Sitting of 11 May 1854

MINUTES.
New MEMBER SWORN.—For Flint County, Hon. Thomas Edward Mostyn Lloyd Mostyn.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1o Customs Duties.
2o Gaming-Houses; Manning the Navy; Navy Pay, &c.

DISTRIBUTION OF PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS—QUESTION.
SIR BENJAMIN HALLsaid, he wished to ask the hon. Under Secretary for the Home Department a question with respect to a circumstance which, though not involving a breach of privilege, was fraught with material inconvenience to hon. Members. He believed that there were two modes in which the House and the public might have printed papers laid before them. The one was when papers were printed by order of the House, and then the expense of their publication and their distribution fell under the cognisance of Mr. Speaker. The other was when papers were printed by Her Majesty's command; they were then printed by the Stationery Office, and their printing was wholly out of the control of Mr. Speaker. If the papers were printed by time authority of that House, they were distributed by its officers; but if not, a number of copies were sent down to the library from the Stationery Office, and then distributed to Members. Other parties might, however, obtain such papers before the Members of that House. On the 11th of April a Report from the General Board of Health was presented, and was ordered by Her Majesty to be laid before both Houses. Some days ago that Report appeared in the columns of a morning newspaper; but hon. Members did not receive their copies until some time afterwards. He wished to know how many copies of the Report of the Board of Health were printed; whether the printer delivered out any copies previous to those sent for the use of Members of that House; if so, how many, and by whose authority did that delivery take place?
MR. FITZROYsaid, that early in the year the general authority for printing the

165
usual number of copies of the Report of the General Board of Health for official and parliamentary distribution was sent from the Home Office to the Stationery Office, and on the 10th April two printed copies were sent to the Home Office. One of these was laid on the table of that House, and the other upon the table of the House of Lords. But, between the time of issuing the order for printing the Reports and the time of their distribution, the Board of Health applied to the Home Office for 4,000 copies of the Report. The consent of the Home Secretary having been given, 4,000 copies were sent to the Board of Health, which they distributed themselves. He imagined that one of them had reached the paper, in whose columns the hon. Baronet had read it. He (Mr. Fitzroy) was not responsible for any irregularity that might have taken place in publishing documents intended for the use of Members of both Houses before they had been delivered to them. He could only be responsible for the manner in which the order for publication was given, and that was in the usual form on this occasion. He was not able to answer any questions with reference to the manlier in which the Board of Health had distributed the copies sent to them.
SIR BENJAMIN HALLsaid, he wished to know whether the printing of these 4,000 copies formed part of the expenditure of the Board of Health?
MR. FITZROYsaid, that he apprehended that it would be included in the general charge for printing Parliamentary Papers. He believed that the expense of the printing in connection with the Board of Health amounted to 20,000 l. per annum.

MR. STONOR'S CASE.
MR. SOTHERONthen moved that Mr. G. H. Moore, the Member for Mayo, and one other Member of the House, to be named by the General Committee of Elections, be appointed on the Select Committee in the case of Henry Stonor to examine witnesses, but without the power of voting. When the Committee appointed to investigate this matter met, they found themselves involved in great difficulty with respect to the manner in which they should prosecute the inquiry, because none of the Members of the Committee had any knowledge of the circumstances of the case. The hon. Member for Mayo laid a statement of his case before the Committee, but declined to suggest to them the names
166
of the witnesses to be called, because he considered that by the votes of the House he had no locus standi to act upon or with the Committee. The Committee upon this came to the resolution that it was very desirable that the hon. Member for Mayo should be appointed to serve with them, in order to conduct the case against the parties whose conduct was impugned; and also that another hon. Member, in the confidence of the accused, should be placed on the Committee, in order to watch the proceedings on their behalf. The appointment of such a person they proposed to leave to the General Committee of Elections, in whose selection there could be no doubt that the House would feel every confidence. The course which he now recommended was strictly in accordance with the precedent of the Carlow Election Committee in 1847, when Sir Frederick Pollock and Mr. Serjeant Wilde were appointed by the House to watch the proceedings on behalf of the parties.
MR. FRENCHsaid, he thought it would be highly advisable, before the House agreed to the Motion, that they should know who was to be the other Member. Whoever were appointed, both parties ought to be as nearly as possible equal in ability to discharge the duty required of them. He confessed he was surprised that the hon. Member for Mayo, who had moved the appointment of the Committee, had not been made a Member of it: he thought a slight thereby had been cast on the hon. Member.
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he must deny that the General Committee of Elections, of which he was Chairman, intended to cast any slight upon the hon. Member for Mayo by not nominating him as one of the Members of the Committee. They had done so because they understood that, on referring the nomination to them, the House desired them to select five impartial Members to compose the Committee. If they were now directed to appoint another Member in addition to the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Moore), merely to examine witnesses, but without the power of voting, they would of course act upon quite a different principle, and would conceive they best discharged their duty by asking the hon. Under Secretary for the Colonies to name that Member.
MR. FREDERICK PEELsaid, that he had no objection to offer to that part of the Motion which related to the appointment of the hon. Member for Mayo. With

167
regard to the other part of the Motion, it was the opinion of the Duke of Newcastle that it was quite unnecessary. The noble Duke would himself be able to state what had occurred with regard to the appointment of Mr. Stonor, and he (Mr. Peel) thought that a tribunal consisting of five impartial Gentlemen, Members of that House, would be quite competent to arrive at a correct conclusion without any other person being nominated to the Committee. The noble Duke was, therefore, perfectly willing that the question should be left to their decision.
MR. MILESsaid, that the statement of the hon. Gentleman was highly honourable both to himself and the Duke of Newcastle; but still he thought that, in order to assist the Select Committee to arrive at the truth, each side should nominate a Member to conduct their case.
MR. HUMEsaid, he thought the House should beware lest, by appointing Members in the mode suggested, they should throw a doubt on the capacity of the Members of the Select Committee to conduct an inquiry such as the present. After the statement of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies, which was highly honourable both to himself and the Duke of Newcastle, he considered it would be highly improper to place any nominee Members at all upon the Committee.
MR. BRIGHTsaid, that it was perfectly impossible that five men who were entirely ignorant of the facts of a case should arrive at the truth without the assistance of some one who was acquainted with the matter, and was in a position to bring forward evidence and cross-examine the witnesses. He was glad to hear what had fallen from the hon. Under Secretary for the Colonies, who had, he thought, taken the proper course; but still he was of opinion that in order to have a fair inquiry into this matter, it was necessary that the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Moore), who could bring forward evidence, should be on the Committee.
MR. DISRAELIsaid that the House should not consider merely the feelings of the person who brought the accusation and of the persons who were accused. What would be the result of having only one nominee, the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Moore)? He, being perfect master of his case, would be sure to manage it effectively; and as there was no person to represent the Government, the Committee,
168
who were in a judicial position, and who ought to decide on the facts that were laid before them, would be obliged to fight the battle of the Government in answer to the accuser, who was a member of their own body. Such a result was not at all desirable. It was due to the five Gentlemen who had to perform so difficult and delicate a task, that they should not be placed in this unsatisfactory position. He did not think that they should sanction a sentimental feeling in matters of this kind. Let the accusation that was made in this case be met in the usual manner, and let all means be taken to secure a fair decision, by giving to both sides equal advantages, as far as that could be done. It would, he was sure, be most satisfactory both to the House and the Committee if nominee members were appointed on both sides.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, that Mr. Stoner himself seemed to have been quite forgotten in the course of this conversation. As his character was involved here, he thought some hon. Member ought to be appointed to act upon the Committee on his behalf.
MR. DEEDESsaid, as a Member of the Select Committee, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that the Committee had hitherto most carefully determined to abstain from doing anything that should in any way implicate Mr. Stoner in the inquiry. The Committee considered that they had nothing whatever to do with that gentleman's conduct, but that they were appointed to inquire into, and report upon, an entirely different matter. Mr. Stonor's friends need not, therefore, entertain the slightest fear that anything unjust would be done in regard to Mr. Stonor. The hon. Member fur Manchester (Mr. Bright) had admitted that there should be on the Select Committee a Member whose duty it was to conduct the inquiry, but, then, in that case, there must also be an hon. Member appointed by the other side, because it was perfectly impossible for any judicial Member of the Committee to cross examine the witnesses with the strictness that was desirable, without exposing himself to the imputation of being a partisan of the accused party. To avoid that he hoped that the house would appoint another Member in addition to the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Moore). And while he perfectly recognised the feelings which actuated the hon. Under Secretary for the Colonies, he could not help expressing a hope that he would reconsider his determination, and,

169
by appointing a Member to represent the Government, relieve the Committee from the difficulty in which they would otherwise be placed.
THE CHANCELLOR, OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that from the discussion which had taken place, it seemed evident that the House was unanimously of opinion that the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Moore) should be on the Committee, though without the power of voting; and also that the general sentiment of the House was favourable to the appointment of a nominee Member on the part of Government. His hon. Friend (Mr. Peel) had said that, so far as the feelings of the Duke of Newcastle were concerned, it would be more agreeable to him not to be represented upon the Committee by any person, or to be put before the Committee in the position of a partisan. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), however, wished to state on the part of his hon. Friend that he did not desire to insist upon this in opposition to the wish of the House; and if it was the general opinion that a nominee should be appointed on the part of the Duke of Newcastle, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not offer any opposition to this step, although it would certainly be more agreeable to his Grace if a different course were pursued.
Motion agreed to.
Ordered—"That Mr. Moore, and one other Member of the House to be named by the General Committee of Elections, be appointed to serve on the Select Committee on the case of Henry Stonor to examine witnesses, but without the power of voting."

FAMILIES OF SOLDIERS AND SAILORS— QUESTION.
COLONEL HARCOURTsaid, he begged to ask the right hon. President of the Poor Law Board whether there was anything in the law as it now stood, or in the orders of the Poor Law Commissioners, to prevent the guardians of the poor from giving, if they thought fit, out-door relief to the destitute wife and child of any soldier, sailor, or marine in Her Majesty's service?
MR. BAINESbegged to say, that there was nothing in the law or in the orders of the Commissioners, as they now stood, to prevent any board of guardians from giving out-door relief to the destitute wife or children of any soldier or sailor on service. He would add that, in the opinion of the Poor Law Commissioners, the same prin-
170
ciple was applicable to the destitute wife or children of militiamen.
COLONEL HARCOURTsaid, he would now beg to ask the right hon. Secretary at War whether, six women per company being the number who with their families are by the regulation of the Army permitted to embark with their husbands on foreign service, the Government will object to grant to those of that number who have been prevented from going out on the present occasion by the exigencies of the service, the same allowance of half rations for the women, and quarter rations for the children, which they would have had if they had gone out?
MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, he had to state that there was no instance in which any application had been made to continue the issue of half rations to wives of soldiers who had been prevented under these circumstances from going on foreign service. He was of opinion that the best course would be to leave it to the discretion of the commanding officers to say whether it would be for the advantage of the women in question that they should receive half rations, supposing the application to be made.
MR. FLOYERsaid, he wished to inquire whether the claim to out-door relief would be held good in the case of wives without children, as well as of those who had children?
MR. BAINESsaid the principle applied in both cases.

EXCHEQUER BONDS—QUESTION.
MR. T. BARINGsaid, he begged to ask the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would state the amount subscribed for the Exchequer bonds described as Bond A, payable at par on the 8th May, 1858, up to two o'clock on the 8th instant, distinguishing the amount of subscription payable in money and that payable in Exchequer bills; and whether the deposit of 10 per cent was paid before two o'clock on the 8th instant on the whole amount subscribed, and, if not, what was the extent of the deficiency? Also, whether any subscriptions have been accepted for the Bond B, ending on 8th May, 1859, and for the Bond C, ending on 8th May, 1860; and, if so, to what extent for each description? He would explain in a few words the object of Ids question. The House was aware that the Government, in inviting subscriptions for the late proposed issue of Exchequer bonds, offered to sub-

171
scribers the option between two modes of payment—one in Exchequer bills, the other in money. It was, therefore, very desirable, with a view to determining the financial position of the country, to know to what extent the deposit had been paid up, and likewise what amount had been paid in Exchequer bills and what amount in money. It had likewise been published that the subscription would be received up to two o'clock on Monday, the 8th instant. As the Resolution of the House only ratified what had been subscribed up to that time, it was to be presumed, of course, that nothing further had been issued; but perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would afford them some information on the subject.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he thought that the object of the hon. Gentleman was a perfectly reasonable one, and that he would best promote it, not by endeavouring to answer the question now, but by presenting a return which would give the information in a more exact form than it would now be in his power to supply. It would state what amount was subscribed on Monday, the 8th May, what amount was subsequently subscribed, and what amount had been paid. When he had the honour of addressing the House on Monday night, he was not in possession of accurate information on this point, and he had spoken not quite exactly, having with him a memorandum which had just been put into his hands, and which had been hastily drawn up. The hon. Gentleman would thus see what had taken place with respect to all the points embraced in his question, except as regarded the payment of deposits by a particular hour. He believed that the usual practice was to take the deposit, not to the last hour for receiving tenders, but to the last hour of banking business; and likewise that deposits for small sums were taken on Tuesday morning from parties who had given notice. He thought the hon. Gentleman had not quite correctly stated the effect of the vote of Monday night. He apprehended that the vote of Monday night went to sanction the whole amount of the bonds paid; but that there was a distinct understanding between the hon. Gentleman and himself, that he was not to make any new contract beyond the amount actually agreed upon.
MR. T. BARING: The right hon. Gentleman cannot state generally, then, what the result of the measure is?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERcould state that, if it were of interest to the house to be made acquainted with it. He could not state precisely the amount paid in Exchequer bills; but 1,600,000 l. was the amount tendered for and paid up to the 8th May, and the remaining 400,000 l. had been tendered for since. But he would take care that no contract of any kind should be entered into until the sense of Parliament had been ascertained.

CONVEYANCE OF TROOPS—THE ANDES STEAMER—QUESTION.
MR. FRENCHsaid, that he had given notice of his intention to put a question to the First Lord of the Admiralty with respect to the conveyance of the 1st Royals from Plymouth, in the Andes steamer, to the East. The matter was one with respect to which he thought it advisable that no misrepresentation should be allowed to have currency, and he had therefore deemed it right to put the question at once. The statement which had appeared in the public papers with respect to the removal of the regiment in question was as follows:—In the month of April last the Andes, a steamer not of very considerable size—1,200 tons burden—had been chartered for the conveyance of 500 men to the East; that the number of the regiment upon its arrival at Plymouth had been found to be 800; that there were only 500 berths in the vessel, and that in consequence a telegraphic message had been sent up to the Admiralty to know what course was to be taken under the circumstances of the case. Orders were issued thence, it was stated, to the effect that as much accommodation as possible should be provided for the troops, but that the whole number must embark; that the troops had embarked, and that, in consequence of the orders to which he had referred, 800 men, or something above that number, had been sent out of Plymouth without a moment's delay, and commanded to proceed at once to their destination. It was further stated, that, in consequence of no efficient examination of the vessel having been made before her departure, and the bulkhead not having been covered with iron, that portion of the vessel had taken fire, that a very considerable quantity of gunpowder had been placed on board without the usual precaution of a magazine being established, and that but for the determined gallantry of the privates of the

173
Royals, every person in the vessel would have been blown to pieces. A great quantity of gunpowder, it was also mentioned, had been thrown overboard, and the vessel had arrived in a very damaged condition in Malta. It was added that the naval officer there had reported her as being in that condition, and that, notwithstanding that report, she had been ordered to sail with the troops on board her to the East. Such were tile statements which had appeared in the public papers, and he had thought it but fair to submit them to the notice of the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty at as early an opportunity as possible.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, that, in consequence of the notice which the hon. Member had given him, he had made inquiry that morning with respect to the subject of his question. In reply to that question he had to state that no complaint whatsoever of an official character had reached the Admiralty, nor, as far as he had ascertained, the Horse Guards, with respect to the matter to which it related. It was perfectly true that the Andes had not been originally engaged to convey so large a number of troops to the East as she had actually taken out. He should, however, inform the House, whose authority it was upon which that number had been enlarged. Sir Harry Smith, the general commanding at Devonport, had been consulted with reference to the increase, and he had given it as his opinion that the vessel in question was perfectly qualified to convey the additional number of men. The commander of the regiment himself had also concurred in that opinion, and that being the case the Admiralty had come to the conclusion that they might safely act upon the information they had received from those gentlemen. Thus much he had to state with respect to the numbers. It had also been deemed advisable that some powder should be conveyed in the Andes. It had been so conveyed, and most unfortunately, owing to the long working of the engine and the stormy weather, a fire had taken place on board. The danger of course had been considerable. The conduct of the commander, the officers, and the men had been, as might be expected, most exemplary; no real misfortune bad occurred; the vessel had arrived in safety at Malta, and had been forwarded, without loss of time, with the troops to the East. He might also be permitted to take that
174
opportunity to state that the conduct of Admiral Stewart, at Malta, had been such as to entitle him to the utmost gratitude. His efforts had been most energetic and most successful.

