Sitting of 17 June 1858

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Government of India (No. 3) Wills of British Subjects Abroad; Administration of Justice; Four Courts (Dublin) Extension; Art Unions Act Amendment; Sti-

2221
pendiary Magistrates, &c,; Smoke Nuisance Abatement (Metropolis).
2° Commissioners for Exhibition 1851; Wills, &c., of British Subjects Abroad; Clerk of Petty Sessions (Ireland); Nisi Prius Court (Ireland); Juries (Ireland) (No. 2); Transfer of Land.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.—COMMITTEE.

  SIXTH RESOLUTION.
  Order for Committee read.
  House in Committee.
  Sixth Resolution.
  LORD STANLEYsaid, that the vote to which the House came on Monday last had imposed on the Government a task of some difficulty, because it had then been decided, not merely that permanent legislation should take place in the course of the present Session—not merely that the Indian Minister, under the new system to be created, should be assisted by a Council—but that the number of the Council, should be fixed, and that its members should not be exclusively nominated by the Crown. And although upon the point to which he was about to direct the attention of the House no formal vote had taken place, yet it was impossible for any one who had listened to the debates and had heard the opinions expressed by hon. Members sitting in all parts of the House, not to feel that there existed a great repugnance to the creation of anything like a popular constituency in this country to which should be entrusted the election of any part of the Council. That constituency not embodying any principle of representation, but being a mere device for the appointment by an elective process of a certain number of persons as a Council for India, it was felt that the creation of such a constituency was inexpedient, and ought, if resorted to in any case, to be so only after all other measures had failed. That being the case, it was the duty of the Government, to endeavour to combine and reconcile those two at first sight conflicting decisions, one of which had been formally arrived at, and the other implied by the general feeling of the House. With that view various plans had been proposed and considered with a view of giving effect to the principle of election, without necessitating the creation of an artificial constituency here. One proposition, which appeared on the paper in the shape of an Amendment, was that a certain number of the members of the Council should be appointed, either by the local authorities of each Presidency in. India, or by the Governor-General on their recommendation.
  2222
  No doubt that was a proposition the adoption of which would, to a certain extent, ensure the desired result. It was quite clear that members who were chosen in that manner, would be entirely independent of the Minister of the day; and it was also apparent that the Indian authorities would have, by reason of their local knowledge, the best means of choosing such as were most fitted by ability and experience to represent the government of India. On the part of that proposition, therefore, some arguments might be adduced of considerable weight; but, on the other hand, there was an objection to its adoption which it was impossible to overlook; neither the Governor General of India nor the governor of an Indian province could feel more than a very remote and indirect interest in the efficiency of the Indian Council in England, while on the other hand it was certain that they would feel the strongest interest in maintaining the efficiency of that which was immediately under their own eyes—namely, the civil and military service of India upon the spot. There was this danger, therefore, if they trusted to the Indian authorities to select any portion of the Council here, that those with whom the choice lay could hardly be expected to make so large a sacrifice as to deprive themselves of the services of the most eminent and efficient men in their employ; they would be much more likely to send home those for whom it was desired to provide an honourable retirement, and the Indian Council would get to be looked upon as a sort of shelf, as a convenient mode of getting rid of men whom the Governor General no longer desired to retain in India. But, even if they could reasonably expect that the authorities of India would be so self-denying as to send them their most efficient members, it was obvious that a result which might be equally inconvenient would follow, and that the maximum of efficiency in the Council here would only be obtained by the sacrifice of the maximum of efficiency in the civil and military service of India itself. Those objections were in his mind conclusive, against the adoption of the plan, plausible as at first sight it appeared, by which they could look to India for the appointment of a portion of the Council. The next proposition which he had had to consider was that which had been put forward the other night by the right hon. Member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham.) The Government had considered it with the

  2223
  deference which was due to the great ability and experience of the right hon. Gentleman, and, he might add, with that natural goodwill which arose from the undoubtedly friendly character of the suggestion which had been made. But having maturely and anxiously deliberated upon that proposition he had come to the conclusion that it would not meet all the difficulties of the case. The plan proposed by the right hon. Gentleman for filling up vacancies was that the Council should themselves select three names, one of which should be chosen by the Minister. The objection to that mode of procedure was, that it would open the door to many and serious abuses. Those who had the power of selecting the three names out of which one was to be chosen might, if their selection of the three were to be final and conclusive, obtain almost with certainty the appointment of any person they might desire; because they would only have to couple the name of one person whom they considered fully qualified for the office with those of two others comparatively obscure and unknown, and thus there would be brought to bear upon the Minister a kind of moral compulsion to choose the one whom they wished to be selected. On the other hand, if the Minister were not to be limited to the three names which they sent up—if he might refuse to select any of them, and might send the list back for a further choice to be made, and if he had the power of repeating that process indefinitely, it was clear that the right of election as vested in the Council became a mere formality, and the ultimate choice must rest with the Minister alone. There was another objection. A great deal had been said with respect to the evils which arose from a divided responsibility, and he confessed he thought that of all divisions of responsibility the most dangerous and most inexpedient was that which would exist if an appointment were to be made, for which no one person, or body of persons, could be held responsible. A constituency, be it what it might, felt a natural pride in securing the services of able and illustrious men; and a Minister was naturally desirous to distinguish his tenure of office by making appointments which would reflect honour upon him, and would be for the advantage of the public service. But that feeling of natural pride and of legitimate self-satisfaction in a successful appointment could not be obtained by any one under a system by which neither the Minister nor the Council
  2224
  would be wholly and exclusively responsible for the choice. He thought that upon these various grounds the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, in the form in which it had been announced, was not one which could be satisfactorily entertained, either by the Government or the Committee. What, then, was the proposition which the Government intended to submit? They thought that, in deciding in favour of the principle of election, what the Committee really desired to express was, that the exclusive nomination should not rest in the hands of the Crown—that their object was, not so much to vest the choice of any portion of the Council in any particular body of men or in any particular constituency, as to take it out of the power of the Minister, and thus to lessen the amount of patronage. If he had rightly interpreted the feelings of the Committee in this respect, he hoped that they would not unfavourably receive the proposition which, on the part of the Government, he was about to submit. What they proposed, so far as the first appointments to the Council were concerned, was this:—They were prepared to accept the number of fifteen, which had been agreed to by the Committee the other night. Of that number they proposed that eight should be nominated by the Crown, and that the other seven, following to a certain extent the precedent set in 1853, should be elected from among their own number by the existing Court of Directors. This related only to the first appointments of the Council. With respect to the manner of filling up future vacancies, they proposed that every alternate one should be filled up by the nomination of the Crown, and that the others should be supplied by election, that election to be by the Members of the Council. He could anticipate at once the objection—and he hoped that it was the only one—which would be raised against this proposition by those who might prefer some other scheme. They would say, "Then you revert to the old system of self-election under which so many abuses prevailed." His answer was, that when they complained of the abuses that prevailed under the system of self-election, they were really contemplating a system under which self-election was the sole and exclusive method by which appointments were made. There was no doubt that any body of men, be it large or small, which had the exclusive power of filling up vacancies as they occurred in its own numbers, would sooner or later be apt to ex-

  2225
  clude all who did not agree in the opinion of the majority, and that this opinion would eventually become despotic, and would be able to perpetuate its own despotism. But because those abuses existed under a system of self-election exclusively, it by no means followed that they would also exist where the process of self-election was only part of the plan by which the whole body was to be chosen. In a word, they looked to the elective principle—self-election though it were—as tending to counteract the evils which might arise from simple nomination; and they looked to the power of nomination vested in the Minister as tending to neutralize the abuses which would spring up under the system of exclusive self-election. They did not consider either of those methods to be satisfactory by itself, but they looked to each to counteract the disadvantages of the other. In supporting this proposition, he must for a moment recall the recollection of the Committee to the position in which they were placed. It had been decided by a majority that the principle of nomination exclusively should not be adopted, and there was an equally strong feeling that any attempt to create a constituency charged with the election of the Council would be at best but a cumbrous and inconvenient expedient. If, then, there were to be an election, and no proper constituency could be found, it seemed that they were thrown back, as it were by a logical necessity, upon some such method as that which he had laid before the Committee. He had now detailed the plan that he proposed, and he confidently expected, looking at the spirit in which these discussions had been hitherto conducted, that it would be considered on its own merits. He hoped that those who took it into consideration would feel as the Government had felt, and would bear in mind, as he had been compelled to bear in mind at every step in the progress of this measure, the extreme difficulties which were involved in the settlement of this question, and at the same time the importance of its being speedily settled.
  Motion made and Question proposed,
  "That the Members of the nominated portion of the Council shall be selected by Her Majesty, subject, as a general rule, to the qualification above expressed, and one-half at the least of the elected Members shall possess the like qualification."
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that before the Committee were called upon to decide on the new proposition which the
  2226
  noble Lord had just submitted to them it would be desirable that it should be embodied in a Resolution and placed upon the Votes, so that hon. Members might have an opportunity of considering its precise terms. He wished, however, to call the attention of the Committee, and especially of the Government, to what he considered was a most important constitutional principle, which was involved in the whole of the points under consideration. He thought, with great deference, that hon. Members had conjured up a sort of imaginary bugbear in respect of the question of the constitution of the Council. It appeared as if they supposed that India was a separate planet inhabited by human beings not constituted like ourselves, not impelled by the same passions, governed by the same feelings, and amenable to the same general principles as regulated the conduct of all mankind; and as if the Government of India were smile peculiar mystery which men of good capacity, of honest intentions, and accustomed to deal with human affairs, would be incompetent to direct, and for the management of which some mysterious knowledge was absolutely required. With great deference to the opinions of other persons he was not of that opinion. It appeared to him that the people of India were very much like the rest of the human race with regard to the passions, feelings, and interests which guided them. There was this difference—that there were peculiar circumstances of caste, religion, and institutions in India, a knowledge of which might be necessary in order to apply to the people of that country those general principles by which the conduct of the human race was directed. There was no great difficulty in obtaining gentlemen who were perfectly acquainted with all those matters, and who would give that information to the Government which was necessary for the application of general principles to the good government of India. The general feeling of the House was not in accordance with the opinion of the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright), and other hon. Gentlemen of the Manchester school, and, therefore, he (Viscount Palmerston) was quite ready to abide by the Council. But he entreated the Committee to deal with the Council upon the established principles of the British constitution. Why should they have such peculiar jealousy of the Government of the day with respect to the selection of the Members of the Council? Was it the

  2227
  principle of the British constitution that the responsible advisers of the Crown should be divested of that peculiar responsibility which appertained to the selection of persons for executive and administrative functions? Jealousy of the Government was not felt with regard to any such appointments. He reposed no particular confidence in Her Majesty's present advisers, but he was perfectly ready to repose that confidence in their conjoint position which he, perhaps, should not repose in their individual judgment. So long as they held the responsible position of advisers of the Crown he was perfectly ready to give them all that discretion which belonged to the constitutional position which they held. Now, was there anything in the functions of a Member of a Council of fifteen, or of the whole of the fifteen, which was so peculiar, so important, or so mysterious as to render necessary the taking of such unconstitutional precautions with regard to his or their appointment? Was not the function of a Judge infinitely more important than that of one of these Councillors, and yet they did not require a Judge to be elected by some hocus-pocus contrivance— whether by the other Judges, or by any other machinery which would violate the responsibility of the Ministers of the Crown in the selection of the Judges? Was a Councillor more important than a Governor General or a Colonial Governor? And yet the latter were appointed by the Crown. If these appointments were bad, you could lay your finger upon the person who was responsible for them, and punish him if necessary. He therefore entreated the Committee not to introduce into the Indian Council, without the slightest necessity or advantage, a principle entirely foreign to the fundamental rules by which the British constitution was worked. He appealed to the Government themselves. He was sure that no one could have heard the speeches of the noble Lord on this subject without being satisfied that, in his own mind and judgment, the noble Lord was against the proposal which he had made. The noble Lord's mind was too candid to be able to conceal the independent judgment which he had formed upon the subject. He was sure that, the rest of Her Majesty's Majesty's Government only supported that proposal because they fancied that they were yielding to what was the fair sense of the Committee; but that sense was come to because hon. Members thought they, were voting according to the wishes of Her Ma-
  2228
  jesty's Government. He was quite sure that if Her Majesty's Government had declared boldly that they adhered to the constitutional principle of responsible nomination by the Ministers of the Crown, the decision of the Committee would have been very different from what it was the other evening. He need not say that there had been cases not very long ago in which the Government had a very strong opinion one way, and in which they did not think it necessary to follow exactly a Resolution in favour of which the House had pronounced a strong opinion. Some hon. Gentlemen thought that the Government then acted rather cavalierly; but the conduct of the Government at all events proved that, when they were of opinion that upon constitutional grounds a particular Resolution, come to by a single vote of the House, was not one to which it was their duty to conform, they had no difficulty in saying that they would follow the impulse of their own judgment. He, therefore, most earnestly entreated the Committee and Her Majesty's Government to give to this matter a more serious consideration than he thought had hitherto been given to it. If it were thought that the passage of the Bill would be smoothed—that feelings which were entitled to respect would be better consulted by adopting the proposition of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle, and making the first Council to consist of persons who were now members of the Court of Directors, he should be perfectly ready to agree to that proposition. But let that be the act of the Government. Let not the responsibility of the Government in such a matter be shared by any person. Let the Government say at once that it was their intention so to propose the first Council. But he objected to the subsequent appointments being made by a hocuspocus plan of alternate nominations of the Council, because it embodied a principle which had been exploded by universal consent, even with regard to the local administration of municipal corporations. The principle of self-elected bodies was so objectionable that it was put an end to, and yet the Committee were now going, with their eyes open, and deliberately, to reintroduce into the general composition of the Executive Government that very principle. He thought the method now proposed would not afford any additional security for the efficient discharge of the functions of the Council. He was quite satisfied that the Government would be as

  2229
  capable as any other body of persons to select proper and efficient Councillors. If the noble Lord were called upon to form a Council what would he do in the first instance? He would consult his colleagues in the Cabinet of course. The Committee could not suppose that any Minister would be so blind and so headlong in his decisions as not to consult those whom he had around him, and in whose opinions he placed confidence. He would also consult other persons, who, from their knowledge of India, would be likely to assist him in considering his choice. He would then, upon the responsibility of himself and of the Government at large, make his appointment, and he (Viscount Palmerston) ventured to say that that appointment would generally be better than one made in either the manner suggested by the noble Lord or in that suggested by the right hon. Baronet. The noble Lord had not explained whether the alternate nominations to be made by Council were to be made by the whole Council, including that portion which was nominated by the Crown, or simply by those who had been otherwise nominated. That was an important matter and required explanation. [Lord STANLEY: By the whole Council.] Well, then, if it came to that, the Crown would always have the majority. That would substantially place the nomination in the hands of the Minister. Then let that be done openly which they were about to do substantially. Let them not violate a constitutional principle in order to come back in practice to that from which they were departing in theory. He gave the Government credit for having endeavoured, against he was sure their own honest and deliberate opinion, to conform to what they imagined to be the wish of the Committee; but he entreated them to follow their own judgment in this matter, and not to violate, for the purpose of catching a vote here or there from parties who might be personally interested, one of the fundamental principles of the constitution.
  MR. WALPOLEsaid, he was surprised at the observations addressed to the Committee by the noble Viscount which were intended to induce a belief that the course proposed by the Government in reference to the future administration of the affairs of India was a departure from what he called the true principles of the British constitution. The experience of the last seventy or eighty years, however, ought rather to convince the House and the country that the principles of the British
  2230
  constitution, as applied to the Government of India, were especially adhered to in the proposition of his noble Friend, who recommended, instead of leaving all the appointments of the Council entirely in the hands of the Crown, with all the corrupting influences which might possibly be exercised by the Minister of the day, there should be interposed a sufficient guard and control as to those appointments. He would remind the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) that when the great struggle first began between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, upon the question of India, the issue raised was distinctly whether the Crown, through the Minister of the day, should possess the power of influencing, to an uncontrolled extent, the government of India, or whether that government should not be to a certain extent left independent of the Crown in the hands of those who were better acquainted with the circumstances and wants of India than any mere Minister could be. The contest was decided in favour of the latter principle, and after having been recognized in Mr. Pitt's Bill, the same principle was confirmed without a dissentient voice in 1793, when the Charter was renewed. Again, in 1813, the same principle was continued, when the Charter of exclusive trade was nullified, and when, in 1833, the East India Company ceased to be a trading company, so impressed was Parliament with the truth of that principle that the governmental authority over our Indian possessions was retained in the hands of the East India Company, for the sole reason that it was nut expedient to give to the home Government of the day all the influence which they would have if the administration of Indian affairs was left absolutely in their hands. In 1833, when the noble Lord was a Member of the Government, that principle was adhered to, as it was also in 1853, when he was again a member of the Government, the last time when the Government of India was settled upon a new basis, and when the right hon. Member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood), the noble Lord's colleague, proposed really what was the substance of the present Resolutions—that there should be a Council partly nominated by the Crown and partly elected by those acquainted with India, her interests, and her necessities. The noble Lord said he thought his noble Friend the President of the Board of Control, with his candid mind, was hardly satisfied with the proposition which he now made. The noble Lord

  2231
  the President of the Board of Control was one of those able and independent spirits who always speak in this House the sentiments they entertain, and he would scorn to utter sentiments or to propose any measure which he did not believe to be best fitted for the object he had in view. The noble Lord, however, was not insensible, and no one could be insensible, to the enormous difficulties by which the question was surrounded: he had pointed them out with fairness and frankness, and he had explained the reasons which led him to believe that it would be best to adhere in regard to the future government of India to the principles that had been found the best for that as well as for this country. The noble Lord opposite (Viscount Palmerston) then said what was somewhat astonishing from such a quarter, that the influence of the Government was so great, the confidence of the House in the Government was so unbounded, that they would accept any proposition which the Government might think proper to make. If that were so, it was very gratifying to the Government, but it must be owing to the circumstance that the House and the country were convinced that the present Government had applied their minds to this Indian question with all the honesty and ability they could bring to bear, in order to enable them to submit such a plan as would command the confidence and the approval of the House and the country, and form a basis for the future good government of India. He (Mr. Walpole) cordially supported the proposition of his noble Friend, because he thought that in dealing with the great interests of a great country it was not wise, as a general rule, to depart more than could be avoided from principles which had been found to be beneficial, such departure being likely to lead to inconveniences of a most serious character. Another reason for supporting the proposition of his noble Friend was, that by a Council partly nominated and partly chosen, as was proposed, they would provide for more independence of action on the part of the Council than, by a Council appointed in any other manner. A third and equally strong reason for supporting the proposition was, while in all our other propositions it was possible to bring to bear by means of representative institutions something like the public opinion of the country upon the administration of its affairs in India, that could only be done by means of the knowledge and experience possessed by others, and if those
  2232
  who possessed that knowledge and experience were admitted to the Council of India, independently of any nomination on the part of the Crown, there would be a provision to some extent for the application of public opinion in regard to the administration of Indian affairs by the Minister of the day. For those reasons he supported the proposition of his noble Friend as one most likely to conduce to the welfare and good government of India.
  SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, he wished in the first place to know whether they were proceeding in a regular manner, for he believed the President of the Board of Control had not concluded his speech by making any Motion.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, there was a Resolution before the Committee.
  SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, in that case they were proceeding regularly, but the plan of the noble Lord was a new plan, and had not been so fully developed at present as to justify the Committee in coming to a decision upon it at once. The noble Lord had not told them, supposing his mixed plan of nomination and election should be adopted, what tenure of office he proposed, what the salaries were to be, nor had he touched in the slightest degree upon the question of patronage. Those matters were all most important questions that must be embraced in the scheme before the Committee could decide upon the new plan. It might be supposed that he was somewhat piqued at the rejection of the suggestion which he made on a former evening, but it was not so. That suggestion was rather harshly repudiated by the great body of hon. Members opposite without deliberation, and it had now, after some deliberation, been rejected by the Government. He, therefore, considered the proposition entirely got rid of, but he did not at all regret having mooted it, for he had been desirous, as far as he was able, and, without reference to party feeling, to afford an opportunity for escaping from the great difficulties with which the question was surrounded. He bowed cheerfully to the decision of the Committee upon the points which he had raised. Before any assent could be given to the proposed plan he thought it but reasonable that ample opportunity for considering it should be afforded. The Seventh Resolution being now withdrawn he thought it was not expedient that any decision what ever should be come to until the Resolu-

