result.
The Marquess of Normanbyunderstood that the petitioner had been informed that the Commissioners had had no further meeting, and that it was not known when there would be a meeting of the board.
Lord Campbellsaid, that if the petitioner applied to a Court of Equity, he must do so with very little hope of success if he reflected on the constitution of the Board, and on the powers it possessed to resist his application. It should be recollected that the resolution of the Board respecting this Charity had been adopted on grave authority, and at the instigation of Mr. Justice Jackson, who made the Motion, and of Mr. Baron Lefroy, who seconded it. Since the proposition had been adopted on such authority, was it clear that even on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor the decision of the Board would be revised? With respect to his countryman, the Bishop of Kildare, be would venture to declare that he was a man of the greatest good nature, and that he would not be guilty of any violence or even harshness in the execution of what he conceived to be his duty; and even in this case he was satisfied that the right Rev. Prelate believed that he was exercising a sound discretion, and that Mr. Justice Jackson, and Mr. Baron Lefroy would not give an erroneous decision on the subject. One of the means which the Government had stated that it meant to resort to for the purpose of pacifying Ireland was by increasing the grant for National Education, and he was satisfied that a case of this kind would do more injury to the progress of the System of National Education in Ireland than would be counterbalanced by any public grant which they could propose for the purpose of carrying it out.
The Marquess of Normanbyhad just been informed that the gentleman did apply to the Board since he received a communication from the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and that he had not received any satisfactory answer. With respect to the resolution of the Board of Commissioners on which these proceedings were founded, he was informed that he was mistaken when he said that it was proposed and seconded by the two learned Judges who had been named, but it was drawn up by them.
The Bishop of Exeterwould not attempt to dwell on the matters of fact of this case, which had been alluded to by the noble Marquess and the noble and learned Lord, nor would he then go into the consideration of the propriety of the encouragement which the Government was giving to what was called the National
510
System of Education in Ireland, for this was not the proper time to do so; but there seemed to him to have been a very singular omission during the present discussion, of the consideration of an important principle involved in the case. The two noble and learned Lords opposite had objected to the constitution of the Board of Commissioners, without looking to one of the most important points for consideration connected with the Act relating to property left in trust for purposes of Education, and he should take the liberty of drawing their Lordships' attention to it. He believed that the facts of this case were shortly these—that a testator left a certain amount of income to be devoted for purposes of education in the parish in which he resided, and that he left the distribution of this fund to the discretion of the Rector of the parish for the time being. He then put it to the noble and learned Lords, whether any person who was appointed by will to administer a trust, and who was admissible to that trust only as Rector of the parish, in which capacity it was his bounden duty, and he was intrusted with the solemn obligation of promoting true religion, would be in any case justified, in the performance of the duties of such trust in dealing with those funds otherwise than according to the terms of the trust which was confided to him, in converting a Parochial into a National School? Could it be said that, in the course which this Gentleman had taken, he was advancing the interests of that religion which he professed, and that he was consistently administrating this fund in his parish in conformity with the duties of his station? The bequest was manifestly intrusted to him for the purposes of Education according to the principles of the true religion, and, therefore, he was not justified in doing what he had done, and what was afterwards undone, and properly by the Board of Charitable Bequests. He clearly had not administered the fund in the way intended by the donor, as he was bound to have done, because he had not given the children attending the school the description of religious education designed for them by the founder, and, although as Rector of the parish he had a discretion, yet that discretion was only to be exercised under legal control. He put it to the noble and learned Lords to say whether, under such circumstances, the Rector of this parish could

511
deal with the bequest otherwise than in educating the children attending the school according to the religion of that Church to which he belonged; and if they could not, and he believed they could not, then it was evident that the decision of the Board was right, and that this Rev. Gentleman had been guilty, though unintentionally, of a mal-appropriation of this fund. For his own part he was prepared to rest on the authority of the two learned Judges alluded to, that in this case there had been a misappropriation of the funds of the Charity; he was satisfied that they were right in the decision which they had given, and he was gratified that they had so given it. He firmly believed that the law of the land was, that funds so bequeathed, if left to the trust of the Rector, or other ecclesiastical authority in the parish, must be expended for the purposes of education in the Protestant religion; but could it be said that, where money was expended on what was called the National System of Education, that it could be said to be expended in connection with the Protestant religion? He was sure it was not so. The noble Marquess smiled, but he (the Bishop of Exeter), could assure him that he would rather attend to his words than his smiles. He would venture to challenge the noble Lord to get up in his place and say that money so laid out in the National System of Education was expended in connection with the religion of the Church of England and Ireland. If it was not, it was vain to allow such a state of things to continue. It should be in the recollection of the House that the National System of Education did not profess to be in connection with the Protestant religion, but it was a system which had been adopted and was administered on the special ground of deference to the feelings and prejudices of the Roman Catholics, and against the feelings and wishes of the members of the Established Church. He, therefore, considered that this was a grave case of misappropriation of the funds of a charity, and he rejoiced that the two learned Judges who had been alluded to had vindicated the law, and had pursued a course calculated to advance principles which he believed to be correct.