HIGHWAYS (DISTRICT SURVEYORS) BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. FREWEN,in moving the second reading of this Bill, said it was very similar to one which he had introduced in 1849, which had been read a second time without a division, but which had not been proceeded with in consequence of the prorogation of Parliament. By the existing Highways Act, the 5 & 6 Will. 1V c. 50, parishes were empowered to unite themselves into districts to which surveyors might be appointed; but very few parishes had taken advantage of that Act. A measure of this nature was loudly called for, for in the county he had the honour to represent, the roads in many parts were very indifferent. He proposed that district surveyors should be appointed, in any district in which the roads were in a bad condition, by the magistrates, with the consent of the commissioner of taxes for the district. The salaries of the surveyors would be limited to 13 s. 4d. per mile of road, which would give an average of 60 l. a year for each district, towards which each parish would contribute about 4l. The Act would only remain in force until next Session, and if it worked well it might be continued from year to year. He was convinced that the plan he proposed would effect a saving in many districts of as much as 50 per cent, and he therefore hoped the Government would allow the Bill to be read a second time, in order that it might then be referred to a Select Committee.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
MR. MILESsaid, he must oppose the Bill, as he considered it of a very oligarchical character. The hon. Gentleman did not propose to adopt the Welsh or Irish systems, but to form an extraordinary kind of board, consisting of the magistrates and the land tax commissioner of a district, whose powers it would be very difficult to define, but who were to appoint the surveyor, and to determine the amount of his salary, without even asking the opinion of the majority of the ratepayers. He should move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months."
Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
MR. FITZROYsaid, he quite agreed in the opinion of the hon. Member who had spoken last with regard to the Bill. The subject of the general management of highways was a very large one, and they were all aware of the necessity of dealing with it by some general measure; but the attempts at legislation which had hitherto been made had not been very successful, and very few Members of the House were capable of undertaking such a task as that of amending the present highway rates. Every year, as a greater number of turnpike trusts became extinct, there was a greater necessity for legislation, and he hoped that the hon. Member for Petersfield (Sir W. Jolliffe), who had turned his attention to the subject and bad prepared a measure upon it, would bring that measure before the House. He thought the machinery of the Bill was exceedingly cumbrous and quite novel in principle, and that it would render the expenses of the surveyors much greater than they were under the present system. He, therefore, could not support the Bill, even if he approved its principle, and he considered it so objectionable in its present shape that, if it were not withdrawn, he should vote for the Amendment.
SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, he was of opinion that if the Bill was adopted it would give anything but satisfaction to those persons generally who were now charged with the highway expenditure throughout the country, amounting to about 2,000,000 l. annually. The most objectionable part of the measure was, that in carrying it into operation the ratepayers were in no way whatever represented. Be had devoted some time and consideration to this subject; and when he was in office he prepared a Bill in reference to it, but he thought that Bill was rather the property of the department to which he then belonged than his own. He felt that a measure of this kind could not be carried through the House unless with the full concurrence of the Government of the day.
SIR JOHN TROLLOPEsaid, that the subject was very complex and difficult in its character; and he feared that it would be impossible to work the Bill of his hon.
176
Friend in its present shape. The question, however, was as important as it was difficult, and he thought that the Government should themselves undertake to introduce a Bill upon the subject.
MR. VERNON SMITHsaid, he had been surprised to hear his hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (Mr. Fitzroy) express a hope that some private Member of the House would undertake to prepare a Bill upon that subject; for, in his own opinion, that was a duty which peculiarly belonged to the hon. Gentleman himself in his capacity of Under Secretary for the Home Department. He believed it was extremely desirable that some measure should be adopted for the purpose of making the appointment of district surveyors compulsory, and for the purpose of ensuring an effective audit of the highway funds. He did not know a greater grievance in many of our rural districts than the wretched state of their highways. In the county of Northampton many of the roads were hardly passable during a great portion of the winter. He was afraid, however, that the present Bill was too complicated in its machinery to effect what was desired.
MR. RICEsaid, although he did not approve of this Bill, he thought his hon. Friend (Mr. Frewen) had done good service in bringing the subject before the House, inasmuch as it had elicited from every preceding speaker an admission of the abuses incident to the existing system, and of the necessity for legislation; and he trusted, between the hon. Baronet the Member for Petersfield (Sir W. Jolliffe) and the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Home Department, the country would eventually obtain a good Bill for the regulation of highways.
MR. MASTERS SMITHsaid, that he had received representations from every part of his county with regard to the necessity of some such measure as that before the House, and for that reason he had placed his name on the back of the present Bill. He should not wish to press it, however, if the Government would give some assurance that the matter should be considered and undertaken by them.
SIR GEORGE STRICKLANDsaid, he hoped the Government would not be so incautious as to give any assurance that they would undertake to deal with this question. They had a sample of such an attempt a few years ago, when Mr. Cornewall Lewis, with great ability and perse-

177
verance, sought to deal with it, but totally failed. If the Government attempted the same thing again, he was sure they would equally fail. The hon. Member for East Sussex (Mr. Frewen) need not have told the House that the roads in the county he represented were bad; they were notoriously bad; but that was no reason why the whole country was to be saddled with an offensive Bill like this. So far from being a popular Act, he believed it would be most offensive to the country at large.
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he could bear testimony to the perseverance and zeal with which his hon. Friend who had just sat down had resisted every attempt to improve the Highways Act. He thought, however, that it would be most desirable if they could pass a good Highways Bill, believing that great economy would in the end be the result, although every attempt had hitherto failed, from what he must call a "mistaken" apprehension of the expense that would be thrown upon parishes by such an amendment of the law. He thought that the appointment of district surveyors would be a great and essential improvement, and he only regretted that the machinery of the present Bill was not such that he could support it.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he concurred in what had been said generally in reference to this Bill. They would be all glad to get a good Highways Bill, but unfortunately they could not agree as to what constituted a good Highways Bill. Unless a Bill on this subject could be introduced which had the general assent of those practically conversant with the management of highways throughout the country, he did not think it would work well. He believed the Bill before the House would be generally unpalatable, and he hoped his hon. Friend would not put the House to the trouble of dividing upon it.
SIR JOHN TYRELLsaid, a few years ago, acting on the suggestion of Sir James Macadam, he was instrumental in introducing a Bill for the management of the highways in that part of the county of Essex with which he was connected, which had the honour of meeting the approval of Mr. Speaker; and he thought that any general measure on this subject, which contained the elements of that Bill, would have some claim upon the attention of the House.
MR. FREWENsaid, that, in conse-
178
quence of the opposition he had met with, he would not put the House to the trouble of a division, but would withdraw his Bill.
Question put, and negatived; Words added.
Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.
Bill put off for six months.

OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL.
Order for Committee read; House in Committee.
Clause 11.
MR. AYSHFORD WISEsaid, he proposed to leave out the words, "Michaelmas Term, 1854," and to insert instead thereof the words, "Hilary Term, 1855." He proposed this change, because hon. Members, on referring to the 18th clause, would find that the Vice-Chancellor had to make up the register on the 10th of September. Now, this it was impossible for him to do during the vacation, when a large number of those of whom the Congregation was to be constituted would be absent from the colleges. He had, therefore, proposed that the election should take place on the 12th of December; then, the register could be made on the 1st of December.
MR. LOWEsaid, that this subject had been well considered by the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was of opinion that, as the clause now stood, there would be plenty of time to make the register. It was very undesirable to defer this matter longer than necessary; and, unless stronger reasons than those advanced could be shown for the alteration of the clause, he trusted the Committee would not agree to the Amendment.
MR. BLACKETT,in supporting the Amendment, said, that if the elections were fixed for the first day of Michaelmas term, it would cause great inconvenience, by compelling members to return to their colleges at a very unusual time, and if the election practically took place on that day, it would be spoken of as having been slurred over, and give rise to much ill-feeling, which it was desirable should be avoided. Under these circumstances, he confidently appealed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for an alteration of the clause.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the first day of term had been inserted in the Bill under the impression that it would probably be more agreeable to the existing authorities of the

179
University, whose powers were to be transferred in the October term, that such powers should virtually and practically cease before the vacation rather than that they should continue to hold them for a few days during the ensuing term, and then transfer them. The Government had addressed a letter to the Vice Chancellor, and requested him to be so good as to consult the Hebdomadal Board on the subject, stating that the Government would be glad to name any portion of the term agreeable to them, provided that the first clay of term was objected to. A very courteous answer was received, stating that the Hebdomadal Board was sensible of the attention paid to it by Government, but begged to decline naming any clay on which the power of the Hebdomadal Council should commence. From this he gathered that the Hebdomadal Board entertained no desire to part with its authority on the first day of term, and he would, therefore, propose that the clause should be altered, and that the election should take place on the fourteenth day of term, at which time there would be a full attendance of the members of the University.
MR. HENLEYsaid, that it would be necessary for the Committee to go back, as they would find that, by a previous clause, the powers of the Hebdomadal Board were to cease on the first day of Michaelmas term. The question they had now to consider was, what would be the most convenient time for the election to take place, and he would suggest that it should do so either at the end of Michaelmas or the commencement of Hilary term.
MR. WIGRAMsaid, he thought that some difficulty might arise from the election being made upon one day by all three sections; some of the members of the council might be elected by more than one section. He proposed to provide against the difficulty by adding the words "on or before," there would then be no necessity for all the elections taking place upon the same day.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he had no objection to offer to the proposal, but could not consent to extend the period for the election beyond the 15th of October, as he thought it most important that a term should not be lost, as it would practically be, if the old Hebdomadal Board remained in office without the power to carry out the new regulations.
Amendment withdrawn; Clause, as
180
amended by the extension of time proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, agreed to.
Clauses 12 to 15 agreed to.
Clause 16 (The Vice Chancellor, before the 10th of September next, to make and promulgate a register of the persons qualified to be members of Congregation).
MR. AYSHFORD WISEmoved the substitution of the 14th of October for the 10th of September.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he had no objection to name the 24th of September as the day before which the register should be prepared and published.
MR. HENLEYsaid, the clause threw a very onerous and difficult duty upon the Vice Chancellor, and he hoped the matter would be reconsidered by the Government.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he thought the Vice Chancellor would have no difficulty in performing this duty, which he would, no doubt, discharge in a manner perfectly satisfactory. If the Bill had retained the clause that non-resident persons should be qualified to be members of Congregation in respect of their having held certain offices for a length of time, the task imposed upon the Vice Chancellor would have involved a great deal of trouble; but as the matter now stood it was plain, presuming Congregation to remain as it was, that the register might be prepared without any difficulty.
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREsaid, he saw in the Bill no remedy for any person who might complain of being omitted from the list of the Vice Chancellor.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,in reply, said, that the Commissioners would have power to amend the proceedings of the Vice Chancellor. He must say that he thought they were becoming too minute in their discussions upon the Bill. It was perfectly well known in the University who were residents, and he hardly thought it possible the Vice Chancellor could omit from his list the name of any person who ought to be included.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he was one of those who thought it was not advisable to make too minute regulations in that House; but they must recollect that they had taken upon themselves to interfere, and it was their duty to put their Bill in a shape that would work. According to his interpretation of the Bill as it stood, he did not think the Commissioners would con-

181
sider themselves entitled to entertain an appeal by any gentleman who might complain of his omission from the list of the Vice Chancellor. He believed, in fact, that there was no appeal provided for in the Bill.
MR. WIGRAMsaid, he doubted very much whether there was any necessity for giving an appeal, because the register, though a great convenience to the University, would not be conclusive at all as to the rights of parties. When they came to the 18th clause, it would be necessary to define the persons entitled to vote very correctly.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he would like to have the opinion of the hon. and learned Solicitor General upon the question raised by the last speaker, whether the register would or would not exclude parties from being members of Congregation. If the hon. Member for the University of Cambridge was correct in his interpretation of the Bill, the proposed register would be all but useless.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that, unless some alteration was introduced into the 18th clause, any person who came within the meaning of that section would be entitled to vote as a member of Congregation, even though his name might not be included in the list of the Vice Chancellor.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 17 (The Hebdomadal Council to regulate its own proceedings).
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer what he meant by the words "without prejudice to the rights of Convocation in the making of Statutes?" As the Bill was drawn, Convocation did not seem to have any power to make Statutes; it could only accept them or reject them.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, Convocation must be an assenting party to any Statutes which might be made for the University. The object of the clause was simply to prevent the Hebdomadal Council from arrogating to itself, under the authority of the Act, any power which, by the present constitution of the University, ought to belong to that which was really the supreme legislative body.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, the question now raised was the rights of Convocation. If he understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer right, this new body, Convoca-
182
tion, although it was not to elect the Hebdomadal Board, was to have every proposal of that Board sent through it to Convocation. Moreover, it was to have the power of debating, of amending, or, if it chose, of rejecting all such proposals; so that, in reality, nothing emanating from the Hebdomadal Council could by any possibility reach Convocation without the consent of Congregation. That was a power to which he most decidedly objected, because it was completely contrary to the constitution of the University as it had hitherto existed. The Bill, in fact, created an oligarchy composed of residents, which was to interrupt the legitimate action of Convocation in legislating for the University as it had always done. As, therefore, the powers of Convocation were nullified by this Bill, he thought the proposal of the hon. Member for North Lancashire was consistent with sound sense.
MR. HEYWOODsaid, the idea of Congregation was perfectly in unison with the ancient practice of the University. The practice in ancient times, when the roads were impassable and access by non-residents was extremely difficult, was, for the resident masters to legislate for the University. If, therefore, Congregation under this Bill was to be an effective working body, it seemed to him undesirable to enable a large body of country clergymen with the present facilities of travelling, to come up and paralyse the powers of Congregation. He begged to move that the words "and Convocation" be omitted at the commencement and close of the clause.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he was quite sure the hon. Member had not rightly apprehended the meaning of the clause. The authorities to make Statutes in the University consisted of Congregation and Convocation conjointly; and the hon. Member had made the error in taking the words "rights of Congregation and Convocation" as if they meant the separate or respective rights, whereas they meant the joint rights of Convocation and Congregation. In other words, it intended to express that the Hebdomadal Council should have power to make regulations for its own proceedings with the concurrence of the Statute-making part of the University. The rights of Convocation and Congregation conjointly required that they should concur in making Statutes. If the Amendment were adopted, it would give a power subject to the right of Congregation in voting Statutes, whereas Congregation

183
had not the exclusive right; it would consequently render the clause unmeaning.
MR. HEYWOODsaid, he wished to have Convocation limited to its political powers, namely, the right of sending Members to this House, and electing a Chancellor and High Steward as representatives in the House of Lords. He thought it would be very much for the benefit of the University that Convocation should be deprived of the right of making Statutes.
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREsaid, he did not concur in the scorn with which the hon. Member for North Lancashire (Mr. Heywood) treated Convocation. Though he was not inclined to favour their prejudices, it was impossible any one acquainted with the literature of the country could speak disrespectfully of country clergymen, and he believed they had more knowledge of the world than resident tutors who had just taken their degree. It would be difficult to select a class more incorrigibly ignorant of the affairs of the world, than the young men who had taken their degree and resided ten years in Oxford, and it was a great advantage to mingle with them those who had had more opportunities of knowing human nature.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, he believed that, practically, the Statutes would be made, as the hon. Member for North Lancashire desired, without the interference of Convocation. In nine cases out of ten Congregation would settle the matter, but it might be desirable that in the tenth case Convocation should come up and apply a corrective to the views of the residents. He thought Convocation and Congregation would work well together under the provisions of the Bill, and he hoped the Committee would not listen to the hon. Member's plan for destroying Convocation altogether.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he understood the hon. Member for the University of Oxford to say that, generally speaking, they could trust to Congregation, but a great occasion might come which would interest all the world, and then they would want the addition of Convocation. He was afraid that the Convocation could not exercise any power in the tenth case to which the hon. Baronet had alluded, if Congregation made use of the veto given by the present Bill, and thereby annihilated Convocation so far as the particular proposition was concerned.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEexplained that what he meant was, that in
184
nine times out of ten Convocation would be satisfied with what Congregation did, but if on the tenth occasion Convocation were not satisfied, there would be the opportunity of checking Congregation, and on that ground Convocation ought not to be destroyed.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONunderstood, then, that on the tenth occasion it might be desirable for Convocation to exercise their power.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTE: They might if they liked.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: Precisely so; and his position was, that they could not, whether they liked it or not, if Congregation exercised the veto which this Bill gave them.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, he must remind the right hon. Baronet that the Hebdomadal Board as it now existed would cease, and the Hebdomadal Council would be elected by Congregation, and therefore not likely to come into collision with it. When the Hebdomadal Council proposed a measure, the question would be, whether Convocation should allow it to pass almost formally in Congregation, or should come up and overrule what had been done. The Hebdomadal Council emanating from the Congregation would be identified in feeling with them, and the difficulty arising under the present system would rarely happen under the new one.
MR. BLACKETTsaid, he thought the hon. Member for North Lancashire had discovered a blot in the Bill, namely, the extreme inconvenience which sometimes arose from the exercise of their powers by Convocation, not on the tenth or extraordinary occasion, which interested the whole world, but on points which more concerned the resident body, and the body of tutors more than any one. For instance, the Statute introducing the study of modern science and modern literature was carried by three to one in the Tutors' Association, and once, if not twice, thrown out by Convocation. He could confirm the statement of the hon. Member that Congregation was not a new body, though its powers had been assumed by Convocation and legalised by practice.
MR. ROBERT PHILLIMOREsaid, he thought it rather singular that the two hon. Members for Newcastle and North Lancashire should have to go to the dark ages to justify the constitution of Congregation. As to the tutors being more competent judges than Convocation there were

185
abundant proofs of their possessing only that half knowledge which was more perilous than ignorance itself, when applied to the affairs of the world. During the time the Tractarian strife was at its height, those who rescued the tutors from the act of folly they were committing, were those despised country clergymen.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he believed that those hon. Members were right in saying that Congregation was a very old body, and formerly possessed much larger powers than at the present time; but the error they committed was this—that they forgot, what he had several times stated in that House without being contradicted, namely, that the Congregation never was co-existent with the Hebdomadal Board. When the Hebdomadal Board was called into existence Congregation sank into comparative insignificance. There never was in the University what it was now proposed to create, namely, three co-ordinate branches of the Legislature, and this Bill did not propose to restore Congregation. For instance, in those days Congregation had the initiative power with regard to legislation. It was recommended by the Commissioners that the initiative powers should be restored to Congregation conjointly with the Hebdomadal Council, but this Bill did not give that power; neither did it destroy the Hebdomadal Board. On the contrary, it remodelled and reconstituted it under the name of the Hebdomadal Council. Therefore they were not restoring Congregation; they were retaining the Hebdomadal Board, which was called into existence in opposition to Congregation.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the right hon. Baronet assumed that no one was prepared to contradict him, because he had made statements without contradiction. He begged to enter his protest against being held to agree in the views of the right hon. Baronet, even though they were not contradicted at the time. He thought the right hon. Baronet had gone a good deal beyond the record when he stated that this initiative power formerly belonged to Congregation, and he certainly did not know how the right hon. Baronet founded, or proposed to show, that the functions of the Hebdomadal Board rested formerly with Congregation. But he submitted that at the moment they were not discussing the functions of Congregation. The hon. Member for North Lancashire had raised a
186
question of principle which might be fairly raised under this clause. He wanted to cut off the power of Convocation, and that was the question before the Committee, to which it would be convenient to direct attention. He confessed, though he felt that Convocation was ill constituted to discharge a great many functions important to be discharged, yet he did not wish to see the franchise of Convocation diminished. The right hon. Baronet thought this Bill did virtually diminish those privileges. That was a question which he should be perfectly ready to argue at another opportunity. What he wished now to say was, that he could not consent to sever the link which united many Members of that House, for example, with the working body of the University of Oxford, and he was quite sure the hon. Member for North Lancashire could not induce the Committee to extinguish the rights at present possessed by Convocation.
MR. PHILIPPSsaid, as a non-resident member of the University of Oxford, he was happy to hear such high eulogiums passed upon that body, though he thought the less they interfered with the internal regulations of the University the better. He freely admitted that the opinions of Lord Harrowby and Lord Ellesmere, and such men as he saw around him, would be advantageous upon any question; but they must remember the same railway train that carried them down would carry down six times as many other men armed in the triple mail of obstinacy, ignorance, and prejudice upon the immediate point under consideration, who would quite overwhelm their influence. He remembered the excitement with re and to Dr. Hampden, and he believed nine out of ten of the non-residents who attended Convocation never read one word of what Dr. Hampden had written. He remembered similar excitement in order to check the Tractarian party. On one occasion, Mr. Williams, fellow of Trinity, was candidate for the professorship of poetry. The cry of Tractarianism was raised against him, and that proved fatal to his claims, though theological opinions did seem of little importance in the professor of poetry, particularly in Oxford, where the standard of taste was formed upon Horace, and Homer, and Virgil—persons who had never been considered to be very sound Protestants. He did not wish to see the action of the non-resident members done away with; hut he thought the internal affairs of the University could be