  2233
  tion to be substituted for the Seventh Resolution had been proposed in a tangible shape. He had no desire again to argue a point which he thought had been decided by a majority in the House, but the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton had again raised the question of nomination by the Crown, and invited the Committee to adopt that course as the only one that would be consistent with constitutional law. The Secretary for the Home Department had already touched upon that point. The noble Lord, in 1833, when he (Sir J. Graham) had the honour of being his colleague, and again in 1853, when he was also his colleague, had no constitutional objections to a similar cause. According to the provisions then made, the Governor General of India was appointed by the East India Company. That high functionary was nominated and appointed by the East India Company without any violation of constitutional principles, and the Crown had only a veto upon the appointment. All the difficulties which were attached to the plan that he ventured to sketch out already existed in the power of veto possessed by the Crown at present. A veto was the only power which the Crown had hitherto exercised in respect to the Governor General of India and the Presidents of the various Councils. With respect to the Commander in Chief the Crown had power to appoint to the command of Her Majesty's forces in India, but it rested with the East India Company to confer upon him the command of their forces in that country. A mixed power had therefore existed, without any violation of the British constitution, in respect to these great appointments. The noble Lord said that the people of India were our fellow-creatures, with passions and feelings like our own, and that there could be no difficulty in governing them. It should, however, be borne in mind that the people of India, who were 200,000,000 in number, had peculiar prejudices, strong but strange religious feelings, and that extraordinary doctrine of caste to which the noble Lord had himself adverted, all of which rendered the task of governing them no easy or light one. When he heard such opinions from the noble Lord he could not help thinking that the attraction of Birmingham was becoming very strong upon him, and that the more the noble Lord discussed this question the more and more he gravitated towards the hon. Member for that constituency. Indeed if they went on debating
  2234
  this matter much longer he feared that the views of the hon. Members for Birmingham and Sheffield would gain the ascendant, and that if the task of governing 200,000,000 of men was to be treated as an easy one, the ordinary rules in respect to other Government departments must be applied to it. But his own opinion was widely different. He did not think that an English Minister appointed to the supreme rule in reference to Indian affairs, and who held his office in accordance with the vicissitudes of domestic politics, would be competent, without the very best advice, to govern India. And if that experiment was tried, his conviction was that it would end in the most fatal disasters. It only then remained to consider the constitution of the Council. The Committee having deliberately determined that it should be a Council partly nominated and partly elected, he could not shut his eyes to the difficulties of election, and he had stated his strong opinion that the existing constituency ought not to be continued, and that its enlargement would only aggravate the evil. He was glad therefore, that the Government had decided to withdraw the Seventh Resolution, while at the same time it would be premature to make any remarks upon the new suggestions of the Government. Every scheme they had put forward approached nearer and nearer to the principle of direct nomination, and in the one just submitted the principle of election was feebly recognized. The noble Lord proposed at once to nominate eight Members by the Crown, which would be a majority of the Council, and the Court of Directors eighteen in number, were to nominate the remaining seven out of their own body; and that Court, it should be remembered, already contained five Crown nominees. As to the filling up of vacancies, and the probability that the Minister would consult his Council on that point, his decision would, of course, much depend on the confidence which he might think fit to repose in the body whose advice he was to take. The Minister for India, being a party man, could hardly altogether divest himself of prejudices, whether just or unjust, against the nominees of the party to which he was bitterly opposed in politics. He feared, therefore, that the practical working of this large preponderance of nominees would not be so smooth and easy as the noble Lord seemed to suppose. He would not, however, be led further into a premature dis-

  2235
  cussion of the measure, but he earnestly appealed to Her Majesty's Government not to press a decision upon this question today. He thought that the Committee were entitled to time for consideration, and if would be most expedient that the scheme now advanced by Her Majesty's Government should be put into a tangible shape, and should include the mode of appointment, patronage, salary, and all the other matters to which he had adverted. No great delay would necessarily result; the Resolution might be drawn up and printed by to-morrow morning, when it could be brought on for discussion on Monday next, without interrupting the true course of our proceedings.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that he would confine himself to the state of the business before them and the mode in which the Government proposed to deal with the question. The House, at its last meeting, resolved by the Fifth Resolution that the Council should not be composed by pure nomination. As far as the Government were concerned they might have rested on that Resolution, and confined to the Bill the mode in which they proposed to carry it into effect, but they thought it due to the House, after the course which the discussion took on Monday, that they should not proceed with the subsequent Resolutions without in candour communicating to the House the outlines of the new plan they intended to propose to give effect to the determination already arrived at. The Government then proposed, if it were agreeable to the Committee, to omit the Sixth and Seventh Resolution, and not to submit any Resolution to carry into effect the propositions just made by his noble Friend, but to defer the discussion upon them until they appeared in the Bill. If this plan were adopted he did not despair of getting through all the Resolutions to-day, in which case the Bill might be introduced at once, and the second reading fixed for Monday next. With regard to the observations of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carlisle, (Sir James Graham) who complained that the important subjects of tenure, salary, and patronage, had been omitted, the right hon. Gentleman would find that the subject of patronage was referred to in a subsequent Resolution. It had been already decided and announced that the Government would recommend the appointment of the Council quamdiu sc bene gesserint, but he thought that it would be ob-
  2236
  viously premature to come to any Resolution at present with respect to the amount of salary. He hoped that the House would be satisfied with the statement made by the noble Lord, and proceed with the remaining. Resolutions, which would give them a fair chance of obtaining Legislation at the earliest possible period. Under these circumstances he should not attempt to reply to the observations of the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton, which seemed to him to be based upon that fallacy which might be termed the "constitutional fallacy." They had been answered by his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carlisle, and still more satisfactorily by the policy which the noble Lord himself as a Minister had recommended and sanctioned. There was only one more point to which it was necessary to allude. The noble Lord had triumphantly concluded his observations by the assumption that the nominee Members of the Council were more or less likely to become tools of the Minister. The noble Lord told them that if they filled up the vacancies by nomination, it was clear that the Minister would always have a majority, but the noble Lord must have been thinking of the nominees that he had himself proposed. The objection to the noble Lord's plan was that his Councillors must necessarily be the tools of the Minister, seeing that they would owe their appointments entirely to the favour of the Crown. He believed that the Councillors chosen under the plan of his noble Friend the President of the Board of Control would be independent Members of the Council. Though they would owe their position in the first instance to the favour of the Crown, yet the moment they obtained their seats under the conditions provided by the Bill they would be just as independent as if they had been appointed by the most popular system of election. There was, therefore, a wide distinction between the class of nominees suggested by the noble Lord and those to whom the Committee were now asked to give their sanction. In conclusion he would suggest that the Motion before the Committee be withdrawn, and that the Resolutions should be omitted.
  MR. BRIGHTsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had hardly done justice to the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton. The great objection to nominee Members of the Council, because they would not be inde-

  2237
  pendent, came, with few exceptions, from the Ministerial side of the House, and not from the Opposition. The noble Lord in proposing the appointment of eight Members to be nominated by the Crown, had just the same idea of those eight Members as the right hon. Gentleman said he had of the eight whom he proposed to nominate. But hon. Gentlemen on the Ministerial side of the House, and especially when the right hon. Gentleman introduced his Bill, strongly urged the necessity of having more independent Councillors than nominees could be expected to be. Therefore, the argument which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had employed against the noble Lord ought to have been turned against the great body of those by whom the right hon. Gentleman was himself surrounded. The difficulties in which they were involved with respect to this question were more curious than considerable, and for a great many of them the right hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle was responsible. He brought forward a Motion the other night which he now seemed quite glad that the House had decided to be altogether impracticable. He then persisted in voting for a Resolution which did not mean in the least what he meant. And by the force of an argument, which was very subtle and very convincing to those who had not much studied the question, he involved them in voting a Resolution which they now all saw to be a positive absurdity, and with respect to which the Government and those who supported them entertained very different views, for there was no doubt that the Resolution of the Government meant a kind of election entirely different from that proposed by the right hon. Baronet. Some portions of the House voted for one sort of election, and some for the other, and now the Government had come to the conclusion, which the House would, no doubt, sanction, that both kinds were inadmissible, and that it would be much better to get out of the difficulty by adopting some simpler plan. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer bad suggested a mode of escape which was as judicious as it was ingenious—namely, that they should say nothing more about it, but should drop the Resolutions. They all knew that they first agreed to proceed by Resolutions, in order that they might have a great many days' discussion of the Indian question, without exciting hopes in the minds of hon. Gentlemen who sat on those (the Opposition) benches that they
  2238
  might damage the Government by rejecting its propositions. They had now got
  rid of that difficulty, because it was by that time pretty well agreed that they were not to change the Government on account of anything which might arise out of this discussion. They had discussed the Resolutions until they knew as much about them as they were ever likely to know, and, considering the time of the year, the state of the weather, and that of the Thames— which, instead of answering the purpose of a river to cleanse and refresh the shores which it washed, only conveyed unsavoury smells into the House—he thought it better that the Bill should be introduced at once, and that what remained to be settled should be decided upon the discussion of its clauses. When the measure came before them on its second reading, he wished to give notice that he should offer some suggestions to the Government, which he had hitherto not had opportunity of doing. At the same time, he must say that he thought all their discussions had tended to the one point, that in this case ingenious contrivances were of no use whatever. The noble Lord the Member for Tiverton was perfectly right when he said that the Home Government, being intended not for the purposes of Indian legislation, but for the check, control, and supervision of the government in India, ought to be as simple as possible; and he (Mr. Bright) was of opinion, that unless you could get rid of nine-tenths of the matters which were referred to this country, you could never have a Government of India worth calling a Government. It must be a Government of circumlocution, of delay, and of neglect. He had recently seen some evidence taken before a Committee upstairs, with which he would not detain the Committee, but which went to confirm the opinions which he had always entertained on this subject. The real Government must be in the residencies, and he should be quite willing to trust its control to any Gentleman who was a Member of that or the other House of Parliament—certainly to the noble Lord (Lord Stanley)—whether as President of this Council or of the Board of Control, or Secretary of State for India, with such helps as were necessary in an office of that nature. His own opinion was, that in five years' time they would abolish this Council, either because it was obstructive, or because it had fallen into contempt.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he rose to make an explanation. He had been told

  2239
  by the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) that he had adopted an exploded constitutional fallacy in regard to the assertion of the principle that the Sovereign ought to nominate the persons who were invested with the executive government of India, and it was said also that he had for a long time pursued a contrary system of policy. He begged leave to say that the fallacy was upon the opposite side. The Company were really the Sovereign of India for the time being in trust for the Crown, and all the appointments of the Directors were made by that Sovereign in the only manner in which it could make such appointments, being an aggregate body—namely, by the aggregate votes of its members. Therefore, there was no fallacy whatever in his argument, which was strictly in accordance with the principle for which he contended.
  MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that the explanation of his noble Friend was extremely tempting, and it was difficult to resist following him on the important question he had raised. He had not succeeded in showing that no peculiar circumstances existed with respect to India which rendered a departure from the ordinary rule justifiable, but, on the contrary, he had shown that the peculiarities of the position of India were so great as to have required the introduction of an anomaly tenfold greater than that which now shocked him so much—namely, the construction of an artificial sovereignty in India in order to bar what the noble Lord called the exercise of the principles of the British constitution. He would not enter upon that question now, nor would he say more upon the general question than that, as the hon. Member for Birmingham had founded his plan for the home government of India upon the expectation that we could get rid of nine-tenths of the business, it was not likely that those who did not share his anticipations would approve his scheme. With regard to the present position of the question it seemed to him, that as there was to be no decision with respect to the new plan submitted by the Government, it would be worth considering whether they had not better defer the other Resolutions, which had reference chiefly to matters of detail, until they knew whether the plan of the Government would be accepted or rejected. After having laid down the general principle respecting the construction of the Council, they were now about to drop the consideration of how that Re-
  2240
  solution should be applied; and it was, therefore, obvious that they could not give their votes with respect to other matters on the mere assumption that the change indicated by the Government would take place. If they were to omit the sixth and seventh Resolutions, if they were not to decide upon the plan of nomination and election, upon the tenure of offices by the members of the Council, whether they were to have seats in Parliament, whether there was to be a Secret Committee, what were to be the salaries of the Councillors—a most important point as affecting the rank, dignity, and consideration of the Councillors, and the class of men who would hold that office—it would not be advantageous to proceed with the eighth, ninth, and tenth Resolutions regulating the mode of transacting business. Nor did he think that, without knowing, how the Council was to be composed, they could satisfactorily dispose of the eleventh and twelfth Resolutions, which dealt with the question of patronage; and he could see no object in proceeding with the thirteenth, which referred to the transfer of the real and personal property of the Company. Therefore, he thought they had better at once drop the discussion of the Resolutions and allow all these matters to be settled when the Bill was brought in.
  LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, he quite concurred in what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford, that if the Resolutions as to the mode in which the Council was to be nominated and elected were to be withdrawn it was not necessary to go on with the remaining Resolutions until the Government had placed before the House the whole of the details of their plan embodied in a Bill. There were, however, some points upon which he thought the Government might be personally asked for explanations at the present moment. He was not in the House when the noble Lord the President of the Board of Control made his statement with regard to the constitution of the future Government of India, and therefore he was not prepared to give any decisive opinion upon it, but if that which was stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member far Carlisle was true, that according to that plan the principle of election entered very slightly into the constitution of the Council, he regarded it as a very great recommendation indeed. It would come, as it appeared to him to this—that nomination by the

  2241
  Crown would be so far checked and guarded that it should be effectual. It had always appeared to him that the patronage of India was very different from the general patronage of the Crown, and when, therefore, Parliament declared that the greater portion of the Council should consist of men who had either served in India or resided there for a certain number of years, they did put a check upon the exercise of the patronage of the Crown by admitting only certain classes of person with respect to whom such patronage should be exercised. There would be many men coming from India with such recommendations and such high claims upon the Government that practically it would be precluded from passing them over, and whatever Government might be in office at the time they would feel equally bound to recognise their general services. Nor would there be found any inconvenience in a Government giving a post to a competent person, though he might be a political opponent, because such persons would find themselves in a similar position to Judges, who were chosen from a certain class of persons in high position at the bar; and whether such men had been appointed by one Lord Chancellor or another, it was always found that men of eminence, admirably fitted to the performance of their duty, had been chosen. He thought that the House and the country must be highly gratified by the mode in which the noble Lord the President of the Board of Control had discharged his important duties. There was a fairness and candour about him, coupled with an evident determination to apply his high abilities to the consideration of this most important question, which eminently entitled him to the best confidence of the House and the country. Although, possibly, some errors might be made both with respect to the Resolutions and the subsequent Bill, he felt convinced that if the noble Lord continued to apply himself as he had done to this question, he was likely to arrive in the end at a decision which would be most advantageous both to India and England. As be (Lord J. Russell) understood, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had admitted the principle that the Members of the Council should be appointed during good behaviour, and so far his (Lord J. Russells) proposal had been accepted. On the other hand, he understood the noble Lord the President of the Board of Control to say, the other night,
  2242
  that he did not object to the introduction of the principle of competition as regarded the cadets in one portion of the Indian army. There were very considerable authorities in favour of this experiment, and he had in his pocket a letter written by Sir John Lawrence to a friend, which contained a decided opinion that competition was the best mode of obtaining cadets for the Indian army. If the noble Lord would be willing to admit the principle, he must allow, in return, that the experiment was somewhat new, and he was quite ready to leave the question of the extension of the principle to the future observation and judgment of the noble Lord. But he wished to know whether he was right in considering that the noble Lord was of opinion that it would be expedient that the secret despatches should be submitted to the future Council, as well as those despatches which related to foreign affairs, war with independent States, and those which had reference to the administration of justice. He was a Member of the Cabinet at the time of the Affghan war, and concurred in that war, but he was convinced that if at that time the Cabinet had been assisted by an Indian Council, composed of twelve or fifteen members, thoroughly informed on Indian affairs, and having cognizance of all the secret despatches which had been sent out, it would have been a very great advantage. No one, indeed, could overrate the benefit which would be derived in the Government of India if the Secretary of State were assisted by eminent men intimately acquainted with Indian matters, as well foreign as domestic. Such questions went to the foundation of the prosperity of British rule in India. They could not have wars with Native States without armies, they could not have armies without pay, and they could not have pay without taxation, and often they could not have taxation without considerable discontent. He knew very well that the question as to the manner in which we should repel aggression was a matter which must frequently be settled in India, but at the same time anything upon which depended time ultimate prosperity and good government of India ought to be submitted to the Council. The House might say that no war in India should be undertaken until Parliament had been called together, but it was very doubtful whether this power of undertaking a new war could be limited and restrained by such provisions. Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox were both agreed in the pro-

  2243
  priety of restraining wars in India, yet there had been nothing but conquest ever since. But, while he doubted the efficacy of any provision in an Act of Parliament in checking wars in India, he relied much upon the influence of a Council at home, which would not be swayed by those passions, excitements, and warlike instincts of different interests that sometimes impelled the Governors General of India to undertake war. If the noble Lord were not now prepared to accede to his views, he would on a future occasion raise a discussion whether the whole of the Council should not be admitted to a knowledge of all the despatches now referred to the Secret Committee. He trusted that the remaining Resolutions would be set aside, that the five Resolutions agreed to by the House would be reported, that the Government would introduce their Bill as soon as possible, and that the noble Lord would move the second reading on an early day, in order that the new principles introduced should be fully discussed, and that they should be enabled to legislate on the matter during the present Session.
  LORD STANLEYsaid, that Government did not, of course, propose to ask the Committee to come to a final decision, or, indeed, to any decision, upon the plans he had then for the first time laid before them. It was the intention of Government that full time should be given for its consideration, but after the vote come to the other night they thought it right to take the earliest opportunity of stating the manner in which they proposed to give effect to the principle then adopted. He would not, therefore, enter into objections which had been made to it further than to make one remark as to its operation. He had been told by the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) that although the Government might call this an elective body, yet that the members of the Council would be really nominated by the Crown. He supposed that the noble Lord, in stating that objection, was thinking rather of a Council nominated for such a term of years as he himself proposed than of a Council appointed for the more permanent tenure recommended by the present Government. A Council of fifteen gentlemen, holding office virtually for life, would be an independent body, and would exercise its functions with little reference to the wishes of any particular Minister. It was extremely improbable, after the first creation of the Council, that the Minister who actually pre-
  2244
  sided over it would be the same person by whom any large number of its members had been selected; on the contrary, the Council at any given period would consist of gentlemen nominated by successive Ministers, and would therefore contain a fair representation of all political parties. The noble Lord the Member for the City (Lord J. Russell) had asked how Government intended to deal with the important question of patronage. In reply he might state that the principle of open competition was in his eyes so valuable, and likely to lead to such beneficial results, that even in the distribution of military patronage it ought to have a fair trial. But it was only an experiment, and, although Sir John Lawrence and other eminent authorities had expressed themselves in its favour, there were many distinguished persons who doubted its value. Government, therefore, would not be justified in undertaking to do more than to give it a fair trial on a scale sufficiently large to allow its worth to be properly tested. What they proposed with respect to other kinds of patronage was in the main a continuance of the existing arrangement. The Minister, as at present, would have a share, but the great mass would be placed in the hands of the Council. The noble Lord had also asked a question relative to the appointment of a Secret Committee and the powers which it was to possess. He could not give a definitive answer to that question at the present moment. He fully appreciated the advantages which the noble Lord expected to accrue from giving to every member of the Council a knowledge of all that was passing; but, at the same time, the Committee were bound to consider that there were, from time to time, pressing matters which required to be decided upon in the utmost haste, and delay would arise if it were necessary upon every question, however urgent, to consult a numerous body of advisers. The noble Lord had likewise referred to the expediency of not making war in India without the consent of Parliament. He agreed in theory with the noble Lord, but the Committee had to bear in mind that in India wars might often spring up on the spot arising out of local quarrels, and not undertaken in consequence of instructions from home, or capable of being controlled by despatches from England. If, from unforeseen circumstances occurring in India, a war should actually be commenced, it would be too much to say beforehand that the Government ought