Lord Monteaglehoped most sincerely that such advice, resting on such authority, would not be adopted by the Protestant Clergy of the Established Church
512
in Ireland. If the law was of the character which was laid down by the right rev. Prelate, it would appear that a clergyman could not accept a charitable trust for the purposes of education, unless he was to carry out that trust in connection with the peculiar principles of the Church of England. He believed that the greatest good might be anticipated from the admixture of Protestants and Catholics in the national schools in Ireland, and the whole object of education would be frustrated and destroyed if they endeavoured to act upon the principles and suggestions laid down by the right rev. Prelate. The right rev. Prelate had asked whether in any respects the National System of Education could be called a Protestant education? Now, in contradistinction to this, he would refer to the highest authorities of the Church, from whom this System had emanated. Among the names of the eminent men who had signed the Report of the Commissioners of Education in Ireland, on which this National System of Education was founded, he found the names of the Lord Primate of Ireland, the Archbishop of Cashel, the Bishop of Killaloe, the Bishop of Cloyne, and several other dignitaries of the Church, as well as the name of Mr. Leslie Foster, and it was not likely that it would have received their support if it had not been Protestant. Such, then, was the System which the right rev. Prelate felt himself called upon to stigmatise, and to which he said that no Protestant Clergyman should lend a helping hand. ["No, no!"] The right rev. Prelate went to the extent of stating that no Protestant Clergyman should take upon himself the execution of a charitable trust unless the funds to be administered were applied to education exclusively Protestant. He (Lord Monteagle) was rejoiced to find that the Government had promised to inquire into the present case, and he trusted that the effect of such inquiry would be to exclude from the administration of charities all who would act in the spirit suggested by the right rev. Prelate. As was stated by his noble Friend there were seventy Roman Catholics and four Protestant children in this school, and by the principle adopted by the Board, and so strongly approved of by the right rev. Prelate, the whole of the Roman Catholic children would be expelled from the school. Previous to the appointment of Mr. Bermingham to this parish, an attempt

513
was made to administer this charitable fund for the school in the spirit suggested by the Board of Commissioners and the Bishop of Kildare, and the effect had been to drive nearly all the children from the school, and to leave them to run wild on the Curragh of Kildare. He was glad that the case was one which would be taken into practical consideration by Her Majesty's Government, for he was satisfied that it could only lead to one result, namely, directing attention not only to this case, but to the whole of the law relative to charitable bequests in Ireland. A Committee of the other House, of which Lord Francis Egerton was chairman, and of which he (Lord Monteagle) was a Member, so far back as 1829, recommended that there should be a reconstruction of the Board of Charitable Bequests in Ireland, but it appeared that nothing had yet been done on the subject. If it were necessary for the Government to make any alteration in the law with respect to charitable bequests in the administration of these charities, he thought the noble Lords themselves would see that the Committee was not very wrong originally; but the necessity was still more stringent now to amend the law. If they wished to make the law practical, and not to leave it a dead letter, they would not allow the administration of all the charities of the country to remain in the Board of Charitable Bequests, which consisted of a variety of persons having other and more important and conflicting duties. He had a great respect for the Judges who formed a part of that Board, but their judicial duties must prevent their attending to those which belonged to the Board. But, passing by the Judges and Bishops, they had the nineteen Clergymen who were Rectors of the parishes in Dublin, and there was, in fact, a Board too large for late had done hint the honour of referring the purposes of responsibility, and too to him, he would state his view of the small for the purposes of deliberation. He matter, but he would not be bound to any hoped to see a Bill that would meet the opinion he gave, without time for further practical objection stated by his noble and consideration. The words of this Bequest learned Friend with respect to the word were, that a Parochial School should be "expedient," and put the charitable bequests of that country on a better footing.