187
regulated by the resident members much better than by those who only came up once in five or six years, without having anything like continuous association with the University.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he was surprised to hear the hon. Member for Haverfordwest (Mr. Philipps) objecting to Convocation because it had opposed the Tractarian movement. He, on the contrary, thought this one of the greatest services ever rendered to the country by any constituency. But if this Bill passed, and a like occasion were to arise, Convocation would not be able to act again in such a manner, as the resident members would have the power of assembling in Congregation and forbidding the meeting of Convocation. Yet this was what the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer called "enlarging" the powers of Convocation. He contended that Congregation could prevent Convocation meeting to discuss any particular question, and that the Bill would thereby place a complete bar to the action of Convocation. He was radical enough to respect the opinions of such a constituency as the University. It was the fashion to abuse Convocation—to talk of it as a turbulent mob—a set of ignorant, half-starved curates. If they looked, however, at the composition of Convocation, they would find among its members a great part of the talent of the bar, a great part of the talent and piety of the Church, many members deemed to be worthy of a seat in that House, and a great many who had seats in the upper House. That was the body which, for the sake of faction, and placing the whole power in the hands of the residents, they were about to disfranchise. He did not believe it deserved to be disfranchised, and that was the reason why he objected so strongly to the Amendment.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, the Government deprecated the annihilation of the functions of Convocation as strongly as the hon. Member for North Warwickshire, who had just addressed them, and he begged to invite attention to two considerations. First, the Charter granted to the University of Oxford was to the Chancellor, masters, and scholars; and therefore all masters whose names were on the books were corporators, but the only franchise they had was the power of voting as members of Convocation. The effect of the Amendment would be to leave the masters an integral part of the
188
corporation of the University, and yet say, in a most inconsistent manner, that they should exercise no power as corporators within the University. The other consideration was, that if they struck off the power of non-resident masters to attend Convocation, they would deprive them of all interest in the University, and the practical consequence would be that the names on the books of the different colleges would be much diminished in number. That was a consequence which he should deplore, and he had no doubt, as every consideration of expediency and legality negatived the Amendment, the Committee would unanimously come to the conclusion that these words should remain as part of the Bill.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, that, as a member of the University of Oxford, he could not hear the language of the hon. Member for Haverfordwest (Mr. Philippe) without entering his protest against it. He was sorry to hear the hon. Member so led away by his zeal for this Bill as to speak of the majority of Convocation as armed in the triple mail of obstinacy, ignorance, and prejudice. The expression was most unjustifiable.
MR. PHILIPPSsaid, lie had been very considerably misrepresented. He most distinctly disclaimed any intention of applying these terms to the general character and attainment of non-resident members. He had been objecting to persons acting either on one side of a question or the other without previously making themselves acquainted with all the circumstances—citing the case of Dr. Hampden as an instance—and he had taken particular care to limit those expressions to the views and conduct of those persons with regard to the point at issue. If a man went up to pass sentence upon writings which he had never read, or of which he had only read garbled extracts, he conceived it was perfectly justifiable to say that his conduct with regard to that point was marked by "prejudice, obstinacy, and ignorance."
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREsaid, that when they were told the Articles were understood in a non-natural sense, it did not require very attentive consideration before the non-residents could make up their minds that such doctrine was mischievous, and ought to be suppressed.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERhoped, for the credit of the Committee, they were not going into this wide field of discussion. Matters of this kind

189
only perplexed and wearied, and drew away their attention from the point under consideration. When the hon. and learned Member for Leominster spoke of the theory that the articles were understood in a non-natural sense, he was entirely unjustified in applying that to the University of Oxford.
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREhad heard that theory was so stated.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: By whom?
MR. J. G. PHILLIMORE: By the same Mr. Williams to whom the hon. Member for Haverfordwest referred.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: If the hon. and learned Member had heard it said so of Mr. Williams, Mr. Williams ought to answer that; but Mr. Williams was not the University of Oxford. He was bound to say he believed the hon. and learned Member was entirely in error. That most improper expression of opinion, he knew, had been ventilated. It had been much ventilated by a gentleman who had no connection with Mr. Williams, except that their names both began with a W—Mr. Ward.
MR. ROUNDELL PALMERsaid, he must defend the character of Mr. Williams, That gentleman had no doubt written several tracts, but in them he had never ventured beyond the bounds of fair speculation allowed to persons who had signed the Articles of the Church of England, and those who supposed that he had any tendency to Romish doctrines greatly mistook both Mr. Williams and his writings. He thought it right to say so much in defence of a man who was most unassuming in all the relations of life, who was distinguished as a scholar, and who, as an exemplary parish clergyman, had gained the respect and esteem of all who know him.
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREsaid, he was perfectly aware that Mr. Williams had no Romanising tendencies, but he had named him, on being called to do so, as he had read these tenets in his writings.
MR. RICEsaid, this discussion would be perfectly endless, if it were allowed to degenerate into personalities. He had no sympathies with the feeling in favour of the non-resident members of Convocation, and what he should like to see was the establishment of Congregation on as wide a basis as possible, which he was certain would consult the interests of the University much better than Convocation did.
MR. HORSMANsaid, he would suggest that this discussion should be postponed
190
till they came to the 24th clause, when it could be more properly raised.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, he agreed with the hon. Member who had just sat down, that it would be far better to take the discussion as to whether Convocation should be retained, and, if retained, whether it should be modified in form, upon the clause which specially referred to that subject.
MR. HEYWOODsaid, he would assent to that proposal and withdraw his Amendment.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 18 (Composition of the Congregation).
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, that this clause enacted that the Congregation should be composed, among others, of the following persons—
"The Tutors of Colleges and Halls and other officers engaged in the discipline of Colleges; all Masters of Private Halls; all residents who, though not actually holding any of the aforesaid qualifications, may have held one or more of them at any previous time for three years and upwards; and residents qualified in respect of study under this Act."
Now, he begged to move, by way of Amendment, that all these words be left out, and the words "all residents" be substituted. His wish was to extend the privileges of the Congregation, if possible, to all the resident members of the University. It was invidious to make the minute distinctions which were attempted to be established by this clause. If the Congregation were to be useful at all, it ought to be an epitome and a representation of the Convocation, and ought to have in it as many elements of the Convocation as possible. This he thought would be better secured by his Motion than by the clause as it stood, while the numbers added to the body would not be great. His Amendment would include the parochial clergy in Oxford, who would form a most desirable body of representatives for the clergy throughout the kingdom, and it would also admit the private tutors, who, as matters stood at present, had no place in the Congregation.
Amendment proposed, to leave out the paragraphs "9, 10, 11, and 12," in order to insert the words "all residents."
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, it would have been a great advantage to the Government if they had heard the opinions of the Committee generally upon this question, because, though the judgment of his hon. Friend was no

191
doubt entitled to great weight, and though the Amendment was not a vital matter, still the Government preferred the Bill as it stood, and that because it was an attempt to form a body that did represent the aristocracy, in the best sense of the University—that was to say, its mind and intellect and working power. His hon. Friend had alluded to the exclusion of private tutors. Now, he believed there were few private tutors who would not be included in the Congregation, under the head of those who declared themselves—as the private tutors might most conscientiously do—resident in Oxford for the purposes of study. He certainly thought the private tutors ought to be in Congregation, and he believed the Bill as it stood would admit them. But there were two other classes whom the Amendment of his hon. Friend would admit—the parochial clergy and the chaplains of colleges. Now, of the parochial clergy in Oxford he wished to speak with the greatest respect. He knew them to be pious, diligent, and laborious; and he believed there was no village, town, or city in the kingdom that was better attended to. But the object of Government was to give Congregation the character of a body that should stand in immediate relation to the working business of the University, and therefore he believed it would be desirable that the parochial clergy, who had no necessary connection with the University as such, should not be members of it. They were going to call the Congregation into existence to exercise most important functions, and they thought it better to compose that body with very considerable strictness, and not to include persons in that body except very good reasons could be shown for it. He could not find any reason in favour of including the parochial clegy. Then, with regard to the chaplains of colleges, their number, he believed, was rather short of twenty, and they were still less qualified, ex officio, to be members of Congregation. Most of them had been educated through the medium of certain eleemosynary foundations. Within his knowledge many of them were excellent men, and some of them were able, learned, and accomplished men; but, then, those of them who were learned and accomplished men would come into the Congregation as students or as tutors of the University. But there was a considerable number of them who were chaplains only. He must confess that he was not prepared to say that that class, con-
192
sidered as a class of chaplains, was in that capacity entitled to become members of Congregation. He had no fear at all that the constitution of the Congregation would produce a conflict of classes in that body. He believed it would be composed of men on whom the signs of party conflict in that House would operate very feebly. The principle upon which the Congregation ought to be based was, that it should represent the intellect and aristocracy of the University, and include within it the whole studying and the whole teaching body of the University. The Government had endeavoured to frame the provisions of the Bill to that end. At the same time they were perfectly inclined to listen to the suggestions of hon. Members if in any way the Bill could be improved.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he wished to ask what was the precise intention of his hon. Friend in substituting merely the words "all residents?" His right hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) had, the other evening, defined residents to mean those who victualled and slept at the Universities—those who had victum et cubile there. He wished to know whether his hon Friend confined his Amendment to those parties who were included in that definition?
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, that he included in the word "residents" not only those who lived within the limits of the University of Oxford, but those who resided in the City of Oxford. There were other classes who might also be included in the terms of his Amendment. With respect to the observation of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer that some of the persons who were intended to be included in the Amendment would be qualified to belong to the Congregation by virtue of their being students or private tutors, he (Sir W. Heathcote) must observe that that would entirely depend upon whether the House would approve or not the qualification in respect of study. It seemed to him to be a form of qualification calculated to lead to a good deal of difficulty. It was not a qualification which he should like to take. He desired to use words that would include the persons to whom he alluded, whether they were qualified by study or not. In answer to the observations of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midhurst, he had to say that he intended persons who had resided within the boundaries of a college for twenty-four weeks of the previous year.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he would suggest that the object would be satisfactorily attained, and the very desirable principle upon which the clause was framed secured, by giving the privilege to all those who were actually engaged, more or less, in the great business and end of the University, by inserting the words, "residents qualified in respect of study and teaching." The addition of such words would make the clause comprehensive enough to include all who contributed anything to the object and purpose of the University.
MR. ROUNDELL PALMERsaid, he would put it to the Committee whether it was not complicating the Bill, and introducing invidious and ungenerous distinctions, to exclude the smaller classes, whose disqualification for taking part in the business of the University, he must say, had not been established to his satisfaction. His right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had narrowed the classes of those residents qualified in respect of study by excluding the parochial clergy and chaplains of colleges from Convocation. With respect to the former, he thought that they might be usefully introduced, as being a distinct class from the non-parochial clergy living in colleges. As to the latter, he could not agree in the reason assigned for their exclusion. It was said that they represented the eleemosynary element, and that they were disqualified by that circumstance. Now, he thought that the eleemosynary element ought to be represented in the University. Independently of this principle, to which he attached importance, the chaplains of colleges filled most important and honourable offices—offices which had relation to the ends of the University. On these grounds he contended that the introduction of these two classes into the governing body could not be mischievous, whilst it might he useful. If harmonious action were desired, it would be far better to include all the residents, and exclude none; but if a large number were excluded besides chaplains and parochial clergy, a large proportion of fellows of colleges must be among them—those who were not expected to take out certificates of study. He did not think these fellows were unworthy to become members of Convocation. Whether they took out certificates of study or not they were worthy of the franchise, and he demurred to the principle involved in the proposed change. He would much rather
194
go back to the old principle, which was more likely to give satisfaction and to ensure the smooth and easy working of the Bill.
MR. BLACKETTsaid, he concurred with the views of the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, and hoped he would adhere to the proposed alteration in the clause. It was his conviction that it would work well.
SIR THOMAS ACLANDsaid, he quite agreed with the hon. and learned Member for Plymouth (Mr. R. Palmer). The new governing power should, as far as possible, include every influential class in the University, so that it could not be said that it was confined to any one or two. He therefore suggested that the provisions should be extended to all non-resident members. By this means, when those members returned to the University, from time to time, they would exercise large influence, and bring the benefit of past experience to hear upon the actual state of things.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he did not think the views expressed on this question by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were sound. They would leave the Act open to a loose construction. Half the persons who passed through the University became working members of the Church of England; why should they be excluded, who could bring to bear upon it the weight of their practical knowledge of the work of the Ministry? With regard to the chaplains of colleges, there was great force in the argument that they represented the eleemosynary principle, and their presence must be of great use in relation to the wants and feelings of the class who had been assisted in their education. He desired to see every class in the University represented. The wider the representation, the greater the efficiency of the University.
THE SOLICITOR, GENERALsaid, the Bill, as it now stood, included all officers of the University, all persons engaged in tuition in the most general sense, and all persons engaged in the discipline of it. All persons who were bonâ fide teachers were included. He could perceive no element or condition that was excluded. With regard to the two classes proposed to be excluded, be must observe, in relation to the parochial clergy, that simple residence in that character in Oxford gave them no connection with the University. They had no connection with it necessarily, and they were not within the rules implied by the institution of the University. As to the

195
chaplains to colleges, he concurred that the eleemosynary element was necessary in the governing body; but he submitted that it would be sufficiently represented there without the inclusion of these classes.
MR. DRUMMONDsaid, he had always deemed it to be a great anomaly in the management of the University that the chaplains should be held to be an inferior class. That, however, was practically the case. In fact, in consequence of their poverty, they were not looked upon as in a position to associate with gentlemen. As an instance of what the operation of the clause under these considerations would be, he might observe that it would exclude, if passed as it then stood, the son of his hon. Friend opposite (Sir T. Acland), one of the first physicians in Oxford, from a right to be a member of the governing body of the University.
MR. J. G. PHILLIMOREsaid, that the proposed exclusions were both ungenerous and offensive, and he hoped they would not be passed. Under them the poet Gray would have been excluded from the governing body; and if the clause was carried, as proposed, such instances would occur over and over again.
MR. HORSMANsaid, he must submit that at no time could it have been contemplated to include the two classes now under discussion. It was not, however, for the Government to prove their disqualification; it was for the other side to prove their qualification for the privilege. The Government, in his opinion, had put the whole case upon an intelligible principle, when they said that everybody actually connected with education should be included. This established some distinct relation to the University. Now, in what relation did the parochial clergy stand to the University? They had no relation to it except that of mere residence in the town; and being merely casual residents, they could have no claim to the privilege. As to the college chaplains, the question was not whether having received eleemosynary assistance was a disqualification, but whether that principle was not already represented. He contended that it was, by several members who had received their education by that means. No qualification could be sounder than that which had been adopted by the Government—that those who took part in the government of the University should stand in some function or other in relation to its studies.
MR. HILDYARDsaid, if the hon. and learned Solicitor General was right in the opinion which he had expressed, that to be a member of Congregation ought to be a distinction, he was entitled to ask upon what ground, by excluding those whom it was admitted this clause would strike out, they undertook to pronounce them unworthy of such distinction? He had heard but two reasons assigned. It was said that a portion of the persons excluded were parochial clergy; but he would bring to the recollection of the Committee that some of the best bishops on the bench had been found, like Cincinnatus at the plough, discharging the duties of parish priests. With respect to the chaplains of colleges, and the allusion which had been made, in connection with their case, to the recipients of eleemosynary education, he would beg to remind the Committee that in the University of Cambridge a very large body of the most distinguished men in the University had risen from that very class. It used to be held that every man was entitled to a vote, unless it could be shown that he was unfit to exercise it; but now hon. Gentlemen were for excluding every one who could not make out a clear right and title by the most indisputable testimony. Was it worth their while, for the sake of excluding so small a body, to plant the germ of future dissent? If they wished their new constitution to work harmoniously, they should admit every gentleman who had passed through the University, had acquired a degree, and, from one circumstance or another, was resident within it, to exercise his share in determining how the University should be governed.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he was inclined to vote for the Amendment. The parochial clergy of Oxford must have a very good knowledge of what went on in the University, and great sympathy with it, and for these reasons would make very useful members of this proposed Congregation. With respect to the chaplains of colleges, he should be very glad if placing them in this position might have a tendency to put an end to that which, when he was at Oxford, had made a very painful impression on his mind—the ungenerous system of proscription—for he could call it by no other name—to which the servitors were subject, the servitors being the class from which the college chaplains were generally derived. He thought that the qualifications proposed by the clause would be found inconvenient and complicated;

197
and he saw no practical danger and great practical good in allowing all residents to be members.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, it seemed to him, that, although the practical effect of the proposed Amendment would not be considerable, there was a difference of principle between that and the clause as it stood, which ought to have some weight in the discussion. The difference of principle was this—that what the Government proposed was to give the power of election, and of taking part in the regulation of the University, to those who were engaged in the proper business of the University—the business of teaching and study. Now that appeared to him to be a very important distinction, because what they were proposing by this Bill to do was to reform the University of Oxford, and to reform it for the purposes of education. Now, whatever might be said with respect to the clergy resident in Oxford, or the chaplain of colleges, there was no question whatever as to their character or ability involved in the present discussion. It was simply a question with reference to their fitness to perform a particular duty, regarding them as a part of the legislature of a place intended to be a place of education. Now, looking at the matter in that point of view, he confessed he did not think that the resident clergy of Oxford had any immediate connection, as such, with the teaching of the University. The clergy of London were a very distinguished body of men; there had at all times been among them some of the most distinguished clergymen of this country; and according to our present mode of travelling it would be exceedingly easy for them to go from London to Oxford, so that they might very well give their votes there, but no question had been raised as to their being allowed to do so, because they had nothing to do with the teaching of the University, and he did not see that a vote ought to be given on account of the circumstance of residence at the plate where education was to take place. With respect to the chaplains of colleges, and to the observations which had been made by his right hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Labouchere), he considered it a reproach to the University that there should be any circumstances existing tending to degrade men who attended the studies of the University, and whose minds and feelings were as sensitive as their own, and to keep them in an inferior position. He should be very glad
198
to alter these circumstances; and he hoped, for the sake of the University itself, that such a state of things as his right hon. Friend had described would not be very long continued. But he was unable to admit that this was a reason why the college chaplains should form part of this body unless they were engaged in teaching. And he thought that some other means might be found of raising the class referred to, besides that which was now proposed. The principle upon which the clause was framed was a very clear one. It was to give the legislation of the University to those who were engaged in the business of the University, and who were acquainted with all its affairs. The words which the Government proposed to add "engaged in teaching or study" would include all who had a fair claim to be included; and, although he did not think the adoption of the Amendment would very much change the character of the Bill, he was sure that upon principle it would be much more consistent to leave it as it now stood.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he would admit that the principle was important, but he thought the noble Lord had very much narrowed it. As he understood the matter, the Congregation would have power to make Amendments in all the Statutes proposed by the Hebdomadal Council, not only with respect to tuition, but with reference to other matters in which the University was greatly interested. Now, if that were true, he thought it a great principle to be established, that they should bring to bear, on so small a body as the Hebdomadal Council, as great an amount of influence as possible, from members who took an interest in the affairs of the University generally, as much as the tutors, who were specially engaged in teaching. No doubt, if this were carried out to the full extent, it would include all the members of Convocation. Why, then, was it proposed to limit it to the resident members? Because they knew what was going on, and all the circumstances connected with the case to be decided, and could not be brought up to give a party vote, and to interfere with the decision which had been arrived at by those upon the spot. That being the case, they ought not to exclude any members resident in the University, because these must be supposed to take as much interest in the affairs of the University as those who were engaged in teaching. Thinking, therefore, that the

199
Bill as it now stood would disqualify persons who were quite competent to frame Amendments to the Statutes and laws to be proposed by the Hebdomadal Council, he did not think it would be just to these members of the University that they should be subject to such a disqualification.
Question put, "That the words 'The Tutors' stand part of the Clause."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 104; Noes 138: Majority 34.