  2245
  not to be at liberty to prosecute it without obtaining the sanction of Parliament, which at a certain period of the year it might be impossible to get. In conclusion, he thought it was the general feeling of the Committee—and, if so, the Government were ready to acquiesce in it—that the Resolutions had answered the purpose for which they were originally introduced. In dealing with a subject on which it would be impossible for the Government to know beforehand what the decision of the House might be upon a variety of important questions, it had been thought expedient to take the sense of the House upon each singly, and then to frame a measure upon the basis so obtained. He thought, however, they had gone far enough in the way of proceeding by Resolution. The House had decided that there should be a Council; it had also determined that that Council should be to some extent elected; and it had expressed its intention in the most decided manner to legislate in a definitive sense for India during the present Session. Upon other questions—such as the questions of tenure of office and of patronage—although the House had not formally expressed its opinion, the Government had heard enough in debate to know what was the general feeling; and therefore they were prepared to acquiesce in the proposal not to proceed further with the Resolutions, but to introduce, without unnecessary delay, a Bill founded upon them.
  MR. MANGLESsaid, that when men were defeated they generally indulged in a spirit of prophecy, and therefore he was not surprised that the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) after his proposal to govern India by a Secretary of State alone had been rejected, had expressed the opinion that in the course of a few years the proposed Council would be discarded, to the satisfaction of the country. He must congratulate him, however, on having made one eminent convert (Viscount Palmerston). The right hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle had gone too far in stating that his proposition had been rejected, inasmuch as a large portion of it had been adopted by the Government. For his own part he was not without hopes that better Councillors would be selected under the plan sanctioned by the Committee than if the principle either of nomination or election alone had been adopted. He anticipated that there would be an honourable emulation between the Government and the Council as to who
  2246
  should appoint the most competent men. He hoped that in the plan proposed with regard to appointments to the military service the Government would take care that the interests of the officers of the Indian army were not neglected. As they spent the best part of their lives in India few of them had any English interest, and, though he was as opposed as any one could be to the Motion of an hereditary army, he trusted that the claims of their children would not be rejected under the operation of a competitive system. Many of the most eminent men now in India—Sir John Lawrence included—if subjected when young to a competitive examination, would never have been in their present position. Personally, he should be rather indisposed to complain of being relieved from the distribution of patronage, for it had always been to bins a source of great anxiety. It seemed to be thought that the members of the Secret Committee had something to do with the despatches which they signed, but there could not be a greater mistake. They merely signed their names to the despatches sent down to them from the Board of Control. They had no power to alter them, nor as a matter of right to remonstrate against them, and, though they had taken upon themselves to do so on occasions, there was no obligation for the President to pay the slightest attention to them. As far as the despatches themselves went, during the two years that he had been a member of the Secret Committee they were of the simplest and most trivial nature, and the greater part of them might have been made public without the smallest inconvenience. The great difficulty which he had found was to keep separate in his mind what he had read in the secret despatches and what in the columns of The Times or elsewhere, and he was in perpetual fear of committing perjury by letting out some little nothing or other which had come to his knowledge in his capacity of a member of the Secret Committee.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he had heard with great satisfaction the announcement of the course proposed to be taken by the Government, as he had, for some time, been of opinion that it would be utterly impossible to proceed to legislate for India this Session, if further time were taken up by their discussing the remaining Resolutions and the Amendments on them. This mode of proceeding by Resolution had had the advantage of disclosing the real views of the

  2247
  Government, the real views of the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton and his friends, and the ultimate views also of the noble Lord the Member for the City of London. He was glad to find that the noble Lord the Member for the City had, of late, very much shifted his ground, and was gradually coming round to the opinions of the Government. For himself, he had beard with increasing satisfaction the enunciation of the opinions held by the Government on this matter, and with increasing dissatisfaction the views entertained by those who preceded them in office. The House had now before it two antagonistic sets of opinions—one presented by the Government, which embodied the feelings and sentiments of those who were connected with India; the other presented by the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton and his friends. He had no sympathy with the East India Company, and eared nothing for it; bat he was bound to say that Her Majesty's Government appeared clearly to appreciate the general views of those who had had experience of India, and who felt a deep interest in its future welfare. The noble Lord the Member for Tiverton, however, appeared to have become a disciple of the Manchester school in regard to India; and if the doctrines of that school were carried out, they would be entirely subversive of the future happiness of the people, and probably at no distant day of the British rule. But it was clear, from the division which had taken place, that the great majority of the House was against those views, and would not allow them to be put into practice. The good Government of India could not be entrusted to local authorities, but must be secured by a constant and careful supervision of an official council in this country. A great deal had been said about the Secret Committee. It must be remembered that that body was originated by an Act of Parliament which was passed when statutes were being framed for regulating the conduct of the Government on the breaking out of the war with France; and the real intention of the clause respecting the Secret Committee was to give to Her Majesty's Ministers absolute and uncontrolled authority to regulate all matters of peace and war, even though they might affect the government of the East India Company in India. He believed that the power conferred by that clause had been much abused, and that under its authority many things had been referred to the Secret Committee which related solely and
  2248
  exclusively to the Government of India. It was never intended by the statute that the Minister should have the power of overruling the constitutional Government of India, and he hoped that the noble Lord, in framing his Bill, would bear in mind what was the origin of the Secret Committee, and what ought now to be its functions. He suggested that the Chairman ought at once to report progress.
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEexpressed a hope that the Government, in their Bill, would abandon that last remnant of the elective principle which was embodied in the scheme they had submitted that morning. Whatever might be its worth as a principle, the small shred that was left could be of no value. He hoped, therefore, that before the Bill was laid on the table the Government would adopt the advice of Lord Palmerston, and come to the conclusion of making all the Members nominative. If the independence of the Government nominees was good for half of the Council, why not for the whole? In his opinion, the whole should be nominated for a period of ten years.
  COLONEL SYKEScontended that the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton was mistaken in supposing that by the constitution the Crown was entitled to nominate the Members of the Council. Taxation without representation was not one of the principles of the constitution. Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who did not profess to be Liberals, had proposed that the Council should be partly elected and partly nominated. This was carried by a majority of sixty-five; but he was sorry to see that the Government was then wavering and inclined to give way. The selection by the Court of Directors of some of their own body was no election—nothing but breeding in and in. It was said to be difficult to get an elective body; there was one already existing—the proprietors of India stock, and to them might be added the returned officers of the civil and military services—forming a constituency of nearly 4,000 independent men. There would be no necessity to canvass, in proof of which he would refer to the mode in which candidates were elected to the Royal Society. Under the proposed constitution of the new Council, the majority would be Government nominees, the numbers being eight to seven; but in the present Court of Directors there were only five Government nominees. He deprecated this change, for all the evils of India were

  2249
  traceable to the interference of the Government, which led to the Burmese war and the annexation of various provinces, He concurred with the noble Lord the Member for London in thinking that there should be no Secret Committee in the new Council. The only person who was responsible for the proceedings of that mischievous body, the Secret Committee, was the President of the Board of Control. If necessary the Council could sit in secret, as the Court of Directors did frequently. He thought those hon. Members who had placed Resolutions on the paper had a right to have them discussed. He had himself placed six Resolutions on the paper, involving most important points, which must be considered at one time or the other. He would not, however, press these Resolutions against the sense of the Committee, but would bring them on on the second reading of the Bill. He entreated the Government to maintain in all its vigour and entirety the constitutional principle of election as applied to the Council.
  MR. DUNLOPsaid, he wished merely to express a hope that the Government would also consider the subject upon which he had given notice, and require the concurrence of a majority of the Council in all matters relating to the revenues of India, the charges thereon, and contemplated loans.
  MR. RICHsaid, that having been connected many years with India, and taking great interest in it, he wished to call attention to the extreme extravagance with which the Government of India had hitherto been carried on, which extravagance, it appeared to him, was to be perpetuated. It would be all very well if the £32,000 a year, which the salaries of the Members of the Council would amount to, came out of the Consolidated Fund, for then it would be open to discussion in the House, but they were taxing the people of India to pay for the salaries of persons in this country. He was opposed to the principle of superannuating the Council, and he was also of opinion that the Council should only be chosen for a limited period of years, upon which question he should move an Amendment in Committee.
  SIR HARRY VERNEYsaid, the great object was to secure the independence of the Council, and if that were attained by the present proposal of the noble Lord, or by any other proposal, he should be perfectly satisfied, It had been said
  2250
  that the men who governed India could govern any country in the world; and if the Company was abolished it should never be forgotten that they had conferred the greatest advantage on India and honour on their own country. He had doubts of the principle of competition being made to answer.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) had shown sound judgment in not attempting to engraft on the Bill any constituency for the election of the Council, while he limited the application of the elective principle very considerably. He would further suggest that the seven Members proposed to be taken from the present Coart of Directors should be chosen by the Government themselves, instead of being selected by the Court from its own body. Thus the Government would be able to satisfy their own consciences, because they would be appointing as Councillors men who had at least originally been chosen by the elective principle.
  LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPESTsaid, he thought that sufficient time would not be given for the consideration of the Bill if the second reading were fixed for so early a day as Monday next. He could not help thinking that the Government were wrong in giving up to so great an extent as they had done the principle of election with reference to the future constitution of the Council. He saw no difficulty in providing a competent constituency interested in India, and he should move an Amendment for the purpose of providing en independent constituency for some portion at least of the Council. Many important questions yet remained unsettled, and therefore he would appeal to the Government to allow a longer time before the second reading was brought on. He wished, also, to know whether the second reading would be taken at a morning sitting?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the appeal of the noble Lord was a very fair one. Indeed it had already occurred to him that Monday might be too early a date for the second reading of this measure, and that if the Bill were, as he hoped it would be, introduced that evening, he would propose that the second reading should to taken on Thursday evening next.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONobserved, that while admitting that the competitive system of education might well be applied in the scientific branches of the Indian army, he thought that another test should

  2251
  be taken for commissions in the cavalry and infantry, and that some standard, not too high a one, should be agreed upon. He hoped the noble Lord would consider this point, as in many cases, competitive examination would give the commission to the person least qualified for it.
  LORD STANLEYsaid, he agreed in the main with the noble Lord. While generally in favour of the system of competitive examination for commissions for the Indian army he could not shut his eyes to the fact that some men of great practical experience were not in favour of it. It was a subject on which they ought not to dogmatise, but look to experience as the test by which to judge of its working. He was willing to go the length of giving it a fair trial, but no further.
  MR. ELLICEsaid, that he was glad to hear a word of common sense from the noble Viscount. Of late there had been many complaints of the want of education on the part of many of the officers of the army. [Cries of "No!"] Certainly the discussions during the last five years on the subject would justify him in that statement. He hoped they would not run to the other extreme, and fancy that a good scholar must always be a good officer. The Marquess of Wellesley, with all his scholarship, would not in all probability have proved so good a general as his brother the Duke of Wellington.
  LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPESTsaid, he must deny that the education of the officers of the army had been neglected during the last five years, and challenged the hon. Member for Coventry to prove his assertion. Now, as to competitive examination, he knew of an instance of rejection because the applicant had spelled jeopardise without the o—"jepardise"
  MR. ELLICEremarked, that he had only stated what the general complaint had been as to the education of our officers during the last few years.
  COLONEL SYKESremarked, that no officer could at present enter the Indian army without undergoing an examination sufficient to show that he had received the education of a gentleman.
  LORD ALFRED CHURCHILLsuggested that commissions should be given to our public schools to be competed for.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  6. Resolved.
  That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill pursuant to the said Resolutions.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he thought that by the withdrawal of the Resolutions the Bill of the Government would be placed in very great peril. What he had risen for was, to ask whether the Government meant to recognise the right of the public creditors of the East India Company?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that what was expressed in the Resolutions on this subject would be introduced into the Bill. The position of the Indian creditor would not, in the least degree, be changed.
  MR. SPEAKERresumed the Chair.

THE IRISH LANDED ESTATES COURT.

  QUESTION.
  SIR ERSKINE PERRYsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland whether, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, it will not be more expedient that Mr. Hargreave be made one of the Judges of the proposed new Landed Estates Court in Ireland, instead of being pensioned off as a Judge of the Incumbered Estates Court on the full amount of his salary?
  MR. WHITESIDEsaid, that the only object of the Government was to make known to the House the facts on which their decision upon that subject must be founded. Since they had last had the question under their consideration a number of country gentlemen had stated to him that as a large amount of new business would rise under the operation of the Bill which he had introduced, they thought it desirable that the services of Mr. Hargreave as a third Judge should be retained. Her Majesty's Government were at present prepared to adopt an arrangement to that effect, and to retain the services of Mr. Hargreave on such terms as Parliament might think fit to sanction.

SALE OF COMMISSIONS.—QUESTION.
LORD BURGHLEYsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Commander in Chief has the power to direct the sale, on the public account, of such Commissions in the Army as are at present disposed of at the Horse Guards without purchase?
GENERAL PEELsaid, he believed that the Commander in Chief had not the power of directing the sale of any Commissions without the authority of the Secretary of State for War.

BREECH-LOADING RIFLES IN THE NAVY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. H. BERKELEYsaid, he wished to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether, seeing that the Marines and Small-arm Men of the American Navy are armed with Breech-loading Rifles, by which each man can fire three times for once from an opponent armed with the old weapon, whether any steps have been taken to place the Naval Forces of Great Britain on an equality with those of America?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he entirely concurred in the opinion which had, he believed, induced the hon. Gentleman to put his question—namely, that the Marines and Seamen in the British Navy ought to be armed in the most effective manner, and that any improvements made in the fire-arms of other countries ought not to be neglected in England. With regard to what had been actually done, he bad to state that no Breech-loading Rifles had been given out to our Marines and Seamen, but that trials of such rifles were at present being made on board the Excellent, the result of which had been that some modifications in the weapon were considered desirable. He had only to add that the Government would not lose sight of the matter.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

  RESOLUTIONS REPORTED.—BILL PRESENTED AND READ 1°.
  MR. FITZROYbrought up the Report.

  1. "That as the Territories under the Government of the East India Company are by Law to remain under such Government only until Parliament shall otherwise provide, it is expedient that the transfer of such Government to the Crown should now take place, in order that the direct superintendence of the whole Empire may be placed under one Executive authority."

  2. "That for this purpose it is expedient to provide that Her Majesty, by one of the responsible Ministers of the Crown, shall have and perform all the powers and duties relating to the Government and Revenues of India which are or may be now exercised and performed by the East India Company, or by the Court of Directors or Court of Proprietors of the said Company, either alone or with the approbation of the Commissioners for the Affairs of India."

  3. "That in order to assist such Minister of the Crown in the discharge of his duties it is expedient that a Council be appointed of not more than fifteen Members and not less than twelve."

  4. "That in order to secure the greatest amount of knowledge and experience in the management of the affairs of India it is advisable that the principal portion of the Members of the Council shall have served or resided in India for a term of years to be limited by statute."

  2254

  5. "That with a view to the efficiency and independence of the Council it is expedient that it should be partly nominated and partly elected."

  6. "That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill pursuant to the said Resolutions."

  First Five Resolutions agreed to.
  Bill ordered to be brought in upon the Sixth Resolution by Mr. FITZROY, Lord STANLEY, and Mr. CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER.
  Government of India (No. 3) Bill,—"for the better Government of India," presented, and read 1£ to be read 2° on Thursday next, and to be printed.

COMMISSIONERS FOR EXHIBITION 1851 BILL.—SECOND READING.
Order for Second Reading read.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that in moving the second reading of this Bill, he felt it his duty to address to the House a few observations on the general character of the measure. After the termination of the Great Exhibition the Royal Commissioners found themselves in possession of a large surplus, which they were bound, by the terms of their charter, to apply to the encouragement of art and science. The Royal Commissioners, under the circumstances, prepared a Report, in which they reviewed the present condition of the institutions in this country founded for the promotion of that object to which they had to apply their own funds, and expressed their opinion with respect to the causes which had rendered those institutions on the whole less productive of advantage to the public than might reasonably have been anticipated from the magnitude of the resources placed at their disposal. It appeared that there was at present in this country a sum of not less than £250,000 a year received from public and private contributions for the promotion of art and science, but that the outlay of that money was attended with comparatively slight results, in consequence of two main causes—namely, a want of system and a want of space; and, indeed, the latter of those wants was the principal source of the former, in the judgment of the Commissioners. In reviewing the four great heads into which the Exhibition of 1851 was divided, the Commissioners pointed out the advantage which would be gained by concentrating, our artistic and scientific institutions, and they then offered to the Government of that day to apply a sum of not less than £150,000 to the purchase of land to be appropriated to the furtherance of art and science provided the Government met them with

2255
a contribution of equal amount, so that there should be devoted altogether to that purpose a suns of £300,000. That proposal having been accepted by the Government and sanctioned by Parliament, the Commissioners proceeded to purchase a considerable piece of land in the vicinity of Kensington. He had, however, to observe that in the year 1851, and previously to that proceeding, a Committee of that House, which had been appointed to inquire into the subject of the National Gallery, had reported that it was not expedient to increase the accommodation which the present building in Trafalgar Square afforded for the accommodation of pictures and works of art, and had expressed their disapproval of the site of that building. In consequence of that Report the Royal Commissioners for the Exhibition of 1851 had proceeded to inquire what would be the best site for a National Gallery, and had selected for that purpose the large space they had subsequently, purchased at Kensington Gore. In the year 1853 a new department of science and art had been established, and the Government of that day had applied to the Royal Commissioners for the Exhibition of 1851, who had purchased that site with the sanction of the Treasury, and in co-partnership, as it were, with the preceding Ministry, for accommodation for the new school which was about to be established; and the mansion known as Gore House, which had since been pulled down, was given up by the Commissioners at a nominal rent for that purpose, although its real value was rather considerable, and amounted to £600 or £800 a year. At a subsequent period, when the museums of art were obliged to leave Marlborough House, the Royal Commissioners allotted a piece of land, twelve acres in extent, for the purpose of erecting a museum, and the House of Commons voted £15,000 for the purpose. The success of that institution was eminent. As many people, if not more, had visited that museum as visited the British Museum. He mentioned these circumstances to show that the original intention of the Royal Commissioners with regard to art and science was a wel1-digested scheme, which it was very probable would have succeeded. Subsequently to this period another Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to inquire into the conduct and management of the National Gallery generally. They reported against
2256
the present site of the National Gallery; they indicated the conditions which they thought were essential for a good site, and they clearly pointed to the neighbourhood of Kensington, which, if he were not mistaken, they specifically mentioned. A Royal Commission was then appointed to inquire as to a site, and their Report was quite in unison with the plan of the Commissioners; and until 1856 the general tone of their proceedings in Parliament indicated an intention ultimately, if not rapidly, to fulfil the designs of the Royal Commissioners, so that on that large piece of ground which had been purchased by the united funds of the Royal Commissioners and the Government in the vicinity of Kensington, there should have been erected the public museums of science and the galleries of art in juxtaposition, as originally contemplated. But in 1856 a very great change occurred. The noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) who took a very active and useful and distinguished part in questions of this nature, moved an Address to the Crown for a Royal Commission to inquire into the best site for the National Gallery. That Motion, which it must be remembered, was made at a time when it was clearly understood that the new National Gallery should be erected at Kensington Gore, was carried, and a Royal Commission was again appointed. Whatever might have been the cause, or the accident, which led to the result of the Parliamentary division, there could be no doubt that the decision of the Royal Commissioners was one gravely arrived at after due deliberation and investigation; and it was not only against building a new National Gallery on the Kensington estate, but against removing it from its present site. Having arrived at that point it became necessary that the Commissioners and the Government should consider what was the advantage of keeping a large amount of money in the unsatisfactory state of investment in which it had been for the last five years. The Commissioners naturally complained of the position in which they were placed. They said that they had not been allowed to fulfil any of the original intentions of the charter under which they acted, and that the only return that they had received for their capital had been a moiety of the scanty rents which a few houses on the estate and some ground let for grazing purposes could