The Bishop of Exetersaid, that the noble Lord had misrepresented what he had said. He stated that he did not mean to go into the question of the policy of the Measure of National Education, so called, in Ireland. He did not say that any clergyman who gave himself to it would do
514
wrong; but this he said, and upon this he rested the whole of his address to their Lordships, that the law of the land required when a bequest was made—and be it remembered, this bequest was made before this National Education scheme entered into the brain of any one—that the education to be conducted by that bequest should be according to the principles of the Established Church. There was a statement of a matter of fact upon which he would be glad to be set right. He meant with respect to that which the noble Marquess supposed to be the original of this scheme of National Education—namely, the fourteenth report of the year 1812, subscribed to which were the signatures of the Lord Primate of that day, and the Archdeacon of Ferns, who lived long enough to express his disapproval of this system of National Education, which was sufficient proof that the scheme was not that propounded in 1812. The Commissioners of 1812 never contemplated that the National Schools should supersede the Parochial Schools, they recommended that the Protestant Schools should be increased in their efficiency, and that these National Schools should be merely supplementary. He maintained that the Parochial Schools were to be exclusively Protestant. As to the law to which he had referred, he might be wrong. He had appealed to the noble and learned Lords, and he would rather have been answered by one of them than by the noble Baron. One of those noble Lords (Lord Cottenham) had left the House while the noble Baron was speaking, but there was one still sitting opposite, whose talents and learning gave weight to his opinions.
Lord Campbellrose amidst loud laughter, and said, that as the right Rev. Prelate had done him the honour of referring to him, he would state his view of the matter, but he would not be bound to any opinion he gave, without time for further consideration. The words of this Bequest were, that a Parochial School should be founded, not a Protestant School.
The Bishop of Exeter: With a Protestant schoolmaster.
The Marquess of Landowne: Which a great many of the National Schools have.
Lord Campbellcontinued. There was not the slightest inconsistency in having a Parochial School with a Protestant school-

515
master, to which the children of Roman Catholics should be admitted. It frequently happened that Protestant schoolmasters educated Catholic children; and be should apprehend the testator, who appointed a parochial school, with a Protestant schoolmaster, if he could now look out of his grave, would not think that his bequest was at all contravened, by seventy Roman Catholic children being educated in the parish along with the four Protestant children. The four Protestant children were educated probably well or better than if they were the sole objects of the care of the schoolmaster: but he would repeat, that the will of the testator did not seem to be contravened by children of another persuasion being educated in that School.
The Bishop of Exetersaid, the noble and learned Lord had so adroitly evaded the question, without giving an opinion, that he would put it again. His question was, not whether seventy children could be educated by a Protestant schoolmaster, but whether they should admit seven or seven hundred Papists into it? He asked him to answer his question. He asked him whether it was his opinion as a lawyer, according to the law, that the clergyman of the parish, the rector who was entrusted with the appointment of the Protestant schoolmaster whether that rector was not bound to have the school conducted according to the principles of the Protestant Church, and had nothing to do with the seventy papist children that came there?
Lord Campbellsaid, his noble and learned Friend (Lord Cottenham) having left the House, and he (Lord Campbell) having given his opinion, the greatest authority that now remained was the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, to whom he begged to refer the right Rev. Prelate.
The Bishop of Exetersaid, that at all events his law had not been contradicted. Petition to lie on the Table.
House adjourned.