List of the AYES.

Anderson, Sir J.

Jackson, W.

Bagshaw, J.

Keogh, W.

Bass, M. T.

Kinnaird, hon. A. F.

Bell, J.

Langton, H. G.

Berkeley, C. L. G.

Lee, W.

Bethel!, Sir R.

Lindsay, W. S.

Blackett, J. F. B.

Locke, J.

Bowyer, G.

Lowe, R.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Mackie, J.

Brocklehurst, J.

M'Gregor, J.

Brotherton, J.

Mangles, R. D.

Bruce, H. A.

Marshall, W.

Buckley, Gen.

Massey, W. N.

Burke, Sir T. J.

Miall, E.

Byng, hon. G. H. C.

Moffatt, G.

Cardwell, rt. hon. E.

Molesworth,rt.hn.SirW.

Challis, Mr. Ald.

Monck, Visct.

Chaplin, W. J.

Monsell, W.

Cheetham, J.

Morris, D.

Cockburn, Sir A. J. E.

Mostyn, hon. T. E. M. L.

Coote, Sir C. H.

Norreys, Lord

Cowan, C.

Palmerston, Visct.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Patten, J. W.

Dashwood, Sir G. H.

Pechell, Sir G. B.

Duncan, G.

Peel, F.

Dunlop, A. M.

Pellatt, A.

Elcho, Lord

Peto, S. M.

Ewart, W.

Ricardo, O.

Fagan, W.

Richardson, J. J.

FitzGerald, Sir J.

Roche, E. B.

Fitzgerald, J. D.

Russell, Lord J.

Fitzroy, hon. H.

Sawle, C. B. G.

Forster, C.

Scobell, Capt.

Forster, J.

Seymour, W. D.

Fortescue, C. S.

Stafford, Marg. of

Fox, W, J.

Strutt, rt. hon. E.

Freestun, Col.

Talbot, C. R. M.

Gardner, R.

Tancred, H. W.

Geach, C.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Gladstone, rt. hon. W.

Thompson, G.

Glyn, G. C.

Thornely, T.

Gower, hon. F. L.

Vernon, L. V.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Grosvenor, Lord R.

Whitbread, S.

Grosvenor, Earl

Wilkinson, W. A.

Hadfield, G.

Willcox, B. M.

Hankey, T.

Williams, W.

Herbert, rt. hon. S.

Wilson, J.

Hervey, Lord A.

Winnington, Sir T. E.

Heywood, J.

Young, rt. hon. Sir J.

Horsman, E.

TELLERS.

Hughes, W. B.

Hayter, rt. hon. W. G.

Hutchins, E. J.

Mulgrave, Earl of

Ingham, R.

List of the NOES.

Acland, Sir T. D.

Alexander, J.

Adderley, C. B.

Bailey, C.

200

Ball, E.

Langston, J. H.

Bankes, rt. hon. G.

Langton, W. G.

Barrington, Visct.

Lennox, Lord A. F.

Barrow, W. H.

Liddell, H. G.

Bateson, T.

Lovaine, Lord

Beamish, F. B.

Macartney, G.

Bentinck, Lord H.

Mandeville, Visct.

Bentinck, G. W. P.

Miles, W.

Blair, Col.

Michell, W.

Boldero, Col.

Morgan, O.

Bonham-Carter, J.

Mowbray, J. R.

Bramston, T. W.

Munday, W.

Brown, W.

Murrough, J. P.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Naas, Lord

Burroughes, H. N.

Napier, rt. hon. J.

Butt, G. M.

Neeld, J.

Child, S.

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Cholmondeley, Lord H.

North, Col.

Christopher, rt. hn. R.A.

Otway, A. J.

Clinton, Lord C. P.

Packe, C. W.

Cocks, T. S.

Pakenham, E.

Codrington, Sir W.

Palmer, Rob.

Cubitt, Mr. Ald.

Palmer, R.

Dalkeith, Earl of

Pennant, hon. Col.

Davies, D. A. S.

Percy, hon. J. W.

Dering, Sir E.

Philipps, J. H.

Disraeli, rt. hon. B.

Phillimore, J. G.

Dod, J. W.

Phillimore, R. J.

Drummond H.

Phinn, T.

Dunne, Col.

Pritchard, J.

Du Pre, C. G.

Pugh, D.

Egerton, W. T.

Repton, G. W. J.

Egerton, E. C.

Rice, E. R.

Emlyn, Visct.

Robertson, P. F.

Evelyn, W. J.

Seymour, Lord

Farnham, E. B.

Shirley, E. P.

Fergus, J.

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Filmer, Sir E.

Smith, W. M.

Fitzgerald, W R. S.

Somerset, Capt.

Floyer, J.

Spooner, R.

Forbes, W.

Stafford, A.

Frewen, C. H.

Stanhope, J. B.

Gaskell, J. M.

Stanley, Lord

George, J.

Starkie, Le G. N.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Thesiger, Sir F.

Graham, Lord M. W.

Thornhill, W. P.

Greaves, E.

Tollemache, J.

Greene, T.

Trollope, rt. hon. Sir J.

Grogan, E.

Tudway, R. C.

Gwyn, H.

Tyler, Sir G.

Hamilton, G. A.

Vance, J.

Hamilton, J. H.

Vansittart, G. H.

Harcourt, G. G.

Waddington, H. S.

Harcourt, Col.

Walcott, Adm.

Hawkins, W. W.

Walpole, rt. hon. S. H.

Hayes, Sir E.

Walter, J.

Heathcote, Sir W.

Watkins, Col. L.

Henley, rt. hon. J. W.

West, F. R.

Hildyard, R. C.

Whitmore, H.

Horsfall, T. B.

Wigram, L. T.

Hudson, G.

Willoughby, Sir H.

Irton, S.

Wise, A.

Jolliffe, Sir W. G. H.

Wyndham, Gen.

Jones, Capt.

Wyndham, W.

Keating, H. S.

Wynne, W. W. E.

Kendall, N.

TELLERS.

King, J. K.

Lennox, Lord H.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H.

Cecil, Lord R.

Laffan, R. M.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that he proposed to add a proviso to his clause, in consequence of

201
the Resolution to which the Committee had come on a former evening. According to the Bill as it originally stood, all the three classes of which the Hebdomadal Council was to be composed were to be elected by the same constituency. The Committee had, however, resolved that the heads of houses and the professors should elect their own representatives at the board, and that being so, he thought they ought not also to take part in the election of representatives of the third class—members of Convocation, and thereby exercise a double privilege. He should, therefore, move the addition of these words at the end of the clause—
"Provided that the persons who shall from time to time be included under the second and seventh divisions hereinbefore mentioned as Heads of Colleges and Halls, and as Professors, shall not be entitled to vote in the election by the Congregation of the members of the Hebdomadal Council."
MR. HENLEYsaid, ho did not know that there was any objection to the insertion of these words, but the right hon. Gentleman ought to have given notice of a proposition of this kind, so that the Committee might have an opportunity of seeing its bearing.
MR. HORSMANsaid, the proposed addition was the natural result of the Motion which had been carried the other night, and ought, therefore, to be supported by the Committee.
MR. MILESsaid, he would suggest that in a complicated Bill of this kind they ought first to go through the clauses, and then proceed to consider the Amendments. It was totally impracticable at a moment's notice to get up a discussion of this kind.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, the Government would certainly not wish to do anything which might be considered to take the Committee by surprise, and the proposed addition should not, therefore, be pressed now, but should be printed and laid before the Committee.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he was by no means prepared to say that he opposed the Motion. It might be a fair and right one. All he said was, that the Committee ought to have notice of it.
MR. WALPOLEwould suggest that the proposed proviso had better be incorporated in the section which related to the six members of Convocation.
Proviso postponed; Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 19 (Promulgation of Statutes in Congregation).
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, that this clause provided for the due publication in Congregation of "Statutes" made by the Hebdomadal Council. He thought, however, the word "Statutes" was not sufficiently extensive, and he, therefore, proposed to add the words "or other act or ordinance requiring the consent of Convocation." He also doubted whether the proviso reserving the present powers of Convocation would be sufficient to invest them with the new powers created by this Act, and he, therefore, proposed to add at the end of the clause, "and if accepted by Congregation shall be afterwards submitted to Convocation for final adoption, as a Statute, Act, or Ordinance of the University."
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he would not oppose the first Amendment of the hon. Baronet, though he believed it to be unnecessary; but he must object to the latter.
MR. HENLEYsaid, be should be sorry to see the proposed alteration accepted, since it would have the effect of imposing a cheek upon the political franchise exercised by this body corporate. It was as though the inhabitants of a town, who wished to petition Parliament, were to be prevented by the town council, and told that they should not do so. This was no academical question affecting the position of the "aristocracy of intellect," but it was simply a question of a political right and franchise. He feared it would give to Congregation the power of preventing the University from petitioning on any subjects on which the opinions of Congregation were at variance with those of Convocation.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he did not think the right hon. Gentleman took the right view of the case. But he confessed that he doubted very much whether that was to be regarded as a practical restriction upon the privileges of the University. The fact was, that Convocation was now very much fettered in its power of expressing an opinion, for it could only debate in Latin, and had no power to suggest amendments on any proposition laid before it. It was now proposed to constitute Congregation on a pretty broad basis, including all those who took part in the business of the University. To them would be given the power of discussing in English, and of entertaining amendments, and, therefore, he thought that upon the whole the privileges of the

203
University would be extended and not diminished by this Bill.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, that the effect of the Amendment would be to deprive the University—that great constituency which had returned the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself to that House—of the power of petitioning that House, or of expressing an opinion and praying the concurrence of Parliament in its views. It would give such a power to the Congregation that Convocation would be able to do absolutely nothing without its consent. For a Government which professed to be Liberal, and for a representative of the University thus to endeavour to stifle the expression of opinion by the most enlightened constituency in the kingdom, was a circumstance that filled him with astonishment.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that the indignant remarks of the hon. Member were founded upon two assumptions, both of which were unfounded. For, in the first place, Convocation never had the power of petitioning except through the medium of the Hebdomadal Board; and, in the second place, the present Bill would not increase the control which was now exercised over the proceedings of Convocation, but would simply vest in the hands of the Hebdomadal Council and the Congregation, instead of in those of the Hebdomadal Council alone.
MR. HENLEYsaid, that he must repeat his objection to this Amendment, because it would have the effect of putting a fresh check upon the exercise of a political franchise; for the right of petitioning, which members of Convocation now enjoyed, must be regarded in that light. They might just as well say that the aldermen and liverymen of the City of London should prevent that great constituency from petitioning, as that an oligarchy of some 300 members should stop the expression of its opinion upon political subjects on the part of the whole University.
MR. ROBERT PHILLIMOREsaid, that no man could have so little interest in stifling the opinions of the constituency of Oxford as his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had thrice been returned by it by large majorities. He did not see how this clause could be regarded as narrowing the powers of the University. At present the University of Oxford was governed by an oligarchy, and the proposal was to substitute
204
a liberal aristocracy in the place of it. It was a measure, in fact, for enlarging and enfranchising the constituency.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, that while the hon. and learned Solicitor General had stated that the words which he had proposed would not vary the meaning of the word "Statute," his right hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) thought that they would do so in a way which he (Sir W. Heathcote) did not intend. As in the one case, then, the alteration would be useless, and in the other it would be noxious, or would effect what he did not desire to effect, probably the best thing for him to do would be to withdraw the words.
Amendment withdrawn.
MR. HEYWOODmoved to insert after the word "promulgated," in line 19, the words, "in the English language," so that the Statutes passed by the Hebdomadal Board might be promulgated in the English language.
Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 18, after the word "promulgated," to insert the words "in the English language."
Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 131; Noes 155: Majority 24.
SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTEsaid, he would move to add at the end of the clause the words, "And if accepted by Congregation shall be afterwards submitted to Convocation for final adoption or rejection as a Statute, act, or ordinance of the University," with the view of rendering the meaning more clear.
Amendment agreed to.
SIR, JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he wished for some further explanation as to how the functions of Convocation would be affected by this clause.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLcould only say that the Bill directed the Congregation should elect certain members of the Hebdomadal Council. The members of Convocation were all pointed out and specified in the clause, and he thought it would be loss of time to discuss principles already adopted.
MR. EWARTsaid, that instead of making any innovation, they were returning, by the enactments of the present Bill, to the original foundation of the academic constitution. He must deny that there was any innovation in the powers conveyed by this clause, and considered that the governing power could not be more

205
properly lodged than in the teachers of the University.
MR. NEWDEGATEtrusted his right hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington) would press the question to a division, for all they asked was not to fetter the University, when it had done nothing to prove itself unworthy of the freedom it had enjoyed these 400 years.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he considered that the question involved in this clause was, whether, when the Hebdomadal Council had determined to originate any measure, the Congregation should be enabled to put a direct veto upon such measure, for as the clause stood such a power would be left in the hands of Congregation. In his opinion the best plan would be to omit the clause altogether.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he thought the clause, by establishing a debating society in the University, was not likely to promote peace and harmony among its members. He would suggest that, as the Hebdomadal Council was to consist of twenty-two individuals, if there should be an equal division upon any question, and eleven were found on each side, the business of the University would be brought to a dead lock.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the governing body of the University had hitherto consisted of twenty-six members, but there never had been an equal division of thirteen against thirteen. He considered that there could not be the least doubt that it was right to give legislative functions to the Congregation. Looking at the composition of the University of Oxford, which included so many able and working men, he thought it impossible that any system could be satisfactory which placed the whole legislative power in the hands of a small body consisting of twenty-two members. if they wished the University to work satisfactorily, they must make provision for the real discussion of measures which proceeded from the initiative board. If such provision was not made, the whole power of the University would be concentrated in one-third part of the heads, one-fourth part of the professors, and one-thirtieth part of the residents of the University. This power must be given to Congregation or to Convocation, and he thought that Congregation, as representing the working part of the University, and including men of great knowledge and experience, was the body to which it could most properly be committed.
Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 215; Noes 68: Majority 147.

List of the AYES.

Acland, Sir T. D.

Forster, J.

Anderson, Sir J.

Fortescue, C. S.

Annesley, Earl of

Freestun, Col.

Atherton, W.

Frewen, C. H.

Baines, rt. hon. M. T.

Gardner, R.

Ball, J.

Gaskell, J. M.

Bass, M. T.

Geach, C.

Beamish, F. B.

George, J.

Beckett, W.

Gladstone, rt. hon. W.

Bell, J.

Gladstone, Capt.

Berkeley, C. L. G.

Glyn, G. C.

Bethell, Sir R.

Goderich, Visct.

Blackett, J. F. B.

Goodman, Sir G.

Boldero, Col.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Bonham-Carter, J.

Gower, hon. F. L.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Bramston, T. W.

Greene, J.

Brand, hon. H.

Greene, T.

Brocklehurst, J.

Gregson, S.

Brotherton, J.

Grosvenor, Earl

Bruce, Lord E.

Hadfield, G.

Buckley, Gen.

Hall, Sir B.

Butt, G. M.

Hankey, T.

Byng, hon. G. H. C.

Harcourt, G. G.

Campbell, Sir A. I.

Harcourt, Col.

Cardwell, rt. hon. E.

Hastie, A.

Carnac, Sir J. R.

Heathcote, Sir W.

Cavendish, hon. C. C.

Herbert, rt. hon. S.

Cavendish, hon. G.

Hervey, Lord A.

Cheetham, J.

Heywood, J.

Chelsea, Visct.

Hindley, C.

Cholmondeley, Lord H.

Horsfall, T. B.

Christy, S.

Howard, hon. C. W. G.

Clinton, Lord C. P.

Hughes, W. B.

Cockburn, Sir A. J. E.

Hutchins, E. J.

Colvile, C. R.

Ingham, R.

Compton, H. C.

Johnstone, Sir J.

Cowan, C.

Keogh, W.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

King, hon. P. J. L.

Crossley, F.

King, J. K.

Dalkeith, Earl of

Kinnaird, hon. A. F.

Dalrymple, Visct.

Knatchbull, W. F.

Davie, Sir H. R. F.

Langston, J. H.

Davies, D. A. S.

Langton, W. G.

Denison, E.

Lawley, hon. F. C.

Dod, J. W.

Lee, W.