2257
yield. At the same time, while they expressed their readiness completely to carry out the original intentions of 1852, they also stated their willingness to put an end to the barren partnership which had existed so long with no beneficial result between the Government and themselves. That was a proposition which appeared to demand the serious consideration of the Government. They were not prepared to take any steps to carry into effect the original plans of 1852, for they looked upon the decision of the Commissioners with respect to the site of the National Gallery as conclusive. They thought it inexpedient that there should be more Committees or Commissions, for they were aware that the national collection had already greatly suffered front the long-continued unsatisfactory state of affairs, and under these circumstances they thought it best to accept the second branch of the proposition of the Commissioners if they could agree to the terms on which the partnership should be terminated. The terms offered by the Commissioners were these:—That the capital which had been advanced by the Government, amounting to about £177,500, should be repaid by the Commissioners, and that there should be added to it half of the rents and other proceeds which had been received during the interval of those five unsatisfactory and unproductive years, making altogether a sum of about £182,000. That proposal Her Majesty's Government had felt bound to accept, and therefore it was the object of the Bill to dissever the partnership between the Commissioners and the Government on the terms which he had just detailed. In the discussion which had taken place upon this subject a short time back in the Committee of Supply, although every one appeared desirous that the partnership should terminate, one hon. Member expressed an opinion that the Royal Commissioners should not be allowed to escape from their engagement unless they consented to pay interest on the money which had been advanced to them more than five years ago; but that was a position which in his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) opinion could not be sustained. The money had been lying useless all that time, as the Commissioners complained—and justly complained—in consequence of no fault upon their parts, and the Government had no right to expect interest on a sum held under such circumstances. Another proposition had also
2258
been made which he thought would not bear the test of a close examination. It was that the Government should receive not merely their capital back, but a sum which bore a nearer relation to the increased value of the land since it had been originally purchaded, five years ago. There could be no doubt that the land had very much increased in value, but it was only as applicable to building purposes that it had done so. It was more valuable to any speculative builder who was going to cover it with streets and squares and crescents; but it was not more valuable to the Royal Commissioners or to any one who was going to act in pursuance of the object of their charter for the encouragement of art and science; because, although the connection between the Government and themselves was about to cease, the Royal Commissioners had by no means given up the fulfilment of their original design, and it was still their object to achieve as nearly as possible the plan which he, on the part of the Government, had explained to the House in 1852. It would therefore be most unfair and ungenerous to exact from the Royal Commissioners an increased sum upon the assumption that the value of land in the neighbourhood had increased. Moreover, if they did so they would prevent the Royal Commissioners from accomplishing those public objects which, but for the interference of the House, would have been sooner accomplished. It would be difficult enough for the Royal Commissioners to execute all their plans, left as they now were to their own resources. There was only one other point to which he wished to call the attention of the House. The first clause proposed the general arrangements which he had explained. The second referred to that plot of ground—about twelve and a half acres—which had been used by the Government for the erection of those museums and schools of art which were originally located at Marlborough Rouse. By the second clause it was proposed that the land occupied by the Department of Science and Art, which was a public department of the administration of this country, might be retained for that department under certain conditions. The Government recommended the House to adopt this arrangement—that as long as that land was occupied by that department, as at present, no rent should be paid for it; the Royal Commissioners deducting from

2259
the purchase money were about to repay a certain sum representing the value of those twelve and a half acres. He was advised that the sum which might thus be deducted would be about £60,000. That value of the land was founded, not on the principle of paying for the land at an increased value, but upon the estimate formed when it was originally purchased. The original price paid for this plot was about £50,000 and at a subsequent period, it being of importance that a portion of the land near the Oratory towards the Brompton road should be purchased by the Commissioners, and the Government not being at the time prepared to make any further advances, a plot of land which cost about £2,000 was purchased. After that it became necessary to make roads throughout this property, and a sum of £20,000 had been expended upon those roads. He was sure that any hon. Gentleman who had seen those roads—and he had no doubt that most present had—would bear testimony to the admirable manner in which they had been executed. Of that sum of £20,000 the Royal Commissioners had supplied £14,000, the rest having been contributed by private individuals. That expenditure must have increased the value of that portion of the 12½ acres where the museums were established by £7,000 or £8,000. In addition to that the Royal Commissioners had, he believed, expended £5,000 or £6,000 upon the museums, besides £15,000 voted by Parliament, and it bad been given to him as a fair estimate, without the slightest reference to the increase in the value of the land since the original purchase, that a sum of about £60,000 should be thus temporarily deducted from the purchase-money to be re-paid by the Royal Commissioners. He had now placed before the House generally the object of the Bill. He thought that the termination of this partnership would be of great public advantage, and hoped that when it was terminated the Royal Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851 would be freed from the trammels which had existed too long, and be able to accomplish their original purposes. He was confident that the accomplishment of those purposes would tend to advance the interests of art and science in this country.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
MR. BRISCOEsaid, he wished to ex-
2260
press his satisfaction at hearing that the site of the National Gallery was not to be changed. At least he hoped he might take it for granted that such was the determination of the Government. Such an announcement would be received by the public with the greatest possible satisfaction; if the collection was removed to Kensington the rich might be able to enjoy it, but the great object of public improvement would be entirely defeated.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he had imagined that the partnership with the Royal Commissioners was entirely to be dissolved, but he was sorry to hear from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that that was not the fact, inasmuch as the country was to pay £60,000 at least for continuing that system of promoting art and science which ought to be maintained solely at the expense of the Royal Commissioners. He did not wish at all to discourage art, but the advantages of its promotion were so remote, so far as the working classes of this country were concerned, that he thought they ought not to be taxed for its promotion. Without going further into the subject just now, he would only say he should not oppose the second reading, but when they came to consider it in Committee he should certainly object to the second clause, and should move to terminate that partnership by which arts and sciences were to be supported at the expense of the working classes of the whole empire. He should also desire to know the exact sum that had been expended upon the land and buildings in question. The original sum voted was £150,000, which they were told would be the final demand; but since then there had been two other grants. He must protest against the money raised by taxation on the working classes being expended in such schemes as those which the partnership between the Exhibition Commissioners and the Government had led them into.
MR. KINNAIRDremarked, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in one part of his speech had stated that the partnership was an unsatisfactory arrangement for the Commissioners, but in the later portion of his speech the right hon. Gentleman showed that the partnership had not been so unfortunate for them, considering the increased value of the land which they had bought. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had not stated how the money was to be raised by the Commissioners to repay the advances made by the nation;

2261
but it was rumoured that they intended to borrow the money and then to sell some portion of the land to repay the loan. He thought the Government would best consult the interests of the country if having become possessed of a valuable site for national building purposes, they abstained from parting with it. After allowing the Royal Commissioners all the ground they would require, there would still remain sufficient to be applied to national purposes, and when they remembered the amount given for Burlington House and the continual demands of the Government for further accommodation, he thought this was an opportunity that ought not to be allowed to escape them. In the name of the whole country he protested against all the advantages accruing from dissolution of partnership going to one party—the Commissioners; and he certainly should feel inclined, in Committee, to take the sense of the House upon the subject.
MR. PALKsaid, he could not agree with the observations of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) to the effect that it was a misapplication of public money to expend it in objects of art or science. Upon the contrary, he believed the efforts made of late years by the Government, the nation, and private individuals had done much to improve the tastes of the people, and to advance the education of the industrial portion of the community. The more the arts and sciences were fostered the more would the education of the working classes be improved and their employment increased, and by that means alone would the standing reproach against our manufactures—our inferiority of taste and design, be removed. He would be glad if some arrangement could have been made whereby all the objects of art belonging to the nation could have been collected together in some place accessible to all classes, and as Trafalgar Square was inadequate for that purpose, he had hoped that the site at Brompton would have been available for that purpose, and the objection to its remoteness from the centre of London could have been obviated by the projected railway system throughout London. However, as the House desired to break up the partnership, he hoped they would at least deal fairly and liberally with the Exhibition Commissioners, and not haggle about the increased value of the land, for it
2262
should be remembered that if the land at Kensington had increased in value, that was owing to the judicious roads which the Royal Commissioners had constructed, and the way in which the grounds were laid out, and therefore he did not think the country ought to demand an advantage from this property which it did not possess when it was first bought, and which they had done nothing to improve. He looked upon this as a working man's question, and, he, for one, would give every facility to the education of the working man.
MR. ALCOCKsaid, he was glad to learn that the partnership with the Royal Commissioner was now about to be dissolved, but he thought some allowance ought to be made for the increased value of the land. That land, which was bought for £300,000, was now worth £600,000. But if the land was to be devoted to public purposes he would not be disposed so much to complain. He might take that opportunity of asking what was now proposed to be done with respect to the public offices. He repeated, if the land were to be devoted to that purpose, or to purposes of science and art, he would not complain, but he certainly thought that every penny of the money paid by the Treasury ought to be reimbursed to them; and secondly, that if this partnership were to be dissolved, it ought to be dissolved totally and entirely.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, when the House went into Committee no doubt full explanations would be given as to those various items. He thought, however, the hon. Member for Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) was mistaken in the view he took of the second clause. The ground purchased by the Royal Commissioners had been paid for partly with money granted by the State, and partly with money collected at the Crystal Palace. It surely could not be expected that the Commissioners should be obliged to give up to the State land that they had purchased with the money derived from the latter source. Yet, such would be the effect of the hon. Member's proposal. Whether or not it was desirable that the whole estate should be purchased, or whether a part should be left in the way suggested by the second clause, was a point worthy of consideration. Whatever course was taken, fair terms ought to be given to the Commissioners, who had a public object in view. Having received this money in trust,

2263
the Commissioners were desirous of using it first to repay what was owing to the state, and next to lay out the rest in a mode that would enable them to meet the cost of erecting such buildings for the purposes of science and art as would be useful to the public. Of course they could not do this without disposing of a part of the land upon building leases or otherwise. When the Bill came to be discussed in Committee, he believed it would be found that the transaction proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was a perfectly fair one.
MR. JOSEPH LOCKEsaid, he had, like his hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire, been rather misled as to the object of this Bill. He certainly thought that the object was the entire dissolution of the partnership between the Commissioners and the State; but it now appeared that that was not the case. The buildings stood upon ground purchased by the Royal Commissioners, and if the partnership was to be dissolved, he thought the buildings ought to go with the land. If he understood the proposition, it was that £60,000 should be set apart by the Commissioners, and be repaid by a deduction to that amount from the capital to be repaid to the country. If that were so, instead of getting interest on their capital, they would not get back the capital itself. He thought they should not have any further connection with the land. The royal Commissioners had improved the land, and now that the partnership was to be dissolved, they would be entitled to the whole value of it, and also the buildings upon it, and in his opinion it would be well to let the Commissioners take those buildings off their hands. The project was that of the Commissioners, and not that of the State. He had divided against the expenditure of this public money, and he should now call for an entire dissolution.
MR. DRUMMONDsaid, wherever the subject of buildings for national purposes was discussed there was always great confusion as to the objects for which they were required. In this case it appeared that the Royal Commissioners had made the mistake of compounding together two things than which none could be more dissimilar—he meant science and art. In science everything was capable of demonstration; in art nothing was capable of demonstration. The country at large had a direct interest in science, which could be
2264
made immediately profitable. For example, the building which had been erected in Piccadilly for the cultivation of geology was unquestionably one of the best mining schools in the kingdom, and was of immense practical utility. What, however, had that to do with art? The cause of all the mischief was owing to people who had got, he knew not how, a great reputation for understanding art—a reputation which, nevertheless, did not last long, for they soon committed some egregious blunder, and then their reputation went down as fast as it had risen. These persons came to mix together two things that were wholly distinct, and, of course, spoilt the one without benefiting the other. The buildings appropriated to science ought to be kept entirely separate from those devoted to art.
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he could not but agree with preceding speakers that this dissolution of partnership was a mere dissolution in name. He would remind the House that the Sheepshanks' Collection of Pictures was national property, and yet formed the nucleus of a collection at Kensington. There had been so much juggling in this whole matter that he could not avoid viewing every step that was now taken with some suspicion, though he thought they might now rest satisfied that the National Gallery would remain in Trafalgar Square. He thought the retention of the piece of ground alluded to most ob-objectionable, and he would, therefore, divide against the second clause in Committee.
MR. ADDERLEYsaid, his hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire (Mr) Spooner) and other hon. Members had complained in effect that the proposed dissolution of partnership did not do away with the Department of Science and Art, They appeared to forget that the Department of Science and Art existed long before the Exhibition. The partnership which was about to be dissolved arose merely from the advance of a certain sum of money by the Government to the Royal Commissioners to enable them to purchase land for a certain purpose. On repayment being made the partnership would be dissolved, although the Government might retain a portion of the land as part payment. He might also remark, that nothing had occurred year by year, in the continuance of the grants that had been made to the Department of Science and Art, that did not lead them to suppose that the

2265
country had been greatly benefited by them. The interests of the country in the promotion of art, manufacture, and trade, had been materially benefited by the stimulus that the liberality of Government had given. The present debate, however, was departing from the strict limits of the proposition contained in the Bill before the House, and would more appropriately take place when the Vote was moved for the Department of Practical Science and Art. He (the hon. Member) hoped on that occasion to give a satisfactory statement to the House to as the present condition of that department, and one which he thought would not lead to the confirmation of what the hon. Member for Warwickshire had said.
LORD ELCHOsaid, he was of opinion that the Government had acted wisely in not transferring the National Gallery to Kensington Gore. Wether the site it at present occupied was the best he would not enter on at that moment, but as he (the noble Lord) understood this Bill, it was simply to dissolve partnership between the Commissioners and the Government. The clause to which objection had been taken in no way militated against the principle, because it was a question whether the clause would ever come into operation. The clause only enabled the country, in the event of its being desirable to retrain a portion of the ground for the purpose of the Department of Science and Art at Kensington, to purchase that portion of the land so much less by receiving money from the Royal Commissioners. That question must depend on the further question whether it was desirable that the country should have that department. It had been stated that the Department of Science and Art sprung out of the Great Exhibition of 1851, but in reality it arose out of a Committee, appointed some years ago, to inquire into the arts and manufactures of this country. He would not say that Kensington was the proper place for such a department, but he thought the Government ought to retain in its hands the power of being able to take land for this or any other purpose, or in the event of its being desirable to remove the present inconvenient barracks at Knightsbridge. The question as to whether it was desirable to do this or to go to the expense of a locality for the Department of Practical Art was foreign to the question before the House.
MR. COWPERsaid, that no doubt there
2266
was something plausible in the idea suggested by the hon. Member for Honiton (Mr. J. Locke), that when Government gave up the interest in the land, it should give up all interest in the buildings, at South Kensington; but a few minutes' consideration would show that this was impossible and out of the question, as there were a number of art institutions in connection with the department that could not be dissociated from the central establishment. There were also normal schools, in which elementary knowledge of drawing and other arts were taught, and afterwards disseminated throughout local schools of art throughout the country. It had been said that South Kensington was situated at an inconvenient distance from the centre of the metropolis. The schools of art must have a locality, and as regarded the working classes, it had been found that the numbers attending the department were quite as great as when it was at Marlborough House. It should also be remembered that they could not give up the other collections without committing a breach of trust with Mr. Sheepshanks, who granted his noble collection of pictures on the condition that it should not be within town, but at South Kensington. The hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond) had said that the combination of science and art in this department was improper. It, was true they were two branches of study, land that they were not to be confounded together, but it was a mistaken inference that they were not to be combined together; and he believed that there were few public museums—such as the British Museum, the South Kensington, and the Geological—in which this was not the case. Any one who read the Reports and traced the practical progress of these departments would discover that they had given an impetus to practical art and manufacture in this country since their establishment such as could not be claimed by any other country in Europe. In fact, such advances had been made in this respect that persons who had the direction of the art schools in France had signified their intention of copying some portions of our system which they considered better than their own.
MR. W. EWARTsaid, he could confirm the statement that the Department of Practical Art had sprung out of a Committee, which had been appointed at his instance, in 1836, and not out of the Great Exhibition; and its normal schools were the in-

2267
strumentalities by which masters were provided for the provinces. Through them, in process of time, he thought that this country, from being one of the lowest in the sphere of art and manufacture, would become one of the highest.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that he could not help remarking that the assertion of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Cowper), that South Kensington was a convenient site for the central school of art, appeared to him contrary to common sense. The fact was, that the South Kensington Museum had been established where it was because it was convenient to a few privileged people connected with the department of science and art. He quite understood that there were some people, and very great people, who would not like to go into the centre of London—into Smithfield for instance—but who did not mind driving through the park to South Kensington; but in his (the hon. Member's) opinion, the museum had been planted there without any regard to the wants or convenience of the industrious classes. He thought it would be to the public advantage that they should entirely get rid of the museum at South Kensington, and that the money should be employed under the direction of Government, so that we might have a school of art and manufacture in the centre of the metropolis, and within a reasonable distance of those who devoted there lives to the pursuits which the institution was specially intended to foster.
MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he concurred in what had fallen from the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Ayrton), and he could testify to the fact that the distance of the Architectural Museum and its casts from the metropolis was most inconvenient to the working men of the metropolis, although, rather than not study them at all, the students would tramp to Kensington, though they would rather, to suit their convenience, they had remained at Cannon Row. He did not think that this discussion was at all premature or fruitless, although the desirability of a national school of design, and its lodgment at Kensington, were two distinct questions.
MR. WILSONobserved, that the second clause appeared not to be clearly understood. The Bill really did provide for the ultimate and permanent dissolution of partnership, subject only to the proviso as to the land and buildings. If the House of Commons determined next year that the
2268
museums should be removed, it would be perfectly consistent with the clause that this should be done, although there were certain conditions connected with the erection of these buildings which it would be necessary should be seen into. Another reason why the House of Commons should retain an interest in the land was on account of the large sum of money they had already expended on these buildings. He (Mr. Wilson) was of opinion that whatever money was paid on the part of the public ought not to be in the ratio of its present value, but according to its original price. No one would begrudge the Royal Commissioners any profit they might make on the transaction, provided it was clearly understood that the objects fur which this property were to be used should be purely public objects.
MR. A. SMITHwas understood to say that it seemed to be indefinite whether the Commissioners had not the power of still selling part of the estate. He understood the reason why they were to have this land at the original price was, that they were to be restricted from making it available for other purposes.
MR. CROSSLEYsaid, it had been laid down by hon. Members that thay were very much indebted to these schools of design for the advancement of manufactures. Now, as a manufacturer of considerable experience, he could not help expressing his conviction that these departments for the promotion of art and manufacture were perfectly useless; and although he was in favour of that House dealing liberally with them, he thought they were going out of their beat when they began to be manufacturers; for it was notorious that the Government were the worst manufacturers and farmers, as well as designers, in the country. He thought they should leave the manufacturers to furnish their own designs, in which case it would be found that they would succeed quite as well without, while a great deal of expense would be saved in the high salaries paid to the teachers at these schools.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERassured his hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) that he had misconceived what he said. What he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) stated, and what really was the fact, was that this Bill was a complete dissolution of partnership. There was not the slightest connection between the Royal Commissioners

2269
and the Museum and schools located at South Kensington. The Commissioners had no more to do with the institutions than had his hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire; and so far as this arrangement was concerned, the Commissioners would be perfectly willing to fulfil to the letter the arrangement for which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was responsible; but they, of course, demand, as a condition, that if they gave the Government the whole of the money, and took the whole of the land, they should have the use of the land; and therefore they required from the Government that they should find a museum for the Sheepshanks' Gallery, that they should find receptacles for the schools, and places where all these artistic and scientific collections should be lodged. It was not in the power of the Government to do this at present. They had not the means of finding accommodation available for museums and schools and galleries of a character similar to those that were at the South Kensington Museum, and therefore he made an arrangement and was responsible for the second clause which had been drawn up solely with a view to the interests of the public. One of the objects of that clause was to provide against injury to these public collections arising from any sudden change in that convenience that had been hitherto enjoyed; and that whenever it terminated, the public should be guarded from any too large sum being demanded for the land. If this clause were not included, they would not only not have this convenience, but they might have a demand for £90,000 made upon them; but by leaving the complete power to the Treasury, the public interest would be secured. He only mentioned the sum of £60,000, because he wished there should be perfect candour towards the House upon the question of carrying this into effect, and he took it as the maximum price, but the principle on which the sum was to be settled was an approximation as near as possible to the original price given. They could not fix the precise sum, because there had been additional purchases since by the Royal Commissioners, and there had been considerable outlay on the roads connected with the land; therefore, he only wished the House to understand that the dissolution of partnership was complete, that all these collections of science and art that had been the subject of so much criticism had nothing to do with the Royal Commissioners, who would be the landlords of their own property. Unless he had made
2270
this condition on the part of the Government, the country would have been obliged to pay an enormous rent, and to make a provisional arrangement that might terminate in six or twelve months. The object of the Royal Commissioners was virtually to carry into effect the original plans which, on the part of the Government and Royal Commissioners, he explained in 1852; but Government could not tie down the Commissioners by severe restrictions in the difficult and delicate position in which they were now placed. They must trust to the general expression of their charter. They must recollect their conduct and declarations as individuals; and if they could not trust to the declarations of those who were now acting on the Royal Commission, they could not trust to the engagement of any men. There was one condition in connection with this matter which was always contemplated, and for which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was responsible, that the outlying portion of the estate should be let out on building leases, in order that there should be sufficient income arising from the land to secure the advantages that the Government desired. The main plot of ground would be applied solely for this purpose. No part of the property would be sold. If some of the outlying portions were let on building leases, it was always contemplated, and it was a condition that the amount of the rents should be appropriated to the purposes of art and science. But the great design would, he hoped, be effected—a design it was the intention of the Royal Commission to accomplish, and for which object their plans were prepared. There would be a space of ground, an ornamental park or garden, not less in size than the enclosed area of St. James's Park, and around it would be grouped museums and galleries, the receptacles of valuable artistic and scientific collections. These results would be brought about by private and individual enterprise and energy, and if these objects were accomplished he was sure the House would never regret assenting to the Bill, the more especially as it would secure, as had been stated, a self-supporting institution. In conclusion, he would repeat that there was no wish nor intention on the part of the Royal Commissioners or the Government which was not frankly expressed in the Bill. It was a bonâ fide proposition, and he trusted the House would give it its support.
Bill read 2°, and committed for To-morrow.

JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES ACTS AMENDMENT BILL—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
Clause 7.
MR. WILSONsaid, no general statement had been made of the objects of this Bill, but as he understood the law, there were at present two modes of winding up joint-stock companies; one compulsory, through the agency of the Court of Chancery, and the other optional, by the creditors themselves. But then, he believed it was provided by another measure, that the optional mode might be rendered compulsory by going into the Court of Chancery. If he understood rightly there were different views as to the legality of that proceeding; and the object of this Bill, he believed, was to clear away those doubts by stating the means by which the optional process of winding up should be rendered compulsory through the Court of Chancery.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, this Bill was read a second time at a very late hour in the evening, because it was considered desirable that there should be no delay in the legislation of the House on the subject, and therefore no explanation of the measure had been given. The circumstance which led to its introduction were shortly these. The legislation of this country in reference to joint-stock companies was by no means in a creditable state. There were a number of Acts in existence which were not b altogether consistent with one another, and difficulties had occasionally arisen in consequence of the extent to which the contradictions went between them; but he hoped that another Session would not elapse without every one of those Acts being swept away, once and for all, and one general consolidated Act passed in their place, which creditors and shareholders would be able to read and understand without having to arm themselves with a number of small volumes for the purpose of searching out what was the law on the subject, and perhaps after all take a view of the law, which upon going into a court of justice they found was altogether incorrect. The immediate object of the clause and of the measure was this. In the Act of 1856 certain clauses were introduced which enabled the companies to whom that Act was applicable, when they got into difficulties to wind themselves up by a voluntary process, and that was a very convenient
2272
process so far as the shareholders were concerned. So long as the matter rested with them alone they might ascertain their liabilities, make contributions, raise as much money as was necessary to pay off their creditors, and so close up and liquidate the affair. But then the difficulty arose, that a creditor might not be content with that process and might desire to come into court and have a compulsory winding up over which he would have some control. The Act of 1856, therefore, left matters in this position, that they must either have a compulsory winding up, in which the creditors had nearly all the control, or else a winding up that was purely voluntary, and which might be superseded any day by an application on the part of a creditor for a compulsory winding up. To remedy that state of things a short Act was passed in 1857, containing a clause which provided that where there was an incipient voluntary winding up, and a creditor applied for a compulsory winding up, and the court was of opinion that the voluntary winding up was a bonâ fide proceeding, and for the interest of the creditors and shareholders, and would be well conducted and worked out by the liquidators appointed by the shareholders, it had power to take into its own hands that voluntary winding up, and make it available for the protection of the creditors. The clause to which he alluded was the 19th, and upon reading it the hon. Gentleman would see that it was one of the most meagre description, and gave rather the idea of instructions for a clause to be hereafter drawn than of a clause itself. When therefore, companies which subsequently fell into difficulties endeavoured to avail themselves of the clause, they found that it was most imperfect in its operation; that it did not go far enough; and that it was rather a hint for a future clause than a clause which contained within itself the provisions which were necessary. Now, what the Bill before the House proposed to do was simply this. It supplemented that 19th clause in the Act of 1857, and went in detail through the various matters with which, in winding up, liquidators, creditors or shareholders had to do, and in every one of these cases it provided that where the Court had taken into its hands one of those voluntary proceedings in winding up a company, there should be on the part of the liquidator and the Court the power of completely exhausting the proceeding, compromising debts, ascertaining liabilities, and settling all suits and

2273
actions which might interfere with the complete liquidation of the company, and which would have existed had there been a winding up that was from the beginning compulsory.
SIR RICHARD BETHELLsaid, the hon. and learned Gentleman had given a correct explanation of the object of the Bill, and it was not his intention to oppose it, because he regarded it as an unfortunate but necessary result of past legislation. It was a result, too, which would constantly occur until such time as Parliament should awake to the necessity of appointing some department to take a comprehensive view of legislation on such matters. Piecemeal legislation had taken place from time to time without reference to any general principle, and at present there were several winding-up acts which proceeded in parallel directions; but so great was the natural antagonism of the different processes that parties were obliged to go to one tribunal to accomplish one object, and to another tribunal to accomplish another. The fact was, that the whole state of the law in reference to this subject was not only unworthy of the greatest commercial community in the world, but was really unworthy of any body of men who conceived that the administration and improvement of the law were among the first duties of the Legislature. He would recommend the establishment of one general tribunal armed with all the powers now possessed by different tribunals for the disposal of these cases.
Clause agreed to, as were also Clauses 8 to 18 inclusive.
Clause 19 (Prosecution of delinquent Directors, &c., in case of compulsory winding up).
MR. AYRTONsaid, that as he read the clause its effect would be to compel the Attorney General to establish a sort of State prosecution against the directors when any creditor required it. Considering the great expense of these prosecutious, as had been evidenced in a recent case, which was said to have cost £10,000, he thought that the Bill should not render it compulsory upon the Attorney General to undertake them, but that the matter should be left to be dealt with in ordinary course of law.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that the clause did not make it compulsory on the Attorney General or the Court to undertake these prosecutions. On the contrary, it left it entirely in the discretion of the Court to say whether the
2274
offence which was laid to the charge of any director, manager, public officer, or member of the company was of so grave a nature that a report of it should be laid before the Attorney General, in order that proper proceedings might be taken for its punishment. After the laying of such report before the Attorney General that officer would be responsible for the prosecution if it were undertaken.
MR. AYRTONsaid, in charges of perjury the Attorney General did not prosecute; the Judge sent the case to a police court like ordinary cases, and instead of costing thousands of pounds it only cost a few pounds. His objection was to those being made State prosecutions.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 20.
MR. MALINSsuggested, that this clause should undergo further consideration, and that shareholders and liquidators should not have the power given them of rushing into criminal proceedings. Where fraudulent acts had been committed—where, for instance, dividends had been declared when there were no profits, and directors went to work systematically to deceive those who had entrusted their interests to their care—no doubt there ought to be a short inexpensive proceeding by which such men might be brought to punishment; and it would be a great national calamity if that end could not be obtained without such cumbrous proceedings as had been instituted in the case of the British Bank Directors. It was a disgrace to the administration of justice in this country that in a case so simple it became necessary to spend as much as £10,000 to convict men who had been guilty of declaring a dividend of 6 and 7 per cent at a time when they were struggling with difficulties, and did not know from day to day that they would be able to open the bank again. The proceedings ought to be more simple; but as they were not, he would not consent to trust shareholders, or liquidators, with the absolute power of deciding whether there should be a criminal prosecution or not. It would too frequently happen that they would be disposed to institute prosecutions with a view to obtaining costs rather than bringing delinquents to justice, and he would recommend, therefore, that the clause should either be further considered on the next stage of the Bill, or that it should be so altered as to place those prosecutions under the control of the Court.
SIR RICHARD BETHELLsaid, he was not aware of the expense of the proceedings in the case of the British Bank, but he had to observe that that prosecution had taken place under the old state of the law, but that under the, he hoped beneficial, Act which he had brought in, and which was passed in the last Session of Parliament, the cumbrous proceeding by indictment for conspiracy would no longer be resorted to. Every step, however, in connection with that prosecution, was taken under the immediate direction of eminent Members of the late and present Governments, and he believed no expense was incurred beyond what was necessary to ensure a conviction. He approved the suggestion of the hon. and learned Gentleman that no prosecution of such a nature should be undertaken without the previous sanction of the Court.
MR. BRAMLEY-MOOREsaid, he thought liquidators ought not to have the power of instituting prosecutions against delinquent directors, for a colourable prosecution might be got up and the guilty parties might escape. Neither did he think that the expense should be paid out of the funds of the company. He thought it would be as well if the clause were omitted.
MR. ADAMSsaid, he thought it would be an unsafe power to leave in the hands either of liquidators or of a meeting of shareholders. The difficulty might, however, be removed by adding to the words, "It shall be lawful for the liquidators," the words "after they have obtained the sanction of the Court, as provided by section 13 of this Act."
The SOLICITOR GENERAL:—The hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton), has suggested upon Clause 19 that some less expensive and solemn mode of instituting a prosecution of this kind than through the medium of the Attorney General might be adopted. Now under the Bankrupt Act there was a less formal and expensive mode, and the Court might direct a prosecution of a bankrupt for any of the offences therein specified. Upon the next stage of the Bill, therefore, he should propose that the nineteenth clause should run something like this:—That it should be lawful for the Court, on application, to direct the liquidators to institute and carry on a prosecution for any of those offences in a manner similar to that which was provided in the Bankrupt Act. With regard to the clause now before the Committee, he agreed that it would be unde-
2276
sirable to trust to a general meeting of shareholders the power of sanctioning or refusing such prosecution. Therefore, in line 42, he should propose to insert the words "it shall be lawful for the liquidators with the previous sanction of the Court."
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 21,
SIR RICHARD BETHELLsaid, that he did not think there was any necessity for its retention.
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that as he believed that the object sought to be obtained by this clause was secured by clause No. 5, he would agree to its being struck out.
Clause struck out.
Remaining Clauses agreed to.
House resumed.
Bill reported, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

WILLS &c., OF BRITISH SUBJECTS ABROAD BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  SIR RICHARD BETHELLsaid, be thought his learned Friend the Attorney General agreed with him that it would be inconvenient to take the discussion on this Bill upon the present occasion. He himself should have to ask leave of the House to introduce a Bill founded upon a different principle. The question was a most important one, and it was extremely desirable that England should not be insular in its legislation. Upon the understanding, then, that the discussion should come on on a future occasion, he would consent to the Bill being read a second time pro formâ.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that on the part of the Attorney General, he was willing to assent to the suggestion to take the discussion on the Motion for going into Committee.
  MR. MALINSsaid, that as one of the promoters of the Bill, he would also cheerfully accede to the suggestion to take the discussion on a future occasion, but as the evil to be remedied was a great one he hoped no unnecessary delay would occur to the passage of the Bill.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for Monday next.

BRISTOL MUNICIPAL CHARITIES BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. ADAMSsaid, he must express his

  2277
  opinion that Bills of this nature were being unnecessarily multiplied. He thought that consolidation might in such cases be very beneficially applied.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that the subject referred to by his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Boston (Mr. Adams) was one which would require mature consideration. Under the existing law separate Bills were necessary.
  MR. BAINESsaid, no doubt the mode of proceeding in these cases was a great deal more round about than need be; but as the law now stood every scheme was bound to be sanctioned by a separate Bill, so that all parties interested in the matter might have due notice of what was about to be done. Nor were these precautions entirely without their advantages, because last year, in the case of the Dulwich Hospital Bill, there was a violent opposition raised that eventually led to various changes being made in the scheme.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for To-morrow.

  CLERKS OF PETTY SESSIONS (IRELAND) BILL.—SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, he approved of the provisions of the Bill generally, but thought it would require some amendment in Committee. He thought that each bench of magistrates ought to have the appointment of its own clerk, instead of those appointments being vested in the magistrates at quarter sessions. There were some other alterations which he should desire to see made in the Bill.
  MR. SULLIVANsaid, he thought that there were no defects in the Bill which could not be remedied in Committee. He, as an Irish Member, felt obliged to the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland for having introduced this measure; and he was sure that the suggestions of the hon. Member for Clonmel, and other Irish Members, would receive due consideration from the noble Lord when the Bill was in Committee.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, he was of opinion that much credit was due to the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland for having solved a question which had long been one of difficulty, and solved it in a manner satisfactory to both the Irish Members and the petty sessions clerks themselves.
  LORD NAASsaid, it was exceedingly satisfactory to him to find that the main provisions of this Bill were so generally approved of by the Irish Members. With
  2278
  regard to the provision for the appointment of the clerks by the magistrates at quarter sessions, that was indispensable, because it was proposed that in some districts the clerks should do duty in two or three courts of petty sessions; and therefore, unless the appointments of clerks were placed in some other hands than those of the magistrates at petty sessions, their appointments might lead to unpleasant differences. It was also provided that no clerk should be removed from his office without the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant. This was intended as a security to clerks, that they should not be removed except in cases where there was ample reason for their removal. He thought there was no doubt that there would be sufficient funds under this Bill to provide retiring allowances for such clerks as should enter office after the passing of the Act. There were one or two minor points which he would amend in Committee.
  MR. DE VEREcongratulated the noble Lord on the success the Bill had met with, and asked whether it would be necessary to require an oath to be taken from the clerks? If so, it ought to be framed in clear and intelligible terms.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for Monday next.

NISI PRIUS COURT (IRELAND) BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, that this was a Bill to give Mr. Thomas Courtenay, the registrar of the Nisi Prius Court, £300 a year for doing duties which he now performed for nothing. He thought that this required some explanation.
  MR. WHITESIDEsaid, he had received a communication from the Lord Chief Justice in Ireland informing him that the late Attorney General for Ireland had, at his (the Lord Chief Justice's) desire, promised to bring in such a Bill as this, and asking him (Mr. Whiteside) if he would do so. He replied that he would. Some three or four years ago a new court, called the Consolidated Nisi Prius Court, was established in Dublin. That court was, of course, created by Act of Parliament, but no officer was created to receive records, to swear witnesses, and to sit under the Judge from the commencement to the close of the business. That duty had hitherto been discharged by the Registrars of the Chief Judges in turn, but without payment. The present Bill was to provide payment of £300 a year for that which he did not

  2279
  think any English solicitor would like to do for nothing.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for To-morrow.

DURHAM COUNTY PALATINE JURISDICTION BILL.—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
MR. A. SMITHsaid, he must object to the extensive and arbitrary powers which it was sought to confer upon the Crown under the provisions of the Bill.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONexplained, that the object of the Bill was merely to carry out an arrangement made in 1857 between the Crown and the Bishopric of Durham. The sixth clause saved to all persons and bodies corporate and politic the same rights which they had before the Bill, and there was therefore no aggression on the rights of the public whatever.
Bill, as amended, passed through Committee.
House resumed.
Bill reported, as amended; to be considered To-morrow.

PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
MR. PALKsaid, that he should have bad no objection to the principle of the Bill bad it been such as announced by his right hon. Friend (Mr. Adderley) on introducing it. But it appeared to him that the Bill contained greater powers than were then stated. He therefore wished to know for what purpose the Bill had been introduced—whether in fact it was for the purpose of transferring the sanitary powers of the Board of Health from the general Board to local Boards; or re-constituting the old Board of Health, which had been condemned so frequently by that House. If the right hon. Gentleman would inform him that, in order to meet any particular emergency, or to check any aggravated form of disease which might arise, he asked for dictatorial powers under the provision of the measure, to such a proposition he should have no objection to accede. Indeed, some such pressing occasion might be said to have arrived, for the state of the Thames at the present moment imperatively demanded that to the abatement of the nuisance a remedy should be applied. So great was that nuisance that it had, he had been told, attracted the attention of every hon. Member who happened to have been in the library in the course of that evening. Now, if such were the case in the building in which they were sit-
2280
ting, how much worse must be the state of things in those alleys of the metropolis which adjoined the river! He should not, therefore, object to giving a Board of medical officers the power to take summary steps in a case of that kind. The first clause to which he particularly objected was the third, which enabled the Privy Council to make inquiries which they thought necessary with respect to the public health; but it did not enable the Privy Council to do anything in consequence of those inquiries. He wished to know whether that clause meant something or nothing. By another clause the present Medical Officer of the Board of Health was to become the Medical Officer of the Privy Council. He wished to know what duties this officer had to perform sufficient to justify his being paid a salary of £1,500 a year, especially taking into consideration the fact that the gentleman who now held the office had other offices, besides a considerable private practice. The Bill also gave power to appoint a medical board, but he understood that there was no intention of appointing a paid medical board. It was quite competent to the Government to appoint a medical board in case of an epidemic, and afterwards to apply to Parliament to grant them a Bill of indemnity for so doing; but he must object to the taking of these indefinite powers, which opened a door to jobbery, and for paying large salaries to officers whose posts were sinecures under ordinary circumstances. The whole course of legislation on the subject of the public health was, indeed, a disgrace to this House. In spite of all their Commissions and Health Bills, the Thames, which was the mainspring of the power and wealth of London, had been allowed to become one vast sewer, which would surely spread disease and death around. He really thought it was high time for any men of humanity, who felt for the position of the working classes in London, to protest against the present system of legislation on this question. In conclusion, he must object to the system of bringing on Bills containing a variety of details which required discussion at a late hour in the evening, when it was impossible to discuss them satisfactorily.
MR. ADDERLEYsaid, that the Bill had nothing to do with the larger questions which were embraced in the Local Government Bill, and with which the hon. Gentleman appeared to have confounded it. The Bill then before the House simply enacted that the services of the Medical

2281
Officer of the Board of Health should be transferred to the Privy Council. The appointment and salary of that gentleman would remain when the Board of Health expired, but he would have no duties if this Bill did not pass. The main object of the Bill was to provide for the emergency of an epidemic. That such powers were required was, he thought, proved by the pestilential state of the great river which flowed close by, and which really might soon come to be a terror to this House, and to those who lived on its borders. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would allow the Bill to go into Committee, and then raise his objections upon its details.
House in Committee.
Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.
Clause 4.
MR. PALKsaid, he wished to know what were to be the duties of the Medical Officer under this Bill, and why it was to be turned into a patent office. If he did not receive satisfaction on this point he would move the omission of that part of the clause.
MR. ADDERLEYsaid, he could not see what objection was to be urged to the retention of the Medical Officer, whose position was not altered from what it was before.
MR. JOSEPH LOCKEremarked, that this Bill was about to make a very great change by transferring the powers under the Bill from a Board over which the House had power to the Privy Council, over which the House had no power. He was not prepared to go on with the Bill, and in the absence of the hon. Member for Finsbury, who had Amendments on the paper, if the Bill were persisted in he would move that the Chairman report progress. The clause also gave the Privy Council the power of fixing the salaries, and took from the House the power over the purse. He thought the Bill should not be passed in that loose manner.
VISCOUNT DUNCANsaid, he agreed with the hon. Member for Honiton (Mr. Locke), and he thought the House was at least entitled to know what would be the probable estimate of the salaries of the men that were to be engaged.
MR. JACKSONsaid, he should not be content with knowing the salaries. He objected altogether to the House of Commons giving up the purse strings out of their hands into those of the Privy Council.
MR. SOTHERON ESTCOURTsaid, there was no danger of the House losing
2282
hold of the purse strings, because no salaries could be given except out of the money voted annually for that purpose by Parliament. Then, as to the objection of other medical officers being appointed, he understood the clause to mean, that in case an epidemic broke out in five or six towns at the same time, the Privy Council should not be limited to one medical officer, but should have power to send down an inspector to each, while for years together, perhaps, there might not be occasion for the employment of one. What they wanted was to have one medical officer always at the disposal of the Board, with power to engage more when it was thought necessary.
MR. P. O'BRIENcontended, that they ought to fix the salaries first, as it would be too late to object to the salaries after the officers were appointed.
MR. GILPINsaid, he conceived that the measure had not been well considered, and that it had come on unexpectedly in the absence of hon. Gentlemen who took interest in the subject. He was disposed to support the suggestion that the Chairman should report progress. The Privy Council was not the right body to have power proposed to be vested in it.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that there could be no doubt that no money could be spent without an estimate being laid before the House. The root of the objection seemed to be that the Medical Officer was of no use. Now, Mr. Simon, last year, prepared a report on vaccination, proving that the smallpox could be absolutely eradicated by a practical system of vaccination; and the result was that a clause bad been introduced into the Bill to give greater effect to the provisions for carrying out vaccination in this country. Therefore the result of the report of that Medical Officer would be to save many thousands of human lives, and that was a sufficient reason to justify the appointment of a permanent medical officer, and the empowering of the Privy Council to appoint a sufficient number of persons to make inquiries.
SIR ARTHUR ELTONprotested against the doctrine that they were not to proceed with the further business because an hon. Member chose to absent himself. He could not understand how hon. Gentlemen could resist the progress of a measure which was loudly called for by the sanitary condition of the country.
VISCOUNT EBRINGTONsaid, he was also in favour of proceeding with the Bill.