Duff, J.

Lewis, rt. hon. Sir T. F.

Duncan, G.

Liddell, H. G.

Dunlop, A. M.

Lindsay, hon. Col.

Dunne, Col.

Lindsay, W. S.

East, Sir J. B.

Lisburne, Earl of

Egerton, W. T.

Locke, J.

Egerton, E. C.

Lovaine, Lord

Elcho, Lord

Lowe, R.

Emlyn, Visct.

Luce, T.

Euston, Earl of

Mackie, J.

Evelyn, W. J.

MacGregor, J.

Ewart, W.

M'Gregor, J.

Fagan, W.

Mangles, R. D.

Feilden, M. J.

Marjoribanks, D. C.

Ferguson, Sir R.

Marshall, W.

Filmer, Sir E.

Matheson, Sir J.

Fitzgerald, W. R. S.

Miall, E.

Fitzroy, hon. H.

Miles, W.

Floyer, J.

Milligan, R.

Forster, C.

Mills, T.

207

Milner, W. M. E.

Scobell, Capt.

Mitchell, W.

Scully, F.

Moffatt, G.

Seymer, H. K.

Molesworth,rt.hn.SirW.

Seymour, W. D.

Monck, Visct.

Shelley, Sir J. V.

Moncrieff, J.

Sheridan, R. B.

Monsell, W.

Shirley, E. P.

Montgomery, Sir G.

Smith, J. A.

Morgan. O.

Smith, M. T.

Morris, D.

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Mostyn, hn. T. E. M. L.

Smith, W. M.

Mowbray, J. R.

Sotheron, T. H. S.

Mundy, W.

Stafford, Marq. of

Murrough, J. P.

Starkie, Le G. N.

Neeld, J.

Stirling, W.

O'Brien, P.

Strutt, rt. hon. E.

Oliveira, B.

Stuart, Lord D.

Osborne, R.

Talbot, C. R. M.

Otway, A. J.

Tancred, H. W.

Paget, Lord A.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Palmer, R.

Thompson, G.

Palmerston, Visct.

Thornely, T.

Pechell, Sir G. B.

Thornhill, W. P.

Peel, F.

Tomline, G.

Pellatt, A.

Tudway, R. C.

Pennant, hon. Col.

Vansittart, G. H.

Percy, hon. J. W.

Vivian, J. H.

Peto, S. M.

Vivian, H. H.

Philipps, J. H.

Walcott, Adm.

Phillimore, J. G.

Wahusley, Sir J.

Phillimore, R. J.

Warner, E.

Phinn, T.

Watkins, Col. L.

Ponsonby, hon. A. G. J.

Whitbread, S.

Portal, M.

Wilkinson, W. A.

Price, Sir R.

Williams, W.

Price, W. P.

Wilson, J.

Pritchard, J.

Winnington, Sir T. E.

Ricardo, O.

Wyndham, W.

Rice, E. R.

Wynne, W. W. E.

Richardson, J. J.

Young, rt. hon. Sir J.

Robertson, P. F.

TELLERS.

Russell, Lord J.

Hayter, rt. hon. W. G.

Sawle, C. B. G.

Mulgrave, Earl of

List of the NOES.

Adderley, C. B.

Grogan, E.

Alexander, J.

Gwyn, H.

Bailey, C.

Hamilton, G. A.

Ball, E.

Henley, rt. hon. J. W.

Baldock, E. H.

Hudson, G.

Bankes, rt. hon. G.

Jones, Capt.

Barrow, W. H.

Jones, D.

Bateson, T.

Kendall, N.

Beach, Sir M. H. H.

Knightley, R.

Bective, Earl of

Knox, hon. W. S.

Bennet, P.

Laffan, R. M.

Bentinck, Lord H.

Langton, H. G.

Beresford, rt. hon. W.

Lennox, Lord A. F.

Blair, Col.

Macartney, G.

Booker, T. W.

Mandeville, Visct.

Booth, Sir R. G.

Masterman, J.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Naas, Lord

Burroughes, H. N.

Napier, rt. hon. J.

Cecil, Lord R.

North, Col.

Chandos, Marq. of

Packe, C. W.

Child, S.

Pakington, rt. hn. Sir J.

Codrington, Sir W.

Palk, L.

Du Pre, C. G.

Parker, R. T.

Forbes, W.

Sandars, G.

Forester, rt. hon. Col.

Somerset, Capt.

Galwey, Sir W. P.

Spooner, R.

Galway, Visct.

Stafford, A.

Graham, Lord M. W.

Stanhope, J. B.

208

Taylor, Col.

Willoughby, Sir H.

Thesiger, Sir F.

Wise, A.

Trollope, rt. hon. Sir J.

Wyndham, Gen.

Tyler, Sir G.

Yorke, hon. E. T.

Vance, J.

TELLERS.

Vane, Lord A.

Newdegate, C. N.

Whitmore, H.

March, Earl of

Williams, T. P.

Clause agreed to.
House resumed. Committee report progress.

CHURCH BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
MR. HADFIELDsaid, he should move that the Committee be postponed until that day six months.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "this House will, upon this day six months, resolve itself into the said Committee," instead thereof.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he was not sure, if the hon. Member who had made that Motion knew the real object and meaning of the Bill, he would not have thought of impeding its progress. The circumstances which rendered the Bill necessary were these:—A contract had been entered into for the purpose of erecting a church in Lambeth. A part of the site of that church was originally comprised in one lease, the holder of which lease had granted a great number of under-leases. A contract had been entered into fur a portion of the land for a site for the church, and the only delay in building the church arose from time circumstance that the original lessor had been advised not to lease that part of the land, lest he should thereby impair or endanger his title to the rest. The Bill had been framed to enable the contract to be at once carried into effect, and to prevent the possibility of difficulties of that nature arising hereafter. The Bill had been suggested by a very eminent conveyancer; the propriety of such an alteration the law had received the general sanction of gentlemen who were eminently versed is the practice of conveyancing; and he earnestly trusted his hon. Friend would not oppose any difficulty in the way of proceeding with the Bill. A measure more necessary for the particular purpose, or more useful for general purposes, it was not very easy to conceive.
MR. W. WILLIAMSasked from what source the money was to come for building a church?
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he was sorry he could not answer that question. He supposed the money would be raised in the ordinary way.
Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question," put, and agreed to.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill considered in Committee, and reported as amended.

MANNING THE NAVY BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLsaid, he was not going to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but some of the clauses would require looking into, and he would reserve any objections he had to make until it went into Committee. It was called "A Bill for the more effectual Manning of the Navy," whereas, in point of fact, it related almost exclusively to the distribution of prize money. He regretted some further stimulus had not been applied, which would have the effect of manning our ships more effectually.
SIR GEORGE PECHELLsaid, he was also of opinion that some of the provisions of this Bill required considerable discussion. There was not a word of manning the Navy in it, and he gave notice that when it went into Committee he should enter fully into the subject.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, that when the Bill was introduced into the House, he fully explained the course which the Government intended to take, and the objects which they wished to accomplish. It was only a temporary enactment, a surrender on the part of the Crown, subject to the distribution which Parliament should provide, of that which was the prerogative of the Crown, namely, all prizes taken during the war. He hoped, therefore, that no unnecessary delay would be brought to bear against the measure.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2o.

NAVY PAY, ETC., BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. OTWAYsaid, he considered that the right hon. Baronet should have explained more fully this measure to the House than he had done. The whole scope of the Bill seemed merely to revert to the plan that was adopted in 1739, and which gave universal dissatisfaction. He
210
had reason to believe that the measure was regarded by the Navy generally as obtrusive, and was neither requisite nor desirable. The officers of the Navy had never, that he was aware of, expressed any dissatisfaction with the conduct of the Navy agents, and he could not see either the utility or expediency of substituting regimental agents in their place.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, that the Bill was framed for the express purpose of obviating the abuses which were proved to exist during the last war. Failures on the part of Navy agents were common during that war, and he had a list before him which showed that from 200,000 l. to 300,000 l. was lost through the failure and misconduct of those persons. The proceeds of the sales of prizes being paid into the hands of Navy agents, they had a deep interest in delaying the division of the proceeds, they having, until the proceeds were divided, the whole benefit of the use of the money of the captor. The object of the Bill was to ensure the prompt sale of the prize by a Government officer. From the moment the sale should be effected the proceeds of it would be paid to a public account, in England, opened at the Bank of England abroad, either with the Commissariat or a Navy agent, and the public would be liable for the full amount of the proceeds. There would, therefore, be prompt payment and ample security, and, as related to the interest of the captor, power was given to the captor to nominate his own agent. He was quite ready to meet bon. Members in Committee on the question, and he felt assured that if the measure were fairly and dispassionately viewed, it would be found that, in every respect, the interest of the service had been studiously consulted.
Motion agreed to; Bill read 2o.
The House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

MINUTES.
Took the Oaths.—The Earl of Sea-field.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Militia.
2a Exchequer Bills (£16,024,100); Episcopal and Capitular Estates Management, 1854.
3a Church Building Acts Continuance.

JUVENILE CRIMINALS—REFORMATORY SCHOOLS.
EARL EITZWILLIAM presented a petition from justices of the peace of the West Riding of Yorkshire and from Swansea, praying that reformatory institutions may be established for the reformation of juvenile offenders.
LORD BROUGHAMentirely agreed in the opinion that they should make every effort for the purpose of improving the system of secondary punishment, and, above all, of improving it by means of these reformatory schools. He had mentioned lately that he bad deemed it his duty, during a late visit to a neighbouring nation, to repair to Tours for the express purpose of examining that most important institution, the reformatory establishment at Mettray. He had heard it stated in France that the establishment at Mettray was the original of these excellent institutions; but that was not so, because nineteen years before the establishment of the institution at Mettray in the year 1839, namely, in the year 1820, an establishment was formed at Stretton-on-Dunmore, in the county of Warwick. He would not say that it had succeeded so well as the Mettray system had succeeded, because Mettray was established after the experience of the English establishment, and its originators had benefited by that experience, as well as by the results of a similar experiment which had been made with more or less success in the neighbourhood of Hamburg; but it was impossible to deny that the amount of the relapses was less considerable there than they had been on an average of years at Stretton-on-Dunmore. He never saw anything in

127
such a state of order as the establishment at Mettray was, when he had an opportunity of seeing it, and when he examined that school. The whole proceedings of every individual from the moment he enters until he leaves the establishment are registered. An accurate account is kept of his conduct and of his misdemeanors, more or less slight—and most of them are very slight; of the rewards he has received, and the punishment, extremely slight and well contrived, to which he is subjected; and on his leaving the establishment a watch is continued to be kept on the place where he is hired (it is chiefly an agricultural establishment), with the farmers and gardeners in the neighbourhood; so that the returns year after year tell precisely the whole effect of the system of discipline, and not only of discipline, but of kindly and patriarchal management, by which these persons had been dealt with. The plan adopted was to divide the whole of the inmates into families, each being under a chief, who had in most instances been educated in the place, and the persons composing the staff of officers had been taught the system by years of experience on the spot. He regretted to hear that the Strett-on-on-Dunmore establishment had, within the last six weeks, come to an end from the want of funds. It had been supported during the whole period of its successful existence of forty years entirely by voluntary contributions, no aid whatever having been given by Government, or by any public body, and it had now come to an end—he was sorry and ashamed to say—entirely from the want of funds. Funds for the Mettray establishment, and similar ones in France, no doubt were furnished by private individuals; but very large contributions were made to them—without which they must have failed, as well as others—by the enlightened wisdom of the French Government.
EARL FITZWILLIAMsaid, he took it for granted that if reformatory schools should be established, the expenses would be paid out of the public funds; and then came the very important question, whether they should be maintained out of the national funds or out of the funds of the county in which they should be established. He apprehended that they would not be complying with the wishes of the petitioners unless some public fund was appropriated for the maintenance of such establishments.
Petitions to lie on the table.

THE WAR WITH RUSSIA—QUESTIONS—

  TRANSPORT OF TROOPS—LAND CARRIAGE.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, I gave notice some days ago to the noble Duke the Secretary of War that I should take an opportunity of putting to him some questions of considerable importance with regard to the army now employed in Turkey. The first of these questions relates to the transport of troops to Turkey. The House of Commons, a few days ago, voted a sum of not less than 3,096,000 l. for that purpose. That appears to me, my Lords, a startling sum; and I must say that, at the commencement, as we now are, of a very expensive, a very difficult, and, I fear, a very long war, it appears to me to be our bounden duty to look most closely into all the details of the expenditure from the very commencement. If we early pay a bill, large as it is, without looking into its details, we shall soon come into difficulty, and there will be a general reluctance on the part of the people to prosecute a war that is so expensively and perhaps so recklessly conducted. I have seen that the expenditure for transport of troops is 3,096,000 l.; and as far as I can gather from what has been stated in another place by a Minister of the Crown, we have already sent 25,000 troops, and I believe the total number to be sent is 27,000, and, as far as I can calculate, the number of horses for cavalry and artillery will be about 5,000. Now, my Lords, the expense for which any lady or gentleman can proceed to India, round the Cape of Good Hope, with every possible comfort, is about 100 l.; so that, if every individual soldier had been sent to Turkey at the same rate of expenditure at which a lady or gentleman could proceed to India, the expense would have been 2,700,000 l. I find, also, that the expense of sending a gentleman's horse to India, without any additional charge for attendance—which in this case would not be incurred, as there is a soldier to every horse—is 50 l.; so that, if all these horses had been sent to India round the Cape, the expense would have been 250,000 l.; consequently, the whole expense of sending these horses and these ladies and gentlemen round the Cape to India would have been 2,950,000 l.—that is, it would have been less by 146,000 l. than the amount of cost of sending these 27,000 men and 5,000 horses to Turkey. My Lords, I thought, in considering this subject, that it was ad-

  129
  visible to look back to what had been the expenditure under the head of transport in former times, and I selected, as the most convenient time to refer to, the year 1808, a year in which great expenditure occurred on account of the war in the Peninsula. In that year, when it must be remembered that there was a depreciation in the currency of nearly 18 per cent, what was the expenditure? I find that in that year the whole charge for transport was 2,900,000 l., but that included a sum of 800,000 l. for the maintenance of prisoners of war; so that the whole sum, including the depreciation to which I have referred, was 2,100,000 l.—that is to say, very nearly 1,000,000 l. less than the sum asked for to pay the transport expenses of the present year. Now, my Lords, we have been told that never had exertions so great been made as at the present moment, and I thought it as well to look back to the year 1808 to see what took place then. I find that in that year the troops which were sent from this country greatly exceeded in number the force which has now been put in motion for service in Turkey. I find that in that year, at an early period of the year, 10,000 men were transported to Sweden; at a later period 5,000 men were despatched to Gibraltar, and by the close of the year the number of men sent to the Peninsula amounted to 49,000. In addition to that force there were also 6,696 horses; so that there were nearly 1,700 horses and 22,000 men more sent to the Peninsula than we have now sent to Turkey; and yet the expense of transport in that year was nearly 1,000,000 l. less than in the present year. My Lords, I must say that it is necessary to make some deduction from the charge for transports for the present year, because I think that there are charges under that head which were not paid by the transport department in the year 1808. I have selected a few items, amounting to 293,000 l., which ought to be deducted on that account, including 160,000 l. for coals for the engines, which of course could not occur in the year 1808; and after that deduction I find that the total charge for the present year is above 2,800,000 l. I have already stated that the charge in 1808, after deducting the amount required for the maintenance of prisoners of war, was 2,100,000 l.; so that the real difference is 700,000 l.; and, if to this I add the sum of 468,000 l. on account of the depreciation of the currency 18 per cent, the practical difference becomes 1,168,000 l. I think, my
  130
  Lords, that this statement is not suggestive of any blame to the Government, or to any officer of the Government, but that it justifies me in asking for some explanation of the items of which that large sum is composed. My Lords, I may mention one circumstance which fell under my own knowledge, and which induces me to think that the detention of transport ships may have some effect upon the great bulk of this charge. On the 8th of March I went on board two transport vessels, and on inquiring how long they had been engaged, I found that they had been engaged from ten days to a fortnight, and that they were ready to receive troops in three days. This was on the 8th March, and they sailed about the 8th of April; so that an additional expenditure had been incurred by the detention of those vessels—in the case of one of them of 1,800 l., in the case of the other, of 1,350 l. These were only two vessels; and there are a great number, for, as your Lordships are aware, the cavalry is only now on the point of sailing, while the ships necessary for their transport have been in the hands of the Government for a considerable period. There is another matter of a totally distinct nature about which I also wish to put a question to my noble Friend—and that is, I wish to ask him in what manner it is proposed by Government to pay the troops now serving in Turkey? I have made such inquiries as I could with regard to the currency in Turkey, and I have ascertained that that currency is depreciated 82½ per cent, that the silver currency is only copper washed with silver, and that the copper is visible at the edges of the coin and on the inscription. That currency is undergoing still greater depreciation, and the sovereign which in January was worth 125 piastres, is now, I understand, worth 150 piastres. It is, therefore, quite impossible that Government can pay the troops in the currency of the country. I understand that at Malta and at Corfu the troops are paid in the currency of England; but there is a difficulty in Turkey connected with our currency which does not exist at Malta or Corfu. The English soldier may have shillings, and the French soldier may have francs worth one-sixth less than our shillings; but the English coin meeting the French coin in the market will hardly obtain the value of this difference in exchange. It may be advisable to coin tenpenny pieces, nearly equivalent to the franc, to avoid this loss; but in Turkey the