2283
Hon. Gentlemen grudged the salary of £1,500 a year to the medical officer; but they did not consider that there were now 150,000 preventible deaths every year in the country, and it was a moderate computation that for every preventible death there were twenty-eight cases of preventible illness, of an average duration of a fortnight each. Let them think of the enormous loss of industry which these preventible deaths and preventible cases of illness produced in the country. It was a new doctrine to hear that the Privy Council had nothing to do with the health of the country, when they knew that the whole quarantine regulations were under their control. He regulations it advisable, therefore, that that body should have the power of habitually and quietly, without exciting alarm, making inquiries into any manifestation of disease in any part of the United Kingdom.
MR. COXsaid, as there seemed to be some doubt about the matter, he now intended to move that the Chairman do report progress. His hon. Colleague (Mr. Duncombe) had given notice of several Amendments on the Bill, and he was sure he would have been in his place to move them if he thought that the Bill would have been brought on. They were now discussing a clause which, in his opinion, would create as great a job as had ever been perpetrated.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he rose to order. As the hon. Gentleman had moved that the Chairman do report progress, he thought he ought not to delay the Committee by discussing the clause itself.
THE CHAIRMANremarked, that he had only understood the hon. Member to say, that he intended to move that the Chairman do report progress.
MR. COXsaid, it appeared to him that the Bill was one of a very important character, and required much discussion. He would, therefore, give an opportunity for further discussion by moving that the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Motion made, and Question put—"That the Chairman do report progress and ask leave to sit again."
The Committee divided: Ayes 32; Noes 140; Majority 108.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, with regard to the first objection, if hon. Gentlemen would but refer to the 7th clause they would find that that clause delegated the power to three persons, being Privy Councillors, of
2284
whom the Vice President of the Committee of Education was o be one. Consequently, instead of referring the matter to, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the reference would be made to that portion of it which had always a certain supervision of it. With regard to the other objection urged, he thought there was some force in it. He wished, therefore, to remind the Committee, what was the state of the law at present, and what it would be under the operation of this clause. The state of the law now was this: the Board of Health had the power of appointing not a medical officer, but a medical council, and they had the power of appointing inspectors with very large powers, which were now vested only in the Board. The powers introduced in the clause were, however, somewhat less. His right hon. Friend at the head of the Poor Law Board had given cogent reasons why the medical officers should have certain powers given to them when infectious complaints were spreading, in order that they might be enabled to point out the mode by which those diseases could be best dealt with. The provisions of the Bill would always be subjected to the revision of the House when they came to deal with the annual Estimates. He would suggest that in the clause relating to remuneration and salaries it should be specified that there should be one paid Medical Officer, who should be the only person entitled to salary, and that the remuneration of other persons he might appoint as inspectors, should be such as the Commissioners of the Treasury should from time to time direct. Thus, there would be only one permanent salary.
MR. JACKSONinquired what was the amount of the Medical Officer's salary?
MR. WALPOLE: £1,500 a year.
VISCOUNT DUNCANsaid, what they wanted was that one of the principal Secretaries of State should take the place of the Privy Council, in order that there might be some one responsible to the House for the appoinments which might be made.
MR. PALKsaid, he was of opinion that if the salary of the Medical Officer was £1,500 a year he ought to devote his services exclusively to the Board, and not derive emoluments from private practice or perform other duties.
MR. ADDERLEYsaid, that the efficiency of medical officers was very much curtailed by the adoption of the principle

2285
of isolating them from all other practice. He was not precluded from private practice by his employers, and it would be better not to restrict him by Act of Parliament.
MR. JACKSONsaid, he thought that if £1,500 a year was not sufficient they should make it £2,000, but that he ought to be debarred from private practice.
Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
The remaining Clauses were then agreed to.
The House resumed.
Bill reported, as amended; to be considered To-morrow.

JURIES (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. WHITESIDE, in moving that this Bill be read a second time, said it consolidated and amended the law with regard to juries. It made partial juries impossible, converted the sheriff from a judicial into a ministerial officer, and compelled him to go through the book in regular order, giving gentlemen who had served a certificate to that effect, and not calling upon them again till others had taken share of duty.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for Monday 28th June.

STANHOPE AND WOLSINGHAM RECTORIES BILL—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he thought it very desirable that the House should be made aware of the objects of this Bill. Stanhope rectory being, as was well known, a very wealthy rectory, five or six new rectories were created out of its revenues, and the surplus would be applied to small livings.
MR. INGHAMsaid, he could confirm the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, and he desired to express the thanks of the county to the Bishop and the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, by whom this arrangement had been made.
Bill passed through Committee.
House resumed.
Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read 3° To-morrow.

TRANSFER OF LAND BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  SIR RICHARD BETHELLsaid, he
  2286
  would not delay the Second Reading of the Bill at that hour further than to observe upon two circumstances—one, that in the other House of Legislature the Bill had received the support of Her Majesty's Government: and the other, that the principle of the Bill had been so much discussed and so generally approved in the Bill brought in by the learned Attorney General for Ireland, that it was only necessary to apply the same principle to the present measure. He should suggest, therefore, that the Bill be read a second time pro formâ, on the understanding that it be left to go into Committee after the committal of the Transfer of Lands Bill in Ireland.
  MR. WALPOLEsaid, he should be unwilling to discourage any attempt to facilitate the transfer of land, and still more unwilling to discourage any attempt to accomplish that object by a measure which would give what was termed a "Parliamentary title." But this Bill, as it had come down from the other House, was in two respects materially different from the recommendations which the recent Commission on the registration of titles submitted to Her Majesty. In the first place, it gave the Court of Chancery jurisdiction in questions relating to the transfer of land; and, in the second place, it did not deal at all with mortgages, leases, or encumbrances. Now, he knew his hon. and learned Friend was strongly of opinion that the object contemplated by the Bill was too limited in its scope, and that the Court of Chancery was not the tribunal by which questions affecting the transfer of land ought to be determined. Still, there could be no harm in reading the Bill a second time pro formâ, provided the hon. and learned Gentleman had no objection to refer it to a Select Committee, who might be able, upon a consideration of the whole subject, to suggest a more comprehensive measure.
  SIR RICHARD BETHELLintimated that he would consent to the Bill being referred to a Select Committee.
  Bill read 2°, and committed for Monday, 28th June.

GALWAY FREEMEN DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL—COMMITTEE.

  ADJOURNED DEBATE.
  Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Question (15th June), "That the Order for the Committee on the said Bill be discharged."
  Question again proposed.
  MR. G. CLIVEsaid, he would suggest

  2287
  the further adjournment of the debate to some future day.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that he should have no objection to its being taken at a morning sitting on Tuesday week.
  MR. BRADYsaid, that the day named by the right hon. Gentleman would be inconvenient to many of the Irish Members who would be then at the assizes.
  MR. P. O'BRIENsaid, that considering the late period of the Session, and that the Government was about to bring in a large measure of reform, it would be better to give up the Bill, and let the subject come into the discussion on Parliameutary Reform next year.
  MR. M'CANNmoved the adjournment of the debate.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the debate be now adjourned."
  MR. G. CLIVEsaid, for himself he was willing to accept the day named by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but as he was anxious that the Irish Members should be present during the discussion, he was equally willing to accept any other day which might be more convenient to them.
  MR. BUTTsaid, that it was impossible to make this Bill consonant with justice. Something was due to the hon. Member who brought forward the measure on public grounds, but something was also due to the large body of electors over whom this Bill of pains and penalties was kept hanging. It ought to be fully and fairly argued before any decision was come to. It ought either to be thrown out, or an early day fixed for a full and fair discussion.
  LORD LOVAINEsaid, he was opposed to the abandonment of the Bill, and would therefore recommend the acceptance of the day offered by the Government for the purpose of discussion of the measure.
  MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, the discussion came before the House in a very inconvenient form. It would be better that the Motion to discharge the order for going into Committee, and the Motion for adjournment should be both withdrawn, and then the discussion could be taken on the simple question of going into Committee.
  MR. MAGUIREsaid, he knew well what was the object of the Bill, though it was not the intention of the hon. Member for Hereford, but those who were his
  2288
  backers and supporters. He should be ready to prove, if necessary, that the real object was not so much the vindication of pnrity of election—not so much the cutting off the rotten members of a constituency—as to make the borough of Galway a pocket borough in the hands of one of the great autocrats of the country. As the measure was forced upon the House he should prove from the evidence which was given before the Commissioners that the rich and the powerful were more to blame, more corrupt, and had a greater amount of responsibility upon their heads. than the poor ragged, wretched victims of their political profligacy. If they intended to force a decision upon the House, he would give them enough of it on Tuesday week. With the amiable purpose, then, of furthering the object of those hon. Gentlemen who were the real promoters of the Bill, he would withdraw the Motion of which he had given notice, and would have a field-day, with the permission of the Committee, on Tuesday week.
  Motion and Original Question, by leave withdrawn—Committee deferred till Tuesday, 29th June at Twelve o'clock.

INSURANCE AND ASSURANCE INSTITUTIONS BILL.

  SECOND READING—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
  Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment proposed to Question [16th June]—
  "That the Bill be read a second time upon Wednesday the 7th day of July next;" and which Amendment was, to leave out the words "Wednesday the 7th day of July next," in order to insert the words "this day six months," instead thereof.
  Question again proposed,
  "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, it would be unreasonable to have this Bill hanging over the House at this late period of the Session. If the hon. Member the mover of the Bill (Mr. Sheridan) would consent to withdraw it after a discussion had taken place on it, the Government would give a day for that discussion.
  Amendment by leave withdrawn; Main Question put, and agreed to; Second Reading deferred till Wednesday, 7th July.
  House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

COUNTY FRANCHISE BILL.
List of the AYES and NOES on the Second Reading of the" County Franchise Bill," June 10, 1858, omitted from Page 1881.

List of the AYES.

Adair, H. E.

Crawford, R. W.

Alcock, T.

Crook, J.

Anderson, Sir J.

Crossley, F.

Ayrton, A. S.

Dalglish, R.

Bagshaw, J.

Davie, Sir H. R. F.

Bagshaw, R. J.

Deasy, R.

Bailey, C.

Denison, hon. W. H. F.

Baines, rt. hon. M. T.

Dent, J. D.

Baring, rt. hn. Sir F. T.

De Vere, S. E.

Baring, T. G.

Diffwyn, L. L.

Barnard, T.

Duff, M. E. G.

Baxter, W. E.

Duff, Major L. D. G.

Beale, S.

Dunbar, Sir W.

Berkeley, hon. H. F.

Duncan, Viscount

Bethell, Sir R.

Dundas, F.

Biddulph, R. M.

Dunkellin, Lord

Biggs, J.

Dunlop, A. M.

Black, A.

Dunne, M.

Bonham-Carter, J.

Ebrington, Viscount

Bouverie, rt. hon. E. P.

Ellice, E. jun.

Bouverie, hon. P. P.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Brand, H. H.

Elton, Sir A. H.

Bright, J.

Ennis, J.

Briscoe, J. I.

Evans, Sir De L.

Brown, J.

Evans, T. W.

Brown, W.

Ewart, J. C.

Bruce, Lord E.

Ewing, H. E. C.

Bruce, H. A.

Fenwick, H.

Buchanan, W.

Fergus, J.

Buckley, General

Ferguson, Colonel

Buller, J. W.

Finlay, A. S.

Bury, Viscount

FitzGerald, rt. hn. J. D.

Butler, C. S.

Fitz Roy, rt. hon. H.

Buxton, C.

Foley, J. H.

Caird, J.

Foley, H. W.

Calcutt, F. M.

Foljambe, F. J. S.

Campbell, R. J. R.

Forster, C.

Cardwell, rt. hon. E.

Foster, W. O.

Cavendish, hon. W.

Fortescue, hon. F. D.

Cheetham, J.

Fox, W. J.

Clay, J.

French, Colonel

Clifford, C. C.

Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.

Clifford, Col.

Gifford, Earl of

Clive, G.

Gilpin, C.

Codrington, General

Glyn, G. C.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Glyn, G. G.

Collier, R. P.

Goderich, Viscount

Colvile, C. R.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Coningham, W.

Greene, J.

Conyngham, Lord F.

Greenwood, J.

Cowper, rt. hon. W. F.

Gregson, S.

Corbally, M. E.

Grentell, C. W.

Cowan, C.

Greville, C. F.

Craufurd, E. H. J.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

2290

Grey, R. W.

Paxton, Sir J.

Gurney, J. H.

Pease, H.

Hadfield, G.

Pechell, Sir G. B.

Hall, rt. hon. Sir B.

Perry, Sir T. E.

Hamilton, Captain

Philips, R. N.

Hanbury, R.

Pilkington, J.

Handley, J.

Power, N.

Hankey, T.

Pryse, E. L.

Hardcastle, J. A.

Pritchard, J.

Harris, J. D.

Proby, hon. G. L.

Hatchell, J.

Puller, C. W. G.

Hayter, rt.hn. Sir W.G.

Ramsden, Sir J. W.

Headlam, T. E.

Rebow, J. G.

Henchy, D. O'C.

Ricardo, O.

Herbert, rt. hon. H. A.

Rich, H.

Herbert, rt. hon. S.

Ridley, G.

Hodgson, K. D.

Robartes, T. J. A.

Holland, E.

Roebuck, J. A.

Horsman, rt. hon. E.

Roupell, W.

Howard, hon. C. W. G.

Russell, Lord J.

Hutt, W.

Russell, H.

Ingham, R.

Russell, A.

Ingram, H.

Salisbury, E. G.

Kershaw, J.

Schneider, H. W.

Kinglake, A. W.

Scholefield, W.

Kinglake, J. A.

Shelley, Sir J. V.

Kinnaird, hon. A. F.

Smith, J. A.

Knatchbull-Hugessen, E.

Smith J. B.

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H.

Somerville, rt. hn. Sir W.

Langton, H. G.

Stanley, hon. W. O.

Laslett, W.

Stapleton, J.

Lewis, rt. hon. Sir G. C.

Steel, J.

Lindsay, W. S.

Stuart, Lord J.

Lowe, rt. hon. R.

Sullivan, M.

Luce, T.

Sykes, Colonel W. H.

M'Cann, J.

Taylor, S. W.

MacEvoy, E.

Thompson, General

M'Mahon, P.

Thornely, T.

Mangles, R. D.

Tite, W.

Martin, C. W.

Tollemache, hon. F. J.

Massey, W. N.

Tottenham, C.

Melgund, Viscount

Townsend, J.

Mellor, J.

Trelawny, Sir J. S.

Milnes, R. M.

Trueman, C.

Monsell, rt. hon. W.

Villiers, rt. hon. C. P.

Morris, D.

Vivian, H. H.

Napier, Sir C.

Vivian, hon. J. C. W.

Nicoll, D.

Waldron, L.

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Weguelin, T. M.

Norris, J. T.

Westhead, J. P. B.

Ogilvy, Sir J.

Whatman, J.

Osborne, R.

Whitbread, S.

Paget, C.

White, H.

Paget, Lord C.

Willcox, B. M'G.

Palmerston. Viscount

Williams, W.

2291

Wilson, J.

Young, A. W.

Wingfield, R. B.

Wood, rt. hon. Sir C.

TELLERS.

Wood, W.

Byng, G. H. C.

Woods, H.

King, J. L.

Wyld, J.

List of the NOES.

Adams, W. H.

Disraeli, rt. hon. B.

Adderley, rt. hon. C. B.

Dobbs, W. C.

Alexander, J.

Dod, J. W.

Arbuthnott, hon. Gen.

Drummond, H.

Baillie, H. J.

Duncombe, hon. Col.

Ball, E.

Dundas, G.

Baring, H. B.

Du Pre, C. G.

Baring, T.

Dutton, hon. R. H.

Bernard, T. T.

Egerton, E. C.

Bernard, hon. Colonel

Elphinstone, Sir J.

Barrow, W. H.

Estcourt, rt. hon. T. S.

Beach, W. W. B.

Farquhar, Sir M.

Bective, Earl of

Fellowes, E.

Beecroft, G. S.

Ferguson, Sir R.

Bennet, P.

FitzGerald, W. R. S.

Bentinck, G. W. P.

Forde, Col.

Blackburn, P.

Forester, rt. hon. Col.

Boldero, Colonel

Forster, Sir G.

Botfield, B.

Gard, R. S.

Bovill, W.

Gilpin, Col.

Bramley-Moore, J.

Gladstone, rt. hon. W.

Bramston, T. W.

Goddard, A. L.

Bruce, Major C.

Gore, W. R. O.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Griffith, C. D.

Burghley, Lord

Grogan, E.

Cairns, Sir H. M'C.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Calcraft, J. H.

Hamilton, G. A.

Cardon, Sir R.W.

Hardy, G.

Carnac, Sir J. R.

Heathcote, Sir W.

Cartwright, Colonel

Henley, rt. hon. J. W.

Cayley, E. S.

Henniker, Lord

Charlesworth, J. C. D.

Hill, hon. R. C.

Child, S.

Hodgson, W. N.

Christy, S.

Holford, R. S.

Clive, hon. R. W.

Hopwood, J. T.

Close, M. C.

Horsfall, T. B.

Coote, Sir C. H.

Hotham, Lord

Corry, rt. hon. H. L.

Hudson, G.

Deedes, W.

Hume, W. W. F.

Hunt, G. W.

Palk, L.

Inglis, J.

Peel, rt. hon. General

Jermyn, Earl

Pennant, hon. Colonel

Johnstone, hon. H. B.

Philipps, J. H.

Jolliffe, Sir W. G. H.

Powell, F. S.

Jolliffe, H. H.

Pugh, D.

Jones, D.

Pugh, D.

Kelly, Sir F.

Robertson, P. F.

Kendall, N.

Rolt, J.

Kerrison, Sir E. C.

Rushout, G.

King, J. K.

Rust, J.

King, E. B.

Sandon, Viscount

Knatchbull, W. F.

Sclater-Booth, G.

Knight, F. W.

Seymer, H. K.

Knightley, R.

Shirley, E. P.

Langton, W. G.

Somerset, Colonel

Legh, G. C.

Spooner, R.

Lennox, Lord H. G.

Stanhope, J. B.

Liddell, hon. H. G.

Stanley, Lord

Lisburne, Earl of

Steuart, A.

Lockhart, A. E.

Taylor, Col.

Lopes, Sir M.

Tollemache, J.

Lovaine, Lord

Trollope rt. hn. Sir J.

Lowther, hon. Col.

Vance, J.

Lowther, Capt.

Vansittart, W.

Lyall, G.

Verner, Sir W.

Lytton, rt. hon. Sir G. E. L. B

Waddington, H. S.

Walcott, Admiral

Mackie, J.

Walpole, rt. hon. S. H.

M'Clintock, J.

Walsh, Sir J.

Malins, R.

Welby, W. E.

Manners, Lord J.

Whiteside, rt. hon. J.

Maxwell, hon. Col.

Whitmore, H.

Miller, T. J.

Williams, Colonel

Miller, S. B.

Willoughby, J. P.

Mills, A.

Willson, A.

Montgomery, Sir C.

Woodd, B. T.

Morgan, O.

Wortley, rt. hon. J. S.

Mowbray, rt. hon. J. R.

Wrightson, W. B.

Naas, Lord

Wyndham, General

Neeld, J.

Wyndham, H.

Newport, Viscount

Wynne, W. W. E.

Noel, hon. G. J.

Yorke, hon. E. T.

North, Colonel

Ossulston, Lord

TELLERS.

Packe, C. W.

Du Cane, C.

Pakenham, Colonel

Miles, W.

Pakington, rt.hn. Sir J.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES.—QUESTION.

  COMMONS, MAY 21.
  MR. MONSELLsaid, it would be in the recollection of the House that in 1853, when the Charities Act passed through the House, the Roman Catholic charities were exempted for two years, on the ground that, without some previous legislation on the subject, those charities would be confiscated if they were brought under the operation of that Act, by reason of the disclosures that would thus be made. Since then there had been several Bills continuing the exemption. The exemption at present existing was on the point of expiring, and he wished to know if there was to be any legislation this year.
  MR. ADDERLEYsaid, Her Majesty's Government had not contemplated the necessity of another Act for continuing the exemption of these Roman Catholic charities, in the hope that by further conference with. Roman Catholic Members a Bill might have been passed this Session for dealing permanently with the subject. At this late period, however, there was no hope of passing a Bill this Session, but he trusted it would be possible in the next. He, therefore, proposed to introduce a Bill continuing for one year longer the exemption of the Roman Catholic charities.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act Continuance; Churches, &c., (Ireland).
THE VOTE OF THANKS TO THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA, ETC.

  LETTER OF THE GOVERNOR GENERAL.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I have to acquaint your Lordships that I have received a letter from Lord Canning, in answer to a communication made to his Lordship, of the Vote of Thanks which your Lordships passed to Civil and Military Servants in India. It is as follows:—
  "Allahabad, May 11.
  "My Lord,—I have had the honour to receive Lord Cranworth's letter of the 10th of February, transmitting the Resolutions passed by the House of Lords on the 8th of that month, with reference to the employment by the Government of India of the resources at its command for the suppression of the mutiny; to the achievement of many important triumphs of the forces of Her Majesty and of the Hon. East India Company; and to the conduct of those persons who, though not holding military rank, have performed valuable military service. I have also had the honour to receive your Lordship's letter of the 23rd of March, communicating a Resolution passed by the House of Lords on the 16th of that month, regarding the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. These Resolutions, together with the letter of Lord Cranworth and of your Lordship, have been made public, and I have forwarded to each officer whom the House of Lords have distinguished by name a copy of the Resolution which conveys the recommendation. I shall have the honour to send to your Lordship hereafter the answers which I may receive from the several officers who have been thus addressed. The other steps which have been taken to carry out the wishes of the House of Lords, as conveyed in their last Resolution of the 8th of February, are described in the inclosed general order of this day's date. The House of Lords may be sure that their approval of the past exertions of Her Majesty's servants and loyal subjects in India will stimulate every man among these to do his duty
  2194
  with increased devotion and perseverance. For myself, I beg to be allowed to express to the House, through your Lordship, my respectful and grateful acknowledgment of the honour which their Lordships have conferred upon me in marking my humble services with the high reward of their approbation.
  "I have the honour to be, my Lord,
  "Your Lordship's most obedient servant,
  "CANNING.
  "To the Right Hon. Lord Chelmsford, Lord High Chancellor, &c."
  The said Letter ordered to lie on the table, and to be entered on the Journals.

DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

  REPORT.
  Amendments reported (according to Order.)
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, that as the measure then stood, although it contained a clause which extended its provisions to India and the Colonies, Ireland was not included. He begged to move, therefore, that the words "or Ireland" be inserted in the 5th clause, for the purpose of extending the jurisdiction of the Court to cases arising in that country.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, he would offer no objection to the proposal as a temporary measure, but was of opinion that a distinct Bill should be introduced, applying the principles of the measure to Ireland.
  LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that they should not be content with simply including Ireland in the provisions of this measure, but that they should establish a distinct Court for matrimonial causes in Ireland. In the meantime, however, the provisions of the present Bill should be made to extend to that country.
  THE EARL OF WICKLOWsaid, he did not agree in the propriety of establishing a new court for Ireland, believing that as the majority of the people of Ireland were Roman Catholics, and could not therefore avail themselves of such a tribunal, it would be inoperative with respect to fourfifths of the population. Its advantages would in fact be confined entirely to the upper classes. He thought, therefore, it would be sufficient to adopt the Amendment proposed by Lord Redesdale
  LORD REDESDALE, alluding to the operation of the new Divorce Court, said it had been prophesied that the proceedings in that Court would differ little from proceedings in similar cases in their Lordships' House; but that prophecy had not been fulfilled, for he saw by the papers of to-day that no less than nine unopposed petitions

  2195
  were granted at once to parties suing for a divorce. If this were so, he must say he thought that their Lordships had passed the Act creating the new court under a totally different impression with regard to what would be its probable effects, and that there could not be those safeguards against collusion which had been considered so essential when petitions for divorce had come before their Lordships' House.
  LORD CAMPBELLsaid, that Chief Justice Cockburn presided in the Court on the occasion to which the noble Lord alluded; the cases had been most carefully sifted, and there was no ground whatever for suspecting that any collusion had been practised.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, that when the new Court came into operation there were many cases of persons who were too poor to have recourse to the former expensive process, and these had been all brought forward at once. He believed that, after awhile, there would not be so many cases before the Court; though if unfortunately there should be, it would only go to show the great value and utility of the Act.
  LORD REDESDALEdefied any Court to get through nine cases of that kind in a day and satisfy themselves that there was no collusion in them.
  EARL GREYfeared that cases might arise in which there would be no parties sufficiently interested in sifting their merits to the bottom, and others in which it might be too much the interest of the parties to blind the court.
  LORD CAMPBELLbelieved that a great portion of the nine cases referred to were cases of bigamy.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Further Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

THE SLAVE TRADE.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDrose, pursuant to notice, to present a petition from the inhabitants of St. Mary, in the island of Jamaica, for the suppression of the slave trade. The petition set forth that in the year 1814 a treaty had been entered into between Great Britain and Spain for the abolition of the slave trade, but that in spite of that treaty and of subsequent treaties the traffic in slaves still continued to the great injury of the petitioners; and it prayed their Lordships to adopt such means as might seem meet to them for the suppression of the traffic, and to compel the
2196
Spanish Government to redeem the pledges which they had given. In presenting this petition he would venture, for a few moments, to call their Lordships' attention to the great subject to which it referred. He was sorry to say that the fact mentioned in the petition was so patent that it would not be necessary to take up much of their Lordships' time in proving the allegations. It was patent to all that the continuance of the traffic in slaves was a breach of the solemn treaties which had been entered into by Spain, with this country, and that the breach had been aggravated by almost every circumstance of aggravation with which one nation could violate the engagements it had entered into with another. In the year 1814 a general treaty was entered into between England and Spain, by which Spain united, without binding herself to any particular line of conduct, with this country, in condemning the trade in slaves. Shortly afterwards the great Congress of all the principal European Powers agreed in the face of the world to condemn that traffic and entered into mutual engagements to put it down. In 1817 a new treaty was entered into between England and Spain, by which Spain undertook that by the year 1820 the slave trade, as far as her own subjects were concerned, should cease, and they even accepted a sum of £400,000 as a compensation for the injury which would be done to certain Spanish subjects by the suppression of the traffic. Year after year, however, passed on, and nothing was done. In 1835 a new and more explicit treaty was contracted between this country and Spain, in which the Government of Spain again repeated the engagements to which he had alluded, and undertook to make a law sufficiently stringent to make it impossible for a Spanish subject to continue the forbidden traffic. But still true to the policy which had throughout characterized a conduct—a policy which had been remarked fur many past generations, and which had induced Lord Bacon, in one of his pithy sentences to say, that Spain was always a nation slow of despatch, and that the fact had been embodied in a proverb, in which persons expressed a hope that when their deaths came they should come from Spain, knowing that then death would be long enough in coming. True to their character ten years passed after this treaty of 1835, before any such penal law was made; and, then, when owing to the remonstrances of this country, a law was framed, the only

2197
point which could have made it effectual—that of declaring the slave trade piracy—was omitted. In spite of repeated remonstrances from successive Governments of this country, in spite of the dishonour which such conduct brought upon her, Spanish subjects had been engaged in the slave trade from that time to this, except during two years that Valdez was Captain General of Cuba; and he had a letter from a person who was likely to be well informed on the subject, which stated that the horrible traffic still existed, and that several ship loads of Africans had lately been landed in Cuba. He thought he need not occupy any more of their Lordships' time in proving the first and principal allegation of this petition, that the slave trade still continued to be carried on by Spain with unexhausted vigour, and that it was so carried on in spite of the most plain and repeated engagements with this country that it should absolutely cease. In thus violating her treaty engagements Spain had not the poor excuse which many countries might urge in such a matter—that her Government was not strong enough to carry them out. The proof lay in a nut shell: it lay in this simple fact, that when Valdez was the Captain General of Cuba, and showed his determination to interfere with this obnoxious traffic, he had been perfectly able to interfere with it, and for the time being to stop it. It appeared from the Slave Trade papers which were from year to year laid on their Lordships' table that when Valdez was appointed Captain General of Cuba he called together all the persons in the island known to be engaged in the accursed traffic, and he told them he had come to the honest determination to stop it, but that he would give six months, in which he would take no notice, in order that those who had ventures might wind up their affairs; but that at the expiration of that time he was determined to put the law in force. What was the result? They found that in 1840 as many as fifty-six ships were despatched from Cuba to the coast of Africa; but that in 1842, when the Captain General endeavoured to enforce the treaty, only three ships were despatched from Cuba to the coast of Africa; and that while in the year 1840, 14,470 Africans were imported into Cuba, in 1842 only 3,100 were imported. And this was not all. When the same Captain General was in Cuba he took means for ascertaining what the general feeling of the Cubans was with regard to the suppression of the traffic, and he reported
2198
that all Cubans whose opinions Were asked unhesitatingly condemned it, and that the feeling of the people, as a body, was favourable to the termination of it. And there were reasons why they should. The trade was conducted for the benefit of certain speculators who introduced Africans for the purpose of breaking up new land, and bringing it in competition with the old estates in the island; and therefore those who were now living in opulence on the produce of their estates were desirous for their own sakes that the accursed traffic should be stopped. But how was the expression of opinion received in that country? It was regarded as a criminal offence, and visited with the severest penalties; and there were instances in which persons had been imprisoned and banished from the island merely because they had expressed with freedom their opinion of this traffic. It came, therefore, to this, that the Spanish Government, instead of being overborne by popular violence, itself put down the wholesome feeling of the island, in order that it might retain this trade. And why, he would ask, was it that the Government of Spain had shown itself anxious that the iniquitous traffic in slaves should be maintained? He was afraid that its conduct in that respect was to be ascribed to the basest of all possible motives—the love of gain—the personal advantage of serving great people who received their reward from the gains of this accursed trade. There was, he believed, little doubt that persons of high position in Spain—persons standing near to the throne of that country—had received largely the wages which resulted from the continuance of that guilty commerce which was one of the great curses of mankind. It was a matter of notoriety that more than one Captain General had been sent out to Cuba—were sent out for one purpose only,—with a view that he might replenish his exhausted fortunes by means of fees received upon the importation of those unhappy Africans. It appeared, indeed, from papers which had been laid upon the table of the House, that certain persons who had held that office had within a very short time been enabled to realize as much as £100,000, and to return to Spain enriched by unlawful gains purchased with the blood of those whom, contrary to treaty, they had permitted to be introduced as slaves into the island over whose interests they had been appointed to watch. It was a well known fact, be believed, that

2199
one of those officers had received a fee of three doubloons per head for slaves thus illegally imported. But this was not all—there was another feature in this case which brought home to the Government itself the criminality of this thing—there were repeated instances of a wilful falsification upon the part of the authorities of the returns of the number of slaves in the island, repeated year after year, in order to evade the treaty. For instance, a return had been made upon one occasion which went to show that the whole number of the slaves in a single year was only 300,000, although there was unmistakeable evidence to show that the number was 900,000; and that the authorities themselves were aware that they were making a statement which was absolutely untrue. There was, however, another ground of complaint in connection with the subject to which he desired briefly to call their Lordships' attention—he referred to the treatment of that class of Africans who were designated in the treaty by the name of emancipados. It was a part of the engagements that in regard to the island of Cuba, all those slaves who happened to have been introduced into the island after a certain date should, after an apprenticeship of five years, be set free, and enabled thenceforward to work for wages. How, he would ask, had that arrangement been carried into effect? The way in which the Cuban authorities had evaded this engagement was that those emancipados who ought to have been allowed to go at liberty were actually substituted for the slaves who happened to die under work in the plantations, the treaty which had been entered into with this country being thereby directly evaded. He thought he had now brought the case to this point, that this violation of treaties was not the consequence of a weak Government overborne by a popular movement, but was the direct act of the Government itself; and it was the act of the Government, not from any desire to develope the resources of the country, but in order that certain persons might have reserved to them the means of gaining wealth through the miseries of the African people. He would now turn to another side of the subject. Was this, he would ask, a state of things which Great Britain could in the face of the world honestly allow to be continued? He would answer that question by stating it to be his firm conviction that we were bound by every obligation which a nation like our
2200
own must regard as most sacred to use every means in our power to put a stop to the evils to which he had called their Lordships' attention, and to provide that the provisions of those treaties into which we had solemnly entered should be strictly enforced. We were bound to adopt that course in the discharge of our duty to our own West India colonists, inasmuch as in consequence of an act which he could not help designating as most unworthy of this country—the equalisation of the duties upon slave-grown and free-grown sugar—we gave them just reason to expect that we would at all events not allow them to be ruined by undue competition with countries which imported slaves for the cultivation of sugar, and that, too, in violation of treaties which the dictates of right and policy alike called upon us to maintain. But it was not our duty to our colonists alone which demanded that we should insist that these treaty obligations should be observed. We owed it to the people of this country, who were heavily taxed for the support of a squadron upon the coast of Africa to intercept the slavers, that that course should be adopted. It was a noble use to which to apply money; but we had no right to do that, and at the same time to allow the very evil to be created by the breach of treaties. There would otherwise be a manifest inconsistency in our maintaining that squadron—an inconsistency which would do much to damage our fair fame in the eyes of the world, and which would lead the English nation to suppose that Her Majesty's Government were actuated by some secret motive in the line of policy they were pursuing, inasmuch as, if such were not the case, they would not suffer a country like Spain to proceed for so long a period in defiance of the obligations into which she had entered. It did not become the high character of England to permit any State whatsoever thus to scoff at the solemn engagements which she had contracted. There was another reason—a great moral consideration. No nation should undertake the succour of the afflicted as we had done, and then flinch from the labour and self sacrifice which that clientship entailed. We had no right to put ourselves forward to the world as the suppressors of the slave trade unless we were prepared honestly and firmly to enforce those treaties for its suppression which our allies had made with us. To renounce the responsibilities which attached to us under those circumstances would be a dishonour-

2201
able abandonment of our duty—a line of conduct utterly unworthy of a great people. There was another subject which ought to be considered in connection with this question. Looking at the condition of things which we had too long suffered to exist, it must be seen that the position of Cuba exposed us to the danger of hostile feeling from the United States, and perhaps of hostile acts. The people of that country, it should be remembered, were the inheritors of our blood; they had our own love for the sea as well as our own jealousy for their national honour and their national flag; and we could not carry on the operations which we were pledged to carry on without coming continually into contact, if not with ships of that nation, at least with ships sailing for security under its flag. The right of search was at this moment in a very unsettled state; and how easy was it for the intemperance of a single commander, actuated by honourable feeling, but carrying too far the right we claimed of seeing whether a vessel was or was not an American, to cast a spark into the slumbering magazine of mischief and involve all in a common ruin! He said "in a common ruin," for what could be more fatal to the advancement of the human race, to rational liberty and to civilization, than that war should break out between these two nations, or even that there should ensue between them any permanent alienation? Yet, while we suffered Cuba to continue a slave importing State, it must in the nature of things be a continual provocative of the most dangerous extremities between England and America. It was like allowing a magazine of powder to exist close to our most precious possessions, and then calmly suffering sparks to be constantly falling around what ought to be its well guarded stores. He contended that the state of things at this moment existing ought to impress upon the nation and the Government the necessity of taking a high tone with Spain, and of enforcing upon it the fulfilment of its treaties. Now, if happily Spain were to follow the example so nobly set her by Portugal—if she would do for Cuba what Portugal had done, as far she could, by influencing the Brazilian Government to abolish the slave trade there—if Spain would do this, and would give to these imported Africans the liberty which under treaty with us was now theirs; if Cuba were in this way constituted a country with free African labourers, they would
2202
then remove the temptation which now continually beset certain parts of the United States to annex this island for certain internal State purposes peculiar to the confederation. In this matter, then, we had calls of right which no nation could possibly disregard, as well as calls of interest which it was of the highest moment now to attend to. We were bound in the face of Europe and of the world to suffer these treaties no longer to continue a dead letter, but to require—aye, and to use every means which the Government of this country could employ to make that requisition binding—that this tardy, this equivocating State should at last free itself, as it had so long engaged to do, from the accursed stain of this traffic in men. The right rev. Prelate concluded by moving that the petition should lie on the table.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that the right rev. Prelate who had just sat down was evidently actuated by the noblest motives, and had addressed the House with an eloquence and fervour worthy of his name. He trusted that the Government would give some intimation of its intentions in regard to the question generally, and particularly as to carrying into effect the suggestions which had been so justly made by his right rev. Friend. It should be remembered that the Government of England had some right to use its influence on the Spanish Government, inasmuch as the latter had received upwards of half a million of money for its accession to treaties, which it had ever since systematically violated. His right rev. Friend had alluded to a very delicate subject—the chance of a difference with the United States. But if we insisted on Spain acting up to her engagements, that risk would be avoided. The present dissensions he regarded as an alarm-bell, which should warn us to be wise in time; and though such alarms were unpleasant, we might remember Mr. Burke's saying that the fire-bell which disturbs our slumbers may save us from being burut in our beds. It was not only the bounden duty, but the plain interest of our own Government, of the Spanish Government, and of the Government of France, to put an end to the transportation of slaves to the coast of Cuba. It was sometimes said that the United States had an interest in the slave trade; but they had none. Not one of the slaves carried from Africa was imported into the United States; a few went to Martinique, but 999 out of every 1,000 went to Cuba.