  131
  larger the coin with which the soldier goes into the market the larger will be the loss, from the demand for small coin which he must have to make his purchases with. I should propose enabling the soldiers to go into the market with a still smaller currency more nearly resembling the silver coin of twopence; and it would be desirable, I think, to strike a number of those coins and distribute them, because they would nearly correspond with the current value of the piastre. I will venture to mention to your Lordships that in the Indian army there is in almost every regiment a person whose duty it is to change rupees into pice—the rupee contains sixty-four pice, and he is permitted to give sixty-three pice. It is found practically to be of great convenience; and I apprehend that the Government would do well to consider whether they cannot in some manner give the English troops in Turkey the same advantage as that possessed by the troops in India from this arrangement. They need not employ natives in this matter; their whole staff need not extend beyond the regimental paymaster; and I see no reason why arrangements could not be made through the Commissariat, which would place the paymaster in a position that would enable him to make the rate of exchange more favourable than the soldier could otherwise obtain. If the paymaster were enabled to pay the soldiers in small silver coin, they would at the same time afford them an opportunity of changing the small silver coin for the current coin of the country. This arrangement is sustained by its uniformly satisfactory practice in India. I am aware that what I am suggesting is not in accordance with the rules of political economy, and that it interferes with individual enterprise and fair competition in the market; but I am satisfied that the individual enterprises of the Armenian shoof would be too strong for the individual ignorance of the troops. The soldiers would be cheated, and would become exceedingly angry, and the result of that anger might be, that blows would be introduced into the currency of the market, and exercise a considerable influence on the price of commodities, while the coin on the other side might be knives and stilettos. These are inconveniences which ought not to exist, and I recommend my noble Friend (the Duke of Newcastle) to take the matter into serious consideration. There is one other point to which I wish to call the attention of the noble Duke. I desire to
  132
  know what measures have been adopted to afford the means of moving the army in Turkey? My Lords, I see by the public press that it is a common error in this country to suppose that the moment these troops are landed with their cavalry and artillery, the officer in command can move them wherever he pleases, or wherever the exigencies of the service may require. There cannot be a more grievous error. I do not state this upon my own authority, but I will take the liberty of reading to your Lordships an extract from a letter which I received about twenty-five years ago from the late Duke of Wellington, and which referred particularly to the condition of the Russian army in Turkey in the campaign then in course of progress. I had written to the Duke to ask him to be good enough to state his views as to the best mode of conducting any future war in Burmah in which this country might be engaged. The Duke in his reply pointed out the cause of the vast expense of war beyond sea as being the transport of animals, without which it was impossible to move an army, and he pointed out the great advantage the Russians then had in being able to transport troops by sea within a short distance of Constantinople; but that those troops could not move for want of animals and were thus useless. Now, it is, of course, impossible for me to judge what may be the amount of our force in Turkey which may be employed in operations inland, and what part may be required for garrison duty at Gallipoli or Constantinople, or for operations upon the shores of the Black Sea. That, of course, rests entirely with Her Majesty's Government to decide; but I will say, that even where our troops are in garrison, as they may be considered to be at Gallipoli, even there some animals are required for the purpose of alleviating the labour of the troops, for the purpose of enabling them to bring stores, ammunition, provisions—everything they require for the service—from the shore, which is at a distance, I understand, of nearly seven miles from the camp. More than that; if troops are to be removed by sea to any point upon the shores of the Black Sea, even there animals will be required; for that force, when thrown on shore for the purpose, it may be, of besieging a fortress must land heavy guns—must bring up all its provisions from the beach—all its stores and matériel. In former times no provision—or, at all events, very inadequate provision—was made for the purpose of enabling

  133
  our expeditions to have the advantage of the use of animals with which to make these necessary movements. Seamen and marines—especially seamen—were employed to a very great extent. It has necessarily very much disheartened these men to have to draw all these heavy guns and stores to, frequently, a considerable distance. They have, however, done that duty zealously and well, and would do it again, no doubt; but it must be recollected that while on shore the efficiency of the fleet, which may be suddenly called into action, is diminished by their absence, and also that these operations are conducted much more slowly than if the men had the advantage of animals; and the noble Duke opposite knows perfectly well that time, in an operation of this kind, is essential to success. Again, in any operation intended to be carried on along the shores of the Black Sea a very considerable number of animals would be required (besides those for the use of the artillery) for the purpose of facilitating the movements of the troops. If these animals were to be shoved out of the ship, and made to swim ashore through the surf as best they could, and if there was no hope of re-embarking any one of them, I still think it would be no less important that they should be made use of. It must be generally admitted, I think, that it will be impossible for any very large proportion of the force to be employed in mere garrison duty. At least some portion of our expeditionary force will be employed in the interior, and it is to be considered what number of animals is absolutely necessary for the purpose of enabling that force to move in a way to execute any operation required from it. I have no doubt that I may be supposed to entertain very extravagant views with regard to the difficulty of moving an army. It is generally understood that in India the baggage attending an army is unduly and unnecessarily large. But some few years ago a great general—Sir Charles Napier—went to India. He was perfectly aware of all the embarrassments which arose out of the enormous amount of baggage, and he set himself to reform that abuse. Sir Charles Napier has given to the world his reasoning upon the subject, and the amount of baggage which he considers absolutely necessary; and, without presuming to offer any opinion of my own upon the subject, I will state to your Lordships what amount of baggage he considers absolutely necessary. Now, his calculation was founded
  134
  upon the supposition that the army was a combined army of Natives and Europeans; but an army of that description requires a very much smaller amount of baggage than an army composed altogether of Europeans. Sir Charles Napier states distinctly that upon an average—of course the amount would vary according to circumstances—but, upon an average, there should be one camel to every two men. One camel was to be reckoned in the calculation as about equal to two horses; and therefore, if we are to move 15,000 men in the East, we shall require 15,000 animals. But, beyond this, Sir Charles Napier distinctly states that there ought to be a reserve of 30 per cent for contingencies; and any one who has seen the number of animals that are left upon the road upon even a comparatively short march must be of opinion that such a reserve is absolutely necessary. If, therefore, we are to move 15,000 men in any operation, we thus require 19,500 animals to enable that army to move, even upon the low and most economical calculation made by Sir Charles Napier. And then, it must be recollected that in Turkey—a country which very much resembles some parts of India—it will be necessary that the army, when engaged in operations in the interior, should move with at least fifteen days' provisions. This would require a still larger number of animals; and therefore it becomes a consideration of the greatest possible importance, for, unless sufficient means of carriage be furnished to the general, he has not any means of executing the great operations of war. I have thought it right to say this in justice to the officer in command in the East, and to the troops employed there; because, unless these means of carriage be supplied, they cannot be expected to act with that vigour and efficiency which would be desirable. The question I have to ask my noble Friend (the Duke of Newcastle) upon this subject is—what measures have been adopted for the purpose of furnishing the Army with these means of land carriage?
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: My Lords, I can assure your Lordships, and my noble Friend in particular, that there is no indisposition on the part of the Government, or on my part, to give to my noble Friend, and to the House, any information we possess, provided we can do so consistently with our regard for the public service; at the same time nobody knows better than the noble Earl that it is im-

  135
  possible for any person, except those immediately concerned in carrying on those affairs, to know what information can be given with safety, and what information ought not to be given. Now, as an instance—before I proceed to answer the other questions put by my noble Friend—with regard to this very question of the means at our command for the movement of troops, I can assure my noble Friend that, under certain circumstances, to answer that question in the only way an English Minister can answer—that is, with entire truth—might be giving a very great advantage to the enemy, while it would effect no good in this country. Suppose that, for the purpose of carrying on the war, adequate provision had been made for the movement of troops by land, and inadequate provision made for their movement by water, or vice versâ that inadequate provision had been made for the movement of the troops by land, while adequate provision had been made by water—would not the fact announced in this House, however great the certainty of the mistake being corrected, and the deficiency supplied, within the next month or six weeks—would not, I say, the knowledge of that fact be of the most essential importance to the enemy, as proving what operations we could undertake, and what operations we could not undertake, and enable them to provide their measures accordingly? I only say this, in reference to the inconvenience sometimes of putting questions of this kind, and in anticipation of my inability or objection on other occasions to answer them. That inability, as regards this particular question, does not exist on the present occasion, and it is for that reason that I have given the instance which I have just presented to your Lordships. I shall now proceed to give to my noble Friend such information as I can, and shall take the questions in the order in which he put them. The first question the noble Earl put was, whether I am prepared to lay upon the table of the House the details of the Estimates which have been lately voted by the House of Commons for the transport of the troops from this country to Turkey. My noble Friend said, with great justice, that the sum was a formidably large one, and that it required explanation. Now, as a matter of account, the Members of the Government will undoubtedly be bound to give a full and entire account of the manner in
  136
  which any money is disbursed which is voted by the House of Commons for the furtherance of this war; and as a matter of account, I can assure the noble Earl that no difficulty will be thrown in the way at the proper time for this information being given. But my noble Friend seems to forget, when he asks for an account of those sums, that this money has not been already expended, that the transports for this service have not already been paid for, that the whole proceeding is now in course of progress, and that the greatest possible practical inconvenience might arise from giving details which would enable those with whom the Government are in negotiation to deal more advantageously for themselves, but less advantageously to the public, than they can do at the present moment. A great part of the sum is only a matter of estimate; and with regard to those parts that could be considered more in the light of accounts, so great was the haste with which the Government had to take up a number of those ships, that it was impossible in some instances to come to an actual arrangement with the parties as to the sum that should be paid to them; and they, to meet the wishes of the Government that no time should be lost, consented, if any difficulty should arise, that the matter should be settled by arbitration. That is one case; as to another case, three-fourths of the amount have been paid, and one-fourth of the amount has been held back on account of some dispute that has arisen, and which is not yet decided. Therefore it is impossible to give my noble Friend such details as he requires, or attempt to give him any greater details than have already satisfied the House of Commons. I think my noble Friend will see that, being, as we are at this moment, in the market to deal with the persons possessing these vessels for the transport of troops, we should be neglecting the interest of the public service if we gave the details for which my noble Friend calls. I readily admit that the sum asked for is a formidably large one; but if he contrasts the expense with a former period, he should state it as the expense for conveying, not 27,000 troops, but 30,000 troops, as the truth is. My noble Friend contrasts the cost of conveying 27,000 troops to Turkey with the cost of conveying 27,000 ladies and gentlemen to India—and says that the cost for the conveyance of troops is greater than in the other

  137
  case. But I think his argument entirely fails. The noble Earl must bear in mind that these ladies and gentlemen who go to India round the Cape do not carry with them many thousand tons of ammunition and other articles which are required in the transport of troops. Again, another most important consideration is, that the vessels which convey ordinary passengers to India return to this country laden with return freight; but these transports, engaged for the conveyance of the troops to the East, in the great majority of instances have not been taken up by the voyage (in which case the expense to the Government would have been materially reduced), but they have been taken up for a period of twelve months; and the Estimates had to be based on the supposition that the vessels would be required for the whole of that time. Thus, my noble Friend will see that the comparison he has made falls at once to the ground, under the circumstances to which I have referred. The noble Earl said that he was led to form a had opinion of the mode in which these affairs have been conducted, and of the lavish expenditure incurred upon them, by facts that he had personally witnessed, with reference to the detention of two vessels—the Lord Palmerston and the Tonning—which he had seen at Woolwich; and he said that he was afraid the cavalry transports stood in the same category, having been taken up for many weeks, and yet only putting to sea at this moment. Now this is certainly the fact; but the Government will not have to pay for the delay—because the detention of these transports was not owing to the fault of the Government or the cavalry officers and troops, but rested with the contractors who provided the vessels. Although, undoubtedly, the ships had been taken up many weeks ago, the contracts had not been fulfilled; and this arises, I admit, from many circumstances which involve scarcely any blame on the part of the contractors. They have had many difficulties to contend with—such as the strike among the carpenters and other artisans by whom the vessels were to be fitted up, and the desertion of the sailors for the purpose either of enlisting on board the fleet, or of seeking employment in the merchant service—perhaps in ships bound to. Australia, attracted by the higher wages offered to them. All these circumstances mitigated any culpability that might attach to the contractors; but I must repeat, that it has been the
  138
  fault of those engaged to supply the ships, and not of the Government, that these horse transports have not sailed from this country many weeks ago. With regard to the Lord Palmerston sailing transport, to which my noble Friend adverted, that vessel took out the first detachment of artillery. It was detained from causes which it is not necessary to mention, and by the direction of the Government, for two or three days, but not longer; and that is the only instance of a sailing transport engaged to convey cavalry or artillery being detained one hour in their departure by the orders of the Government, or by any laches on the part of the military authorities. As regarded the other vessel mentioned by my noble Friend, the Tonning steamer, it took out a portion of the staff and part of a body of troops, who were conveyed to Turkey in three steam-ships. The receipt of the convention with Turkey in reference to the landing of English troops in Turkey was expected whilst this portion were under orders to sail, and they were detained a week or nine days waiting for its arrival after the vessel was ready to sail, so that as regards them, I think, some demurrage will have to be paid. But as respects the remainder of the vessels, the delay was occasioned in consequence of the inability of the contractors to prepare them for sea, and not from any fault on the part of the Government or the military authorities, or of the officers and men of the regiments that were ordered away.
  With reference to the second question of my noble Friend, as to the currency in which the troops in Turkey are to be paid—he is no doubt aware that there is a standing rule of the Commissariat Department; on occasion of any expedition of this sort, a general order is issued fixing the standard of the army pay, which, of course, is regulated by the intrinsic value of English coin, and its proportion to the coin of the country to which the troops are about to be embarked. With reference to the particular currency, he is no doubt aware that for a very long period the currency of the eastern shores of the Mediterranean has been almost entirely carried on in the colonnado, or pillar dollar. The diminution of this currency has of late years been very great, and even four or five years ago it was to a great extent disappearing, and the ordinary sovereign of this country to a considerable degree has taken its place in many

  139
  parts of the Levant, and of course more especially so in those most frequented by British subjects. The entire supercession of the colonnado by the English sovereign has been accelerated, I believe, by the enormous drain of the former coin to China. Under these circumstances, it was felt to be desirable that the basis of the currency in which the troops should be paid should be the English sovereign, and, therefore, an arrangement has been at once made for sending a supply of that coin from this country. I believe that 225,000 English sovereigns have been sent to the Commissariat Department accordingly, and 5,000 l. of English silver—the latter more as an experiment, in the direction which my noble Friend has suggested, than from any practical necessity at the present moment. This is meant as a temporary arrangement until the effect of the experiment has been ascertained; and inasmuch as the troops cannot be regularly paid in English sovereigns, it will be absolutely necessary that they should be paid in the current coin of the country where they were stationed. I am aware that my noble Friend has previously made the suggestions on this subject which he has thrown out this evening to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, I have to thank him for so doing. I think there is a great deal that is very valuable in his suggestions, and therefore we have transmitted a copy of them to the Commissariat in Turkey, accompanied with a desire that they should report how far it would be possible to carry them out, and whether any difficulty attaches to the plan originally devised for paying all the accounts in English sovereigns and in the coin current in the country, fixed in its proportion to the value of the sovereign.
  The last question put by my noble Friend was with respect to that point which I have already touched at the commencement of my observations, namely, the means of moving our troops. My Lords, I can assure my noble Friend—admitting to the full extent all that he has said, based on the great experience and information he has obtained by his attention to these subjects—that this matter has not been neglected, nor was it overlooked at the commencement of this expedition. Orders were sent out long before any troops embarked from this country to the Commissariat officers, who were early despatched to Turkey, instructing them to make in-
  140
  quiries in all directions as to the means of obtaining animals for carriage, and authorising them to make provisional contracts for purposes of transport. We, as long ago as the month of March—I forget now the exact day—had a report from one of the Commissariat officers, who stated that he had been more successful in this respect than he had at first anticipated; and every subsequent report received in this country leads us to expect that, although the means of transport in Turkey are not so good as might be obtained in other countries, there will be sufficient in point of quantity, and that there certainly will not be the difficulty originally apprehended. With the single exception of a very small transport corps organised in this country, the whole of the remainder will for the present be conducted by Turkish subjects, assisted by the Turkish Government; and only this morning a letter was received from a Commissariat officer, dated the 29th April last, in which appear these
  words:—"The Turkish Government acts with good faith and loyalty towards us in matters relating to transport and supplies." All the other accounts agree in entertaining a hope that the supply of transport will be sufficient, and every means are taken to provide the troops with baggage horses, which are abundant, and baggage mules, which are much less abundant and more expensive, and also with baggage waggons. On the other hand, as I have already explained to my noble Friend, we are also provided with transports for the conveyance of troops by sea. We have at our disposal permanently in those seas transports for an amount of force equal to at least 30,000 men, without encroaching on the resources possessed by our ships of war for carrying out effectually any operations which they may undertake. I hope, therefore, that my noble Friend will feel satisfied that all these important matters have not been neglected. As regards other points, I am not able to give him now the estimates for which he asks; but I can assure him that we shall have no hesitation, at the proper time, and consistently with the interests of the public service, to satisfy Parliament and the country as to the mode in which we have expended the money that has been so liberally voted by the House of Commons.
  I have thus far been answering questions that have been asked. Before sitting down, I will just mention—although no question has been asked with respect to it—that I have had an intimation from noble

  141
  Lords that in some quarters there is an apprehension that the state of the health of the troops at Gallipoli is such as to cause considerable anxiety. I am happy to state that it is in my power to give the most positive contradiction to any such statements. The number of British troops at Gallipoli is 5,300 men; and out of this force, by a letter I have received, dated the 25th of April, I find that there were only twelve men sick; and by another letter, dated the 30th of April, and received this morning, there were only twenty men sick. Such a small proportion of invalids in a force of 5,300 men is hardly to be found in the records of any army in the field, or even in the records of this country itself. I have thought it necessary to make this statement to your Lordships, in order to correct misapprehension.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, as the noble Duke had alluded to the health of the troops, he wished to say a word respecting the comfort of the wounded. He saw that the Government had devoted attention to providing waggons for a travelling hospital. He had no doubt that in passing over good macadamised roads these waggons would cause the least possible aggravation of the sufferings of the wounded; but as the troops would have to go up rocks and rugged bill country, it would be impossible that these waggons could follow them. Unless coolies were employed for the assistance of the wounded, they might depend upon it that men who had been injured would be left to die on the field of battle, and many others would have their sufferings increased.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, he should be sorry if there were any misapprehension on this subject. Great pains had been taken in organising an ambulance establishment on the most approved system, and this was the first time that such a provision had been made for an English army. It was quite possible that in many parts of Turkey these waggons would not be available for the conveyance of the wounded; but at the same time it had been thought desirable to send them out, in order that they might be useful where the roads were fit for them. This part of the arrangements would not interfere with the employment of any other means of conveyance where waggons should be found impracticable; and certainly whatever fault might be found with their other measures, the medical and hospital departments had been most effectually provided.
  142
  The staff of surgeons and the supply of medical appliances of every kind had been on the largest scale—larger than in any former war—and no pains, care, or cost would be spared to secure the fullest and most effectual provision for our wounded or sick soldiers.

  THE WAR WITH RUSSIA—QUESTION—

    BOMBARDMENT OF ODESSA.
    THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, he wished to ask the noble Duke whether Her Majesty's Government had received from the Admiral in the Black Sea any official account of the bombardment of Odessa; and, if so, what steps they would take for conveying the details of the operations to the public? He also desired to ask, with regard to the proceedings of the war generally, what course the Government intended to take in regard to the early communication to the public of the successive events as the information should reach the Government itself. The public anxiety as to such matters would be still greater in this war than in former wars, for now, while by means of the telegraphic despatch almost instantaneous communication would be made to this country of the occurrence of an action in any given place, no details could be expected through the same medium as to the numbers, and still less as to the names of the killed and wounded, details which, in former wars, accompanied the notification of the action itself. The anxiety of the public, or, at all events, of that portion of the public who had relatives and friends engaged in the war, would be in the highest degree increased by the intimation of an action having been fought, unaccompanied by a statement of the casualties occasioned; and it was, therefore, most expedient that, without waiting for the ordinary Gazette, the fullest information that Government should from time to time receive should forthwith be published, if necessary, in an extraordinary Gazette.
    THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: Despatches have been received this day from Admiral Dundas, narrating the bombardment of Odessa, the first announcement of which was made in this House a few days ago by my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Your Lordships are already in possession, through the newspapers, of all the details which are given in the despatches of Admiral Dundas, and I believe I should be wasting your Lordships' time if I were to read the cir-

    143
    cumstances narrated in those despatches. At the same time, I think I ought to mention to your Lordships that this despatch and its inclosures give a most positive and satisfactory denial to the statements which have been put forth relative to this affair in behalf of the Russian Government. From the despatch and its inclosures it clearly appears that our flag of truce was most undoubtedly fired upon by the batteries of Odessa; and when the account of that outrage and violation of the law of nations was conveyed to Admiral Dundas, Admiral Dundas was not satisfied in a case of that kind, with the reports of the captain and crew, however conclusive these reports might be to his own mind, but he took information from another person who was present on the Mole of Odessa when the gun was shotted and fired by the Russians. This fact is stated in the despatch; and on the receipt of this information, Admiral Dundas wrote to General Osten-Sacken, the General Commandant of Odessa, informing him that his excuse was found to be destitute of foundation, and, as a reparation for the insult offered to the flag of truce, he demanded the surrender of all the English, French, and Russian ships in that port, allowing a certain time for the Russian General to return either an assent or a refusal to the summons. No answer having been received, the Admirals took the course, the circumstances and consequences of which have been correctly related in the newspapers. I am happy to add to that statement, that the loss on the part of the English fleet was only one man killed and ten wounded, most of them slightly. As to the second question of the noble Earl, I have to state that the Government will publish the despatches through the Gazette to-morrow, and that will be the means in future of acquainting the public from time to time of the events of the war, as the Government receives its intelligence. I can also assure the noble Earl, that in all cases of important events, the Government, having a full appreciation of the interest and anxiety of the public, will not wait for the usual day for publishing the Gazette, but a supplemental Gazette will in such cases be instantly issued.
    THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, that he understood the noble Duke to state that the accounts in the newspapers of this event were correct. Now it appeared from the newspapers that the chief cause of the attack on Odessa was the
    144
    violation of the flag of truce. If that were so, he thought no punishment too strong to avenge such an act of barbarism. But would the Admiral have been entirely justified in attacking Odessa from the moment war was declared; or were they to infer that the orders to the Admiral were such, that if this outrage had not been offered to the flag of truce, he would not have been justified in attacking Odessa and the shipping there as he did? The general impression was, that the Admiral made this outrage the prime reason for bombarding the port; and it was desirable that that point should be cleared up.
    THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: I think the noble Earl is trespassing somewhat beyond the well-recognised rule in such cases, in calling upon me to explain what were the instructions given to the Admiral with regard to these transactions. The noble Earl must see that the instructions given to the Admiral will not bear merely upon this particular operation, but upon any others that may yet take place; and I must therefore decline to disclose what those instructions are. I can, however, assure the noble Earl and this House, that it is the strong feeling and desire of the Government that in the conduct of this war private and neutral property should be, as far as possible, respected, and that as little destruction should be caused to that property as is consistent with the effective carrying on of the operations.
    THE EARL OF DESARTsaid, there could be no second opinion as to the great credit the operations at Odessa reflected on all the officers concerned.

    EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR ESTATES MANAGEMENT, 1854, BILL.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
    THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, there was one provision in this measure savouring of the principle of the Bill, to which he had an objection. In the Bill which this was intended to be a continuance of, it was provided, that if a reversion of tithes, or land in lieu of tithes, were to be sold, as a previous condition of such sale, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be required to take the present spiritual wants of the district into consideration. Now, by the present Bill, this condition, which operated in the nature of a safeguard for the claims of particular localities in regard to spiritual instruction, was altogether

    145
    omitted; and on that ground he objected to the measure in its present shape. In Committee he should take measures to remedy this great defect.
    THE EARL OF POWISsaid, that in his opinion the House should have in the first instance full information as to the action of the Church Commission—what they had been about, what the result of their proceedings had been, how they had expended the immense sums that had been placed at their disposal, and whether the calculations on which they had acted in the distribution of ecclesiastical revenues had proved correct. Since 1837 vast quantities of property had been sold under the Act. From 1837 to 1840 episcopal property alone was dealt with, but from 1840 to 1850, under the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill, a large amount of augmentation had been given out of capitular property to the poorer benefices. The Commissioners had received power to borrow 600,000 l. from Queen Anne's Bounty fund, to be consumed in twenty years, in the expectation that by the end of that time the leases would become so much more valuable as to enable them to repay it, interest and capital, as well as to meet their grants to poor livings. From that time to this, however, not a single intelligible statement had been made as to whether their calculations were real or whether they were fallacious. By the account of last year the Commission had expended 9,500 l. more than their annual income; the sum of 10,000 l. being originally stated as the utmost limit, which they could not overpass. The episcopal portion of the accounts, which was formerly favourable, was now unfavourable; that was to say, the amount paid to the smaller sees was nearly 10,000 l. a year more than was received from the larger ones. He found that in conformity with a promise which had been made when he brought the subject forward last Session, there was, in the accounts of the present year, some attempt to make a distinction between revenue and capital; but he complained that in respect of the whole of the transactions from the year 1837 to the year 1853, not only had no information been given, but there was not even the vestige of an attempt to give it. The result was, that the House must be in perfect ignorance whether the Commissioners had made an a extravagant amount of annual grants and incurred ex-travagant annual liabilities, or were acting within that prudent margin of 10,000 l. a
    146
    year, which was the professed basis of their operations when Parliament allowed them to borrow that sum of money. Moreover, it was utterly impossible in these accounts to distinguish the income from the capital. If, therefore, the powers of the Church Estates Commission—against which, abstractedly, he had no objection—were to be renewed, be thought that an understanding should be first come to for submitting proper and decent accounts to Parliament in future. He might be told that it was a difficult thing in this case to distinguish revenue from capital. But if that were so, surely it was high time that the difficulty should be grappled with and mastered, and that they should not go on in this hand-to-mouth manner, utterly unable to determine whether their expenditure was justified or not, There was no reason, with which he was acquainted, why these accounts should not be given in such a shape that Parliament might be able at once to see whether the Commissioners had or had not incurred an amount of liabilities which was disproportionate to the means at their disposal. This system of grants and consumption of capital bad gone on for seventeen years, and he defied any one to ascertain from the accounts submitted to the House whether, at this moment, Church property was better or worse to the extent of hundreds of thousands of pounds than it was when the account began. Not being aware that the Bill was to come on for second reading today, he was unprepared to enter upon details. But having endeavoured to form some idea of the prudence of the transactions in which the Commissioners had been engaged, he could venture to assert that their accounts were utterly defective, that they did not furnish the information which Parliament was entitled to have, and would not enable one to form an opinion as to the accuracy of the principles or calculations upon which their proceedings were conducted; and he trusted that the Government, in continuing the Estates Commission, would give Parliament some security that more specific and intelligible accounts should in future years be laid upon the table.
    THE EARL OF CHICHESTERwas understood, to say, that for a considerable number of years the Church Estates Commission had incurred no expenditure for grants except such as were obligatory under Acts of Parliament; but that calculations which had been made justified the hope that in a few years the Commissioners

    147
    would be able to resume the making of grants. He to a great extent agreed with the noble Earl (Earl Powis) that the kind of account to which he referred would be a useful document; but he denied that fuller accounts could be published. The accounts now published were as complete as they could be, though they were not on the plan desired by his noble Friend. That plan, if adopted, might not be so satisfactory to the House as it would be to his noble Friend, and he had rather therefore pause before altering the present system.
    On Question, agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly; and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

    UNAUTHORISED NEGOTIATIONS BILL.
    LORD CAMPBELL,in naming the Select Committee on this Bill, said, that he had not the most distant intention that the Bill should interfere with the enforcement of the private rights of any portion of Her Majesty's subjects. It was intended by the Bill, as originally framed, to prevent such deputations as that to Florence upon the case of the Madiai. His own opinion was, that such a proceeding was not in the exercise of any constitutional right, that it was not, generally speaking, calculated to gain its object, and that with regard to the great Powers of Europe, it might be attended with inconvenient results. After hearing the opinions which had been expressed by noble Lords for whom he had a sincere respect, particularly by the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Shaftesbury), he would willingly abandon that part of the Bill which applied to such cases, and would consent that the operation of his measure should be confined to such deputations as should seek to attain objects injurious to the British empire, where there should be an intention to thwart the measures of the Government, or to do that which would be productive of inconvenience to the public service. With that restriction he hoped that the Bill would meet the approval of their Lordships.
    THE EARL OF CLANCARTYwished to know if the Bill would apply to such a deputation as had recently proceeded to St. Petersburg from the Quakers of this country.
    LORD CAMPBELLsaid, the Bill, in its restricted form, would not apply to such a deputation as that which had recently proceeded from the Quakers of this country to the Emperor of Russia. Although he con-
    148
    sidered the tendency of such deputations to be very injurious, he believed the intentions of the particular deputation to which he referred were perfectly harmless, and such deputations would not be prevented for the future. The Bill would only apply to such cases as that of Mr. Smith O'Brien, or that of the deputations which went to France in 1791, where there was an intention to carry out views prejudicial to the interests of this country.
    LORD BEAUMONTwished to know what was left in the Bill, now that the noble and learned Lord proposed that it should not apply to persons, who, though their proceedings might be injurious to the country, had no evil intentions. It appeared to him that the Bill with the modifications proposed by the noble and learned Lord, would apply only to the case of persons who were engaged in conspiracies with foreign Powers against this country, and he conceived that persons who entered into such conspiracies could be punished under the existing law. He wished to know, therefore, why their Lordships were asked to sanction such a measure?
    LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that there remained in the Bill provisions which he regarded as very important, and which his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst), who was not now present, fully approved. The Bill would include the enactments of the American law, which were admitted on all hands to be highly salutary, and would also make certain proceedings which English subjects might now do abroad with perfect impunity punishable, for the future, as misdemeanors. He thought he had stated the other night, without any risk of being misunderstood, that, by the law of England, cognisance could not be taken of acts committed beyond the territory of England. Acts, however mischievous, which were committed beyond the seas, might be committed with perfect impunity; and one object of this Bill was, to render English subjects amenable to the law of England for acts committed in foreign States, which acts might be detrimental to their own country, although they might not be punishable by the existing law.
    THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREwished to remind the noble and learned Lord that there were some 5,000,000 of British subjects in Ireland who professed the Roman Catholic faith, and who necessarily must communicate through their bishops, or other persons, with the Pope of Rome.

    149
    He hoped the noble and learned Lord would take care that his Bill did not interfere with such communications.
    LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that he believed that the Bill, as it originally stood, would not have interfered with the spiritual intercourse between Roman Catholics and the See of Rome; and he was quite certain that as it was now framed there was not the smallest possibility of its offering any obstacle to that communication.
    Committee named.

    SPIRITUAL DESTITUTION OF THE LABOURING CLASSES.
    Order of the Day read.
    THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAmoved to resolve—
    "That the Religious Wants of the great body of the Labouring Classes employed in our Manufacturing Districts (from the extensive Deficiency of Church Accommodation, of resident Clergy to administer to their Spiritual Necessities, and of Schools to afford them a sound Scriptural Education) demand the earliest Attention of Parliament,"—
    He would not detain their Lordships by entering into details at any length. The necessity which existed for making provision for the religious wants of the people, and the establishment of schools for their sound scriptural education, was so generally admitted, that he might almost content himself with laying the Resolution affirming it upon their Lordships' table, without adding a single observation of his own to enforce or recommend it; for if any man, either in or out of that House, holding the position of a legislator, admitted their existence and denied his responsibility to lend a helping hand for their removal, any arguments which he could advance would be quite useless, for he was convinced that by such a man even a voice from Heaven denouncing such a dereliction of duty to our country and to God would pass unheeded and disregarded. It was a notorious fact that the people of England anxiously desired an extension of religious knowledge; and he felt it to be an imperative duty on the part of the Legislature of this Christian country no longer to delay looking into the subject of the spiritual wants of the great body of the people. The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, he begged to remind their Lordships, was effected by members of the Protestant Church, and they ought not now to be told they were not to have a particular system of religious education,
    150
    because the whole of the nation did not entertain their peculiar doctrines. They had a scriptural Church connected with the State of the country, and during the thirty years that he had had the honour of sitting in that House, he had frequently endeavoured to draw the attention of their Lordships to this great and important subject; for he held it to be among the first of their duties to give to the people of this country every necessary means of religious instruction, alike as regarded Church accommodation, a resident clergy to administer to their spiritual wants, and schools to afford them a sound scriptural education. He knew it was said to be impossible, in the present state of society, for the Government to establish schools confined to the teaching of the peculiar doctrines of the Established Church; but, for his part, he was of opinion that schools might be established where at least the teaching of the Holy Bible should be one of the fundamental rules; and he was convinced that the great body of Protestant Dissenters, especially the Wesleyans, would readily come forward and give their support to such a scheme as that. On a recent occasion this great Christian country was engaged in a solemn act of public humiliation and prayer, and, although they could only judge from outward appearance of the feelings which influenced the human heart, the manner in which that day was observed, not only in the metropolis, but through the length and breadth of the land, must have afforded deep gratification to every Christian well-wisher of the country. It appeared by the last Census returns that during the first half of the present century upwards of 10,000,000. had been added to our population; and within the last ten years no less than 2,700,000. It appeared, also, that there were upwards of 2,000,000 of people who, if disposed to attend places of worship, would be altogether without church accommodation, and it was, therefore, necessary that increased means of spiritual instruction should be provided. But he was not one of those who considered that the mere building of churches was the first step towards the religious instruction of the people. He believed that the establishment of sound scriptural schools and a resident missionary clergy would prove the most efficient means of reaching the mass of those who, through the neglect of their duty by the Legislature, had been allowed to grow up around us in a state of

    151
    perfect infidelity and absolute heathenism; and that, then, if new churches were built, they would be crowded by earnest and devout worshippers. Let their Lordships reflect for a moment upon the present circumstances of the country, and the national judgments which had visited the land. Let them reflect upon the late awful famine, which had carried off so many hundreds and thousands of their countrymen; that fearful pestilence which even now continued to hover on our shores; and the great war upon which we had just entered, and the result of which no man living could foresee, or tell how it might affect the greatness and the prosperity of the empire. They could not contemplate these national judgments without, as Christian and responsible beings, asking themselves if, as a nation, we had given any cause for such a visitation, and yet fail to perceive and honestly to declare that we had shamefully neglected the first duty of the country. He charged it on no particular Government—he charged it on the Legislature. They had all been guilty of neglecting their duty towards God, and if on the day of national humiliation and prayer, which had lately been observed throughout the land in such a manner as must have excited heartfelt gratification in the breast of every well-wisher of his country, they had closely examined the sins of the nation, he believed that they must have confessed that the most prominent of those sins had been the great neglect of which they had been guilty in failing to meet the spiritual wants of the poorer classes, over whom, in the providence of God, they had been placed. He could not believe that the noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government would refuse his sanction to the Resolution he had now to propose. He knew well the pressure of the war, and how much the time of the Government was occupied in taking measures to mitigate the evils which it necessarily brought upon the country. He did not, therefore, ask their Lordships to agree to any specific measure upon the subject, but simply to acknowledge the existence of this pressing evil, and to declare that when the proper opportunity arrived, they would take it into their consideration, and endeavour to apply a remedy. The noble Earl concluded by moving the Resolution.
    THE EARL OF ABERDEEN: My Lords, I should be very sorry to appear to say anything at variance with the spirit of the Resolution which the noble Earl has pro-
    152
    posed; to much that he has said I willingly assent, for it is difficult to exaggerate the amount of spiritual destitution which prevails in some parts of the country, particularly in the manufacturing towns. My Lords, I know the zeal and sincerity of the noble Earl in his endeavour to meet those evils, and, agreeing as I do with many of the sentiments he has expressed, I willingly assent to the Motion he has made. But I would submit to the noble Earl that, when he moves this Resolution, it must be surely with some particular view; it cannot be that a mere barren declaration could satisfy any object, but it must be with a view that Parliament should act in consonance with the Resolution. My Lords, I cannot say that I think it is at all probable that Parliament would be induced to meet the deficiency of the church accommodation of which he has complained by grants made for that purpose; at least I should be very unwilling to propose to Parliament any such grant. Agreeing with him, as I do, in the great amount of spiritual destitution and the extent of the want of church accommodation, I still think we have great reason to congratulate ourselves upon the efforts which have been made of late years to supply that want. I think that during the latter part of the first half of this century individuals have done so much to provide means for extending church accommodation as to show much more may yet be done without coming to the Government for assistance for such a purpose. I will for a few moments call your Lordships' attention to what has been done since the commencement of the present century in order to show you the rapid progress which, through great energy and activity on the part of members of the Church of England, has been made in supplying the means for remedying the evil complained of by the noble Earl. In the commencement of this century, from the year 1801 to the year 1811, the number of churches built in England and Wales was 55; in the next ten years that number bad increased by 97; between 1821 and 1831, the number built was 276; between 1831 and 1841, that number increased to 667; and during the ten years preceding the last Census, the number of churches built in England and Wales amounted to 1,197. Now, we find that the greatest increase—that which took place within the last twenty years—has been effected without Government aid, and solely by the energy, and piety, and

    153
    zeal of members of the Church; and even the building of this large number of churches does not represent the whole of the good effected, for church accommodation was increased to a far greater extent by the restoration, enlargement, and improvement of the churches which took place during the same period—the list I have read being only a record of the churches built. Now, the fact of these churches being built by private exertions—the private and local exertions of individuals—contrasts strongly with what was done at the time Government aid was afforded towards the building of churches on the proposition of my noble Friend on the cross-bench (the Earl of Shaftesbury). The churches built by the Commissioners under those circumstances were, generally speaking, most improvidently built. They were built at a most irrational expense, and the funds were most injudiciously appropriated for the purpose. During the first thirty years of the century, 500 churches were built, at a cost of 3,000,000 l. sterling, 1,152,000 l. being provided out of the public funds and the remainder from private benefactions. During the following twenty years there were no public grants for any fresh undertakings, and yet, within that period, 5,500,000 l. was spent, and 2,029 churches were built; so that, during the few years since the cessation of public grants, the efficiency of the remedy for the evil complained of by the noble Earl has increased immeasurably, and I must say that a spirit does exist at this moment, with the view of supplying the wants of the labouring classes in respect to religious instruction to a degree that never, in my memory, has existed before. That spirit is still on the increase, and I have no doubt that by the private exertions which will be made we shall meet the evil which exists far more effectually than by Government grants. I quite agree with the noble Earl that this is a great and necessary duty, but noble efforts have been made by individuals in the cause; and in proof of them let me mention to your Lordships the exertions made by the most rev. Prelate who presides over the clerical affairs of the metropolis, who has built more than 200 churches during his ministry, and also to the metropolitan, the success of whose exertions has been not much less. The noble Earl has stated that he thought the building of churches should not be the first object; but I believe that a church has never yet been
    154
    built without speedily drawing within its walls a congregation, and, therefore, I think the first and most advantageous act in the way of supplying the deficiency complained of is the building of churches. In addition to the want of church accommodation the noble Earl has also appealed to the State in behalf of a sound scriptural education. What the noble Earl means by a sound scriptural education is, I suppose, an education in accordance with the doctrines of the Church of England. I agree with him in desiring to see a sound system of education introduced; but before we can hope to see such an education as this, we must come to some agreement with those who have claims also upon the State and the Government for the relief of their wants. We can no longer with truth say that the religion of the Church of England is the religion of the people. I do not mean to assert that it may not enjoy a numerical majority; but, notwithstanding, the amount of dissent and the number of the various sects and denominations is such as to entitle them to very great consideration. Those persons are good citizens and loyal subjects, and I say it is the duty of the State to care for their education equally with that of the members of the Church of England. My Lords, the difficulty of establishing any united system of education is so great that I begin to fear it must be considered as insuperable. But, my Lords, although the system adopted may not have worked so satisfactorily as could have been wished, I must remind your Lordships that the State has not altogether neglected measures for the education of all classes and all denominations. Just look at the progress made under this head since the revised system of grants voted by Parliament and distributed by the Committee of Privy Council. I do not know, but I am afraid this is not the most satisfactory mode of dealing with this subject; but, under the circumstances, I believe it to be the only practicable one, and I trust that the manner in which the Privy Council have discharged their duty to the country has given general satisfaction. This system of Parliamentary grants for the purpose of education commenced in the year 1839, when the sum of 50,000 l. was voted for the purpose. I will not weary your Lordships by going through the whole of the years, and the gradual augmentation of the grants, but in the last year, 1853, those grants amounted to 260,000 l.

    155
    I do not say that that is a large sum for such a purpose; on the contrary, if no better system can be devised, I am disposed to think it wise to extend and greatly increase, for such a purpose, that sum, large as it is. But I hope we shall shortly have a better system. There is a Bill before the other House of Parliament for the purpose of establishing a general system of united education in Scotland. Whether that will succeed or not I am unable to say; but it was introduced at least under very favourable auspices, and I must say if it does not succeed I shall be inclined to despair altogether of ever seeing, either in that country or this, a system of united education. We therefore, must do the best we can to supply the wants which have been described, by such a mode as I have pointed out; and I do think that a judicious increase and the judicious application of grants by the Committee of Privy Council offers practically the best mode of meeting the educational wants of the classes to which my noble Friend has alluded. Having said that, I cannot see the advantage of laying on the table a Resolution like that moved by the noble Earl, without any practical result expected or intended to be derived from it. I think there is nothing to be gained by such a proceeding; and it is quite unusual, in a Parliamentary sense, to lay on the table a declaration of that sort from which no particular measure is to ensue. Having said that I sympathise entirely with the feelings of the noble Earl on this subject, I should be very sorry, indeed, to meet such a Resolution with a direct negative; but, under the circumstances, I hope your Lordships will permit me to move the previous question.
    EARL NELSON: My Lords, I quite agree in many of the remarks which have fallen from the noble Earl at the head of the Government; and as a friend to the Church of England I would be one of the first to protest against asking aid from the State. We have done a great deal, both in the building of churches and the erecting of church schools, but, notwithstanding all that has been done, we must remember that there is a great want which we have not yet met, and that cannot be met by the means which have hitherto been employed. It is a patent fact that in all our great towns in many of the manufacturing districts there are masses of the population who are virtually not only excluded from the Church, but are untouched either by
    156
    the Church or by dissent, and who are nearly in a state of heathenism. Although! I do not ask Government for any aid towards reclaiming these people, I think a great deal might be done by the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the best mode of meeting the difficulty. Many of the working men in the country consider that it is the duty of the Church to move in this matter. Now there does not appear to be any apathy on the part of individuals to move in the matter. Many solitary efforts have been made from time to time for remedying this admitted grievance, but they have all fallen short of the exigency of the case; and I believe that what is really wanted is some means of acting together to meet the awful deficiency of religious instruction among us. I hope that a Commission will be appointed by the Government, or else that the most rev. Metropolitan will call together some of his right reverend brethren, some of the most influential of the laity, and some of the parochial clergy, to discuss the best mode of supplying the melancholy want of spiritual provision and church accommodation disclosed by the Census returns. I believe that the most effectual method of combating the irreligion which prevails amongst the masses would be to send out a missionary staff of the clergy. We shall never succeed unless we are prepared to treat the people as if they were in a state of heathenism. I believe that the working men of this country are favourably inclined towards the Church of England; and I can state one curious fact in corroboration of that impression. Some time ago, when I was conversing with a very clever working man, I asked him what religious body had the greatest power over his fellow-workmen. He replied, that some years ago he should have said the Wesleyans; but, since they had had a split amongst them, he believed that the Church of England stood next on the list; but that, if we wished well to the Church of England, we ought to do all in our power to procure more clergymen, for it was clear to all that she was more deficient in clergymen in proportion to her people than any other religious body. I therefore am of opinion that the first thing to be done is to employ large bodies of clergy for real missionary work. We should require funds to support them, and more extended means for educating them than the Universities now present. In this respect the Roman Catholics in Ire-

    157
    land teach us a useful lesson; for the way in which they provide for their priesthood is by selecting the cleverest boy in the village school and sending him to college for instruction for the ministry. Next to the employment of a large missionary staff of clergy would be the establishment of an organised body of the laity, voluntarily working under the clergy in their respective districts. I cannot refrain from mentioning the case of a friend of mine, the incumbent of Yarmouth, who proceeds on this principle. He divided his large parish into eight districts; these districts are placed under bodies of the laity, and visited by them; they all meet at the beginning of the week, and give a report of their proceedings to the minister, and a regular missionary work is carried on, and with most wonderful success. Next to voluntary b organisation of the laity comes increased church accommodation. I do not say always increase the number of churches, because I think when we have to act against such a mass of irreligion as that by which we are surrounded, we ought in the first place to make better use of the churches already in existence. I believe much might be done in our cathedral towns by periodical preachings in the cathedrals, if a sufficient staff of clergy could be provided, and if periodical services could be performed in the naves of those cathedrals, I am sure the people would flock to them. But what is the case at present with respect to the churches in our towns? Most of them are used merely for morning, afternoon, and evening service. In many of the churches services might take place at hours more suitable to the working man than the hours at present fixed. This system is acted upon in the Roman Catholic places of worship. In some of the churches abroad the service of the Church of England is performed at one hour, some other Protestant service at another hour, and at another comes the Roman Catholic service. I have mentioned the points which appear to me to be the most important. I believe there are means by which the Church of England might provide a remedy for the evils complained of, and I am anxiously expecting the Report of the Cathedral Commissioners; and when we have seen what they propose and what the Ecclesiastical Commissioners can do, I have no doubt that a part of any fund that may be required can be raised by voluntary contribution. For the want of some practical
    158
    plan we go on talking year after year and doing nothing; but I believe that by issuing a Commission, or by the adoption of the suggestion which I have thrown out to the Metropolitan, we should be able to devise some efficient remedy for the evils by which we are surrounded.
    THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, he hoped that the noble Earl who proposed the Resolution would acquiesce in the suggestion made by the noble Earl at the head of the Government, to dispose of it by the previous question, not because he differed from the noble Earl in the estimate of the great lack of spiritual provision for the people, nor because he differed from him in his estimate of the great importance to us, as a nation, of providing for the religious wants of the people; but because he was convinced that such a Resolution did really point the minds of men in the wrong direction for that relief which was required. He was convinced that in the present state of the population of the country the Church of England could not with propriety or advantage ask for grants from the public funds for the strengthening, encouragement, and development of religious education. Although he lamented the fact of a large portion of the population having separated from the Church, there was still, thank God, the great majority of the population professing the religion of the Church of England. Even in the Census returns lately given the majority was of this kind—that whereas on the particular Sunday named there attended the Churches of England 2,300,000, the largest attendance of the next largest religious denomination—and that a promiscuous one—was only 515,000. Now, although he said that those Census returns were singularly inaccurate in this respect, it was sufficient to show that the members of the Church of England were greatly in the majority. Indeed, he should be thankful if he were allowed to test the accuracy of those returns, not by the general results in the office of the Registrar General, but by the details of those returns sent from the several districts from which the general returns were tabulated. He had himself found many singular inaccuracies in respect to those parts of the country with which he was more particularly acquainted. But even making every allowance for those inaccuracies, he thanked God that the Church of England was the Church of the overwhelming majority of the people of this country. This fact, however, he did

    159
    not think would justify her in appealing to Parliament for the means of extending her power by grants of money, and he should deprecate, even if the Government were disposed to assent to such a proposal, the reception of such grants. What the Church of England wanted was increased liberty to adapt themselves to the present necessities of the people. He believed that they could only ask for a continuance of that liberty which they enjoyed by showing that they were deserving of it. He believed that they could only get increased grants by a diminution of their present liberty, and that the result of such aids would be to stir up that inimical feeling towards the Church which was now happily slumbering, and that they would check that flow of voluntary help which had ever been liberally exercised in that Church, and to which the noble Earl called attention by the aid of such a striking array of figures. When they had expended 3,000,000 l. by the aid of the Government upon building churches they could only raise 1,900,000 l. of that sum by voluntary assistance. They, however, were enabled to raise 5,000,000 l. within a very much shorter period, when they had only their own voluntary efforts to depend upon. Although he thought that the Resolution of the noble Earl was influenced by the best intentions, yet its adoption by the House would be calculated to lessen the labours of the clergy, and to diminish their influence in the land. He should be sorry to see the expectations of those who desired to promote the greater efficiency of the Church disappointed, but he hoped that they would turn their attention to those internal exertions which ha thought would suffice, with God's blessing, to overcome the difficulty, rather than resort to what he believed was a dangerous and palsying source of revenue, namely, a public grant from the public money of this land.
    THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVIDSsaid, ho thought that the adoption of the Resolution would place the important question they were considering upon a totally false and delusive foundation. The noble Earl who proposed this Resolution had, with his usual earnestness, adverted to several calamities and afflictive visitations which had recently befallen this country. The noble Earl had ventured to do that from which he (the right rev. Prelate) would shrink—namely, to assign a cause for those calamities, one which was necessarily hidden from the human mind, and buried
    160
    in the depths of the Divine councils. Now, he would only observe that, in these remarks the noble Earl had fallen into an enormous anachronism, extending to an interval of about 300 years. The noble Earl attributed those calamities to the neglect of the Government which had failed to provide, by grants out of the public Treasury, the means of supplying a remedy for the spiritual destitution under which the people were labouring. The noble Earl had confounded a present effect with a remote cause. If there bad been any guilt in this matter, it certainly was not chargeable on any Government in our day, but had its origin in those religious dissensions which broke out about 300 years ago, and had continued down to this day. These dissensions were the palpable cause which precluded the nation and the Government from meeting the evil which they all deplored. He thought, therefore, that when the noble Earl treated the evils which had come upon us as a punishment for a national sin, he should have recollected that this sin was committed three centuries ago, and that it was not in our power at once to remedy the evil. If there was the slightest prospect that the Resolution, if passed, would have the effect of healing those religious dissensions, and of restoring us to that unity of feeling which was broken 300 years ago, then he would most cheerfully consent to it. But inasmuch as we were labouring under evils arising from causes so remote, he thought that the language which had fallen from the noble Earl was much to be deplored, as it could only have the effect of diverting the attention of the country and of Parliament from the remedies by which the evils complained of could be mitigated or removed.
    THE EARL OF CLANCARTY: My Lords, having listened with attention to this discussion, I wish, with your Lordships' permission, to say a few words before it closes. The noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government, in objecting to the Resolution of my noble Friend, adverted to the fact, certainly a very gratifying one, that of late years a large and increasing number of churches had been built by the munificence of individuals, and that the yearly increase of church accommodation had been greater from that source than formerly, when the State gave aid to the building of churches; but both the noble Earl and the right rev. Prelate, who spoke last but one, appear to me to attach far too much importance to these church

    161
    buildings, as a means of supplying the spiritual wants of the country. Church accommodation is, no doubt, very important and much needed; but much more important is that religious training of the population which induces them to resort to places of worship. I therefore deeply regret the manner in which the noble Earl noticed that part of the Resolution and of my noble Friend's speech which referred to the want of adequate provision for the scriptural education of the poor. The noble Earl could not distinguish scriptural from sectarian instruction, and, therefore, could promise nothing. He did not consider that the Established religion was the religion of the masses of the people; perhaps it was not; but the people of England, whether members of the Established Church or Dissenters, were a people professing Christianity, and should, therefore, not be left in that state of heathen ignorance which had been this evening admitted and lamented on both sides of the House. After the manner in which the Government has for so many years disregarded the petitions that have been presented from Ireland for the sanction, aid, and encouragement of scriptural education for the poor of that country, I ought, perhaps, not to be surprised that the noble Earl should receive so unfavourably the representation made by my noble Friend in behalf of the neglected masses of the manufacturing population of England. The noble Earl has so repeatedly affirmed that the godless system of education under the Irish National Board was the greatest blessing ever conferred upon Ireland, that he is only acting in consistency with that opinion in withholding from, or rather in not extending to, the working classes, whose ignorant condition he admits, the means of Scriptural instruction which my noble Friend calls upon the State to provide. But I would warn the noble Earl that such spiritual destitution, such heathen ignorance as has been described as existing among a large section of the population, not only reflects disgrace upon a Protestant Government, but is fraught with danger to the stability of the State. Does any noble Lord think that the restraints of mere temporal power, mildly, as I rejoice to say, that power is exercised in this free country, are alone sufficient for maintaining the harmony and order of society, and for enforcing respect for legitimate authority and obedience to the laws, those laws especially which guard and
    162
    regulate the rights of property, without the aid and sanction of the Divine law, without the conviction upon the mind of the population, that those laws are founded upon the law of God? Let it be considered for a moment, what would be the condition of this country upon the possible visitation of a famine, or of the vast population of the manufacturing districts being thrown out of employment, and wrought upon by want to combine in insurrection against the constituted authorities of the land. What reason is there to suppose that, with such a population, unrestrained by the precepts of the Divine law, England would not witness scenes of bloodshed and outrage similar to those which ushered in the French Revolution of 1793, when Paris was in the hands of an infidel mob? Christianity was then disowned, and men affected to worship the goddess of Reason. The events of that period should be regarded by every Christian Government as a warning against the possible consequences of neglecting the religious interests of the people. Be assured that, to uphold the fabric of society, especially in a free country, the restraints of religion are not less essential than those of the municipal law. Hence, I conceive it is that we have in this country the union of Church and State. The one sanctions and supports the other. The Church claims the sanction and support of the State, as the witness and exponent of the truth in this country; and as the State, on the other hand, claims the sanction of the Divine law for the enforcement of its ordinances, it is its duty to support the Church in its mission of disseminating the knowledge of the Word of God throughout the length and breadth of the land. The Church is not to be dealt with as an establishment for the rich, or for only a section of the people. If, as the noble Earl remarks, the religion of the Church of England is no longer the religion of the people of England, why is it but because the Church has been wanting in ministerial efficiency, because the causes of the spiritual destitution complained of are precisely those which are set forth in the Resolution? If the Church possesses within itself the means of expansion, it is the duty of the Government to turn those means to account. If its resources are insufficient, then the State should provide whatever may be necessary for extending its ministrations, and teaching to all who are willing to accept of them, but espe-

    163
    cially to those masses of the manufacturing population whose spiritual destitution has been admitted and deplored. As regards the Motion before the House, I hope my noble Friend will withdraw it, for the adoption of his Resolution could not be attended with any practical benefit. The discussion of it I hoped might have drawn the serious attention of the Government to the existence of a very serious evil, which requires an effectual remedy; but I regret to find that the noble Earl, while he admits the evil, does not hold out any prospect of steps being taken for its removal.
    THE EARL OF WINCHILSEA,in reply, said, that no individual, however great his talents, was perfectly competent to undertake a measure of this extent and importance; but he held it to be the duty of the Government of a Christian country like this to make proper provision for the religious wants of the people. He did not ask the Government to provide a system of education that would be purely of an exclusive character, but all he desired was, a sound religious and scriptural education, based upon the reading of the Bible, without note or comment. With respect to the observations which had fallen from a right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of St. Davids) with regard to great national calamities, he might say that, though individual sins might go unpunished in this world, national sins never would, He had long felt that it was the duty of the Legislature of a Christian country like this to come forward and contribute some portion of the enormous wealth with which the Almighty had blessed it, in the relief of the religious wants of the poorer classes of its population. No country in the world was so rich and mighty; we were the greatest and most powerful nation that bad ever existed, with more moral influence than had ever been possessed by any other people; and he felt most deeply that we should be made awfully responsible for the proper use of the talents and blessings placed in our hands. Having relieved himself from any personal responsibility in the matter, he would withdraw the Resolution in compliance with the wish of their Lordships; but, at the same time, he begged most firmly to record his opinion, that, if the. present state of things was to continue and increase in this country, the day would speedily arrive when the condition of the manufacturing population—under no restraint of religion, and with the passions
    164
    of their fallen nature the only rule and guide of their conduct—would bring down a just retribution and punishment upon the high and mighty of the land.
    Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.
    House adjourned till To-morrow.