2203
The number and complexity of the coral reefs on the Cuban coast would render it impossible for any squadron which might be maintained there effectually to suppress the slave trade; but he believed that, if an end were put to that gross system of corruption under which the Governors of Cuba had enriched themselves by bribes at the rate of so much a head for every unhappy African landed on the Cuban coast, they would prevent the great difficulties which arose between the United States and this country with respect to the right of search. Let us, however, treat our American brethren with perfect frankness as well as fairness in dealing with this subject. The United States would not allow the right of search, treating it as a belligerent right, which had no existence in time of peace. This whole subject had been explained in an able and most valuable Compendium of the Law of Nations which had been published by two learned members of the profession to which he had the honour to belong—he meant Mr. Hazlitt and Mr. Roche—and in which the question of the right of search was most clearly and accurately handled. He thought no lawyer would deny that the right of search was a belligerent right only; but, making that admission, he did not at all admit it as a consequence that any ship of any country —not mere slave-traders, but common pirates and robbers—were to be allowed, simply by hoisting a certain piece of bunting, to carry on their nefarious proceedings with impunity. But if the Americans objected to the exercise of the right of search —even to visits for police purposes—in time of peace, on the ground that they were prohibited by international law, they must on the other hand admit that, according to international law, the same doctrine applies equally to small as to great States; and therefore, that such States as Lubeck, which possessed some three or four ships— and Monaco, which, although possessing no vessels, was yet an independent State—and San Marino, which might become owner of A small sea-board—might cover by their flags vessels which were engaged in this traffic, and no other nation would have any right to interfere with them—nay, any common pirate might use their flag at his pleasure, instead of his own black flag, and no one had a right to ask him whether he was making a right or a wrong use of that flag, because only cruisers of the nation whose flag was thus used had a right to visit. If it were admitted
2204
that, according to the American doctrine, the right of visit as well as search was belligerent, and only to be exercised in case of war, the principle must of course apply to Lubeck, Monaco, and San Marino, and to every small State, as well as to France, America, or England. For his own part he conceived that this question might be most satisfactorily arranged by friendly and kindly discussion between those Powers whose interests were concerned; but, at the same time, he thought that all discussion would be rendered unnecessary if Spain did her duty by performing the obligations she had contracted, and for which she had been well paid. He could not conclude without saying one word respecting the slave trade which was carried on with the sanction of the French Government, by exporting slaves from Africa, and carrying them across the Atlantic to Martinique and elsewhere, under colour of their being free labourers. He had had conversations with French naval officers, who, according to a most excellent regulation, had been placed on board vessels which conveyed negroes from the African coast. One of these gentlemen told him that he had been on board a vessel containing 350 slaves, that the passage occupied thirty days, and during its continuance thirtyfive negroes died, being at the rate of 10 per cent. per month; that it was necessary, as the crew only consisted of from fifteen to twenty men, to take great precautions in keeping the negroes in the hold, and that many of the negroes were in irons, and were not allowed on deck for the time which was necessary for their health. A heavy mortality was the necessary consequence. He (Lord Brougham) was not surprised, after hearing such an account of the mode in which this traffic was conducted, at seeing a statement that the poor unhappy negroes on board one of these ships had been unable to bear their confinement and their chains, and that they had risen upon the crew, and murdered the whole of them with one exception. [Earl GREY: Not murdered—killed them.] The noble Earl was right. The negroes "killed" the whole crew except one man, and some people were rather disposed to complain that a single exception had been made. The person whose life was spared, was however, the medical officer who had behaved very kindly to the negroes. As regarded what had been said about the negroes going on board of their own free will, he did not believe a word of it. He

2205
asked the French officer to whom he had alluded how the 350 negroes had got on board the vessel he superintended, and he found that they were all slaves who had been bought on the coast from chiefs well-known as slave-traders, although they had been temporarily liberated—if such a term could be correctly used in such a case—in order that it might be said they were free emigrants. He hoped that Her Majesty's Government would bear this question in mind in any communications they might have on the subject with the Government of France. He thought a very great mistake had been made in not endeavouring to establish a better system of communication between this country and the African chiefs,—many of whom looked upon the slave trade with abhorrence, and were most desirous of establishing a legitimate commerce in palm oil, cotton, drugs, and other articles. He was afraid it was too true that this lawful commerce had materially diminished within the last eighteen months in consequence of the establishment of that system of "free emigration" to which he had adverted. He would say one word with respect to the petition itself—and he certainly thought that the inhabitants of Jamaica had a right to complain on this subject. If it were admitted, for the sake of argument, that slave-grown sugar might be allowed to enter into the English consumption, and that the slave-grown sugar might increase by the natural increase of the slaves or by more effectual cultivation, yet it was a totally different thing that that slave-grown sugar should be increased by the unnatural, forced, and infernal traffic in Africans carried on by force and fraud. That was a cruel addition to the burdens imposed on the planters of Jamaica, and they bad a most undeniable right to call on the British Government to stay the importation of negroes into Cuba, or to prevent the importation of Cuban slave-grown sugar.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, my Lords, the reason that I listened for my noble and learned Friend to speak is, that the other night he gave me notice that he should follow my right rev. Friend and ask me some questions as to some events that have taken place on the coast of South Africa. Your Lordships have heard the hereditary eloquence and seen the hereditary feeling with which my right rev. Friend (the Bishop of Oxford) has addressed the House on a subject always interesting in this country. I wish I could say
2206
that it is an object of as great interest to other countries as to this; but I regret to say that we are not aided as we might wish on this subject by other nations, and this is one of the greatest difficulties with which we have to contend. With the greatest justice, my right rev. Friend has laid unmitigated blame on the Spanish Government for a long course of breach of treaty and the commission of gross cruelty towards the African race—and this, too, after all the despatches which have been written from England to Spain on the subject, and which, I believe, if they were woven together, would reach from here to Cuba itself. I am not now defending the present Government, which has only been so short a time in existence, but it would be unfair to say that this has been its fault. One British Ministry after another has done its best to induce Spain to do its duty, and all have signally failed. Spain has opposed to us that passive resistance which is the most difficult resistance in the world to overcome; and it has not been without the greatest risk of collision with other countries that we have attempted to take measures that have appeared to those countries stronger than we had a right to take, and which, if carried further, might have involved us in war. The right rev. Prelate must recollect that the Foreign Minister of this country cannot act entirely upon the feeling which he possesses as an Englishman upon this subject. The matter involves so much complication —it involves so much risk of offence to other nations who—I say it without offence to them—do not feel so strongly as we do on this subject, that every step must be taken with caution, and the Minister cannot act with the vigour he might be disposed to adopt. It was not only that other nations have descended into a sort of relaxation of feeling with respect to the principle of slavery and slavery itself, but that they do not even admit those doctrines of international law which my noble and learned Friend who spoke last has laid down. My noble and learned Friend said that there was a difference between the right of search and the right to visit; that although we have no right to search, we have a right to visit, in order to carry out the police of the ocean. I must be permitted to say that the United States have constantly and categorically refused to admit that distinction. They say that on no account, for no purpose and upon no sus-

2207
picion, shall a ship carrying the American flag be boarded except by an American ship, unless at the risk of the officer boarding or detaining her; and the doctrine laid down by the United States has been adopted by other countries. It is not long ago that we tried to obtain from all civilized nations some agreement by which our officers might know how far they should go in cases of strong suspicion, and be protected from the consequences of any mistake on their part in boarding a vessel of another country not liable to seizure. I tried to ascertain what license other nations would give in this respect; but I was anticipated by the French Government, who laid it down that no French ship should be detained, stopped, or boarded, but that certain forms should be gone through without detaining her, which, to a certain but very small extent, might ascertain her right to carry the flag which flies at her mast head. I have no reason to conceal what I have done since recent events. I need hardly tell the House that I have admitted the international law as laid down by the American Minister for Foreign Affairs; but I have not done so until that statement had been approved and fortified by the opinions of the law officers of the Crown. But having admitted that, I have put it as strongly as possible to the American Government that if it is known that the American flag covers every iniquity, every pirate and slaver on earth will carry it and no other; that this must bring disgrace on that honoured banner, and that instead of vindicating the honour of their country by an obstinate adherence to their present declaration, the contrary results will follow—that the American flag will be prostituted to the worst of purposes. I have urged, and I shall continue to urge, that it is necessary in these civilized times, with countless vessels navigating the ocean, that there should be a police of the ocean; that there should be, if not a right by international law, an agreement amongst nations how far they would go to verify the nationality of vessels and ascertain their right to bear a particular flag. From the language I have used, from the conversations which I have had with the American Minister resident in this country, and from the observations contained in a very able paper drawn up by General Cass on this subject, I am not without strong hopes that some arrangement of this kind may be made with the United States, which, with the instructions given to the officers of both
2208
countries, may enable us to verify the flags of all countries without running the risk of offence to the country to which a ship belongs. Your Lordships, I think, cannot expect me to go more into detail as to the great practical difficulties that lie in our way in suppressing the slave trade. I must say, however, that I think we made a mistake in sending our squadrons to the Cuban waters instead of keeping them on the coast of Africa. On the Cuban coast they are in American waters; the ships detained are outward bound from those countries—no doubt they have on board provisions for slaves; no doubt they are going to Africa, and will return with slaves; but they are not carrying slaves when they are detained. Admiral Fanshawe, who is about to command Her Majesty'e fleet in the Mediterranean, told me that so effectual were the operations of our squadrons on the coast of Africa, that at the beginning of the Russian war the slave trade was nearly extinct. He stated that when, about ten years ago, he took the command on that station, fifty-four slavers were captured in the first year of his command; fifty in the next; not more than two or three in the third; and that, during the command of the Admiral who succeeded him, the captures were reduced to an almost infinitessimal amount. During the Russian war, however, it was necessary to withdraw a large part of our squadron, and the result was, that the slave trade again made progress. I must say, that the conduct of Spain towards us on this question has been marked by the greatest ingratitude. We have taken her part on several occasions against those whom she has suspected of designs adverse to her. It has always been the policy of England and of other European countries to support Spain, and defend her in the occupation of Cuba against hostile invasions, as well as to prevent any agreement by which she might be induced to part with it. But I do not hesitate to say, in my place in Parliament, that if Spain continues to show that utter want of principle, and that utter and base ingratitude which she has displayed towards this country, which has always been her friend, I do not hesitate to say that she must expect that indifference will be exchanged for amity, and instead of our taking her part she must expect us to leave her to whatever consequences may ensue, whether proceeding from her present conduct or not. I have now only to give a short account of the

2209
occurrence on the coast of Liberia to which my noble and learned Friend has referred. A ship was lying on the coast of Africa, having on hoard a number of negroes, who were called emigrants by the French Government, but were neither more nor less than slaves. They were manacled; but they managed to effect a rising in the absence of the captain, who had gone on shore, and murdered all the crew, except the surgeon. They then sailed away. An English ship, which had heard of the disaster, chased the slaver, which immediately gave herself up without making any defence, the persons on board expressing the greatest joy and pleasure in meeting with an English ship. The French captain, who had followed her in a boat, then took possession of her, took her from the English vessel, so far as the command went, and took her into Liberia. The French admiral, or the officer on the station, claimed the ship, and took her out of the Liberian waters. As a matter of law, we were not justified in taking the slaver in Liberian waters without the consent of the Liberian Government; so that the quarrel as it now stands is between the French Government and the Liberian Government. The English Government have nothing to say in the matter. I have only to add, that Her Majesty's present Government will, as Her Majesty's late Government did, take advantage of every opportunity they may have of protesting to the French Government against a line of conduct which, although it affects to be a system of emigration, can only be called, in the language of truth, a renewal of the slave trade.
THE EARL OF CARLISLErose to express his great satisfaction that this paramount subject had been brought under their Lordships' attention. He called it "paramount" because there was no other great question so calculated to excite the sympathy and interest of the whole world. He had had an opportunity of seeing some of the effects of importing negroes into the island of Cuba, and in his opinion it was to the eternal disgrace of the Spanish Government that such a system had been so long carried on in that beautiful island. No one would shrink more than he would from saying anything which could complicate or embitter our relations with the American Government—he knew that even such a purpose as the suppression of the slave trade must be carried on with some
2210
reference to changing circumstances and conditions; and he felt convinced that in the interest of suppression strict care should be taken that we did not exceed the limits of our well-defined rights or encroach on the rights and prerogatives of others. Still, he felt bound to express his opinion that the countrymen of Clarkson, Wilberforce and Brougham, had already done so much for the suppression of the slave trade they would never consent to a disgraceful retreat or retrograde course upon this great question. He rejoiced, too, to hear that there was a prospect of a satisfactory solution of the dispute between this country and the United States.
LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, that however much it might have been our duty to put an end to the slave trade carried on by our own subjects, he felt considerable doubts whether the policy of interference with foreign States was originally a wise policy; but, having embarked in it and pursued it with considerable success for a long series of years, we ought not precipitately to abandon it. He rejoiced to hear of the course which had been taken with reference to the difficulty with the United States, and he thought the language used by the noble Earl wise and judicious. He had not the slightest doubt it would turn out that there had been great exaggeration in the American newspapers as to what had been done by the officers of our cruisers; but he was convinced that, no matter what instructions were given to our officers, if we undertook by an armed squadron to visit and examine the great number of American vessels which passed through those waters, sooner or later serious differences with the United States would occur. He would put it to their Lordships what would be the feeling in this country if an armed squadron were to be placed in the Channel to stop and search our outward-bound vessels? Whatever might be the reason with a foreign Power for doing so, it would undoubtedly give rise to a most disagreeable state of feeling in the public mind of this country. He believed there was a great deal more moderate feeling on the part of the majority of the people of the United States on this subject than might sometimes be supposed from the accounts which we read in, their newspapers, and that the temperate course pursued by Her Majesty's Government would tend to calm the excitement that did exist; but he thought it was a matter more worthy of the attention of the

2211
Government how far we ought from time to time to involve ourselves in embarrassments with foreign Powers on questions like these—embarrassments which might be attended with serious consequences, and which could not fail to be productive of great inconvenience. He regretted to hear from the noble Earl opposite a confirmation of the statement which they had heard of the proceedings of the French on the coast of Africa. He agreed with his noble Friend opposite, that what the French were doing in Africa was neither more nor less than the practice of the slave trade; and he strongly hoped that the remonstrances of Her Majesty's Government on that subject would have the effect of putting a stop to the system. This was one proof of the difficulty that existed in dealing with foreign Governments on this subject; for there was no disguising the fact that other nations did not look with the same abhorrence on the slave trade as we in this country did. There was one point not yet touched upon which he was anxious to notice—he meant the present state of our relations with Brazil. Owing to an Act passed in this country, and known under the name of "Lord Aberdeen's Act," we had never been able to conclude with Brazil either a slave-trade treaty or a commercial treaty. He would not discuss now the reasons for passing that Act, but it was productive of one most valuable result—that of putting an end to a most flagrant slave trade, and it induced the Brazilian Government to act with such energy in the matter that an enlightened public opinion grew up in the country, which he believed would not submit to the renewal of the slave trade there. Some years had now elapsed since the slave trade had been carried on in Brazil, and he thought it would be a wise policy to repeal the Act to which he had referred, and enter into such treaties with regard to the slave trade as Brazil would be ready to conclude with us, and at the same time to enter into a commercial treaty with that empire:—generally, in fact, to modify the policy which was rightly adopted some years ago, but which altered circumstances no longer required. He would rejoice to see an increase in the legitimate trade of the coast of Africa. Such a trade would carry civilization in its train, and would do more for the ultimate suppression of the slave trade than any treaties into which they could enter, or the employment of any squadron, however powerful.
EARL GREYsaid, he entirely concurred with his noble Friend who had just sat down with regard to the extreme importance of the trade with the African coast, as the means of civilizing and christianizing that country. But he must remind him that it was the opinion of every one acquainted with the subject, and especially of that distinguished man Dr. Livingstone, that the legitimate trade could not go on until the slave trade was put an end to. Legitimate commerce was destroyed by the conduct of the traders engaged in the slave trade, and it was only by the interference of this country that we could hope to put an end to it. Our efforts had been at one point to a great degree successful: a legitimate trade had sprung up and was rapidly increasing, and great hopes had been entertained that in a few years the slave trade would be put down. But that bright prospect had been blighted, and, to their disgrace, by those two great countries the United States of America and France. It was of no use, from fear of giving offence, to refrain from speaking the truth on such a question as this; and he would assert boldly, and without fear of contradiction, that in the eyes of God and man the United States and France were responsible for the renewal of the African slave trade. With regard to the United States, he concurred in the opinions which had been expressed, of the necessity of our acting with the greatest caution and forbearance. However indignant we might feel—and he trusted there was no Englishman who did not feel indignant—at the monstrous prostitution of the United States flag, it was not only our duty but true wisdom—having regard to the object in view—to remain rigidly within the line of our duty, and not by measures of questionable legality to put ourselves in the wrong. But he could not help thinking that his noble Friend who spoke last attached too much credit to the American accounts of what had occurred, which had not yet been checked by those of our own officers, and that we were acting too hastily. His noble Friend spoke of an American squadron in the Channel overhauling our outward-bound vessels. No doubt we should not allow that for a moment, and he doubted whether we had ever consented to the right of search. Our orders to our officers were if they knew that a ship was bona fide a vessel belonging to the United States—though she might be engaged in the slave trade—though there was proof

2213
legal and moral that she was a slaver—the orders to our cruisers were not to interfere with her; but we had a treaty with Spain against the slave trade, and we were not to be prevented in the case of a ship coming out of Cuba, though under the United States flag, from ascertaining whether she was a United States ship or whether she was Spanish or not, or whether she had no papers at all, and was consequently a pirate; in that case only we claimed a right to visit a vessel, and to see what she really was. If, however, we found, she had good American papers, even though the evidence was palpable that she was engaged in the slave trade, we discharged her, and left to the United States the disgrace of being engaged in such a traffic. But in order to ascertain whether a flag was properly carried by a vessel we must have the right to visit. At the same time he hoped from what had fallen from the noble Earl, that the orders to our cruisers would be strict not to visit ships against which there was not strong prima facie evidence that they had no right to use the American flag. Great discretion ought to be exercised, and if it was not exercised officers who failed in that respect ought to be recalled. So much with regard to the United States—with regard to France the case was still stronger. That a great Christian nation, that the great empire of France, should become nothing better than a gigantic slave-dealer was a thing almost too disgraceful to be believed; but so it was. We knew that it was with reference to the ship which was captured by negroes. We knew that wars were stirred up in Africa in order that prisoners might be taken for the purpose of being sold to the French Government. France was amenable in the eyes of God and man for devastating a part of Africa in which commerce and civilization had begun to take root. It was known that negroes were brought down to the coast and put manacled on board vessels commanded by French officers. In the case in question the slaves rose—and did not murder—but in the exercise of a sacred right, the attempt to recover their liberty, killed the crew of the vessel when the ship was in the power of the negroes, they having obtained their liberty by force.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: They could not manage the ship, and our vessel saved them.
EARL GREY: That was perfectly right; but what he thought ought to have been
2214
done should have been to put hands on board, and take the ship to Sierra Leone.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: She was in Liberian waters, and it could not be done.
EARL GREY: Neither the authorities of Liberia, nor any one else, had a right to interfere with the possession of the ship by the negroes, which they had de facto and de jure; and if we had sent her to any port they chose to go to, no one could have had any right to object. He hoped that poor Liberia would not be brought into the quarrel. We were bound to give those negroes all the assistance in our power, without inquiring into the nationality of those who, by an act of piracy, had taken possession of them.
THE EARL OF ABERDEENsaid, that the instructions to our officers, unless they had been changed, were drawn up under his superintendence; they were communicated to the American Government, and were approved by Mr. Webster and the Government of the day; and he believed that our officers were now acting under those instructions. If that was the ease, he was at a loss to comprehend what were called British outrages on American ships. We made no claim to visit or to search any American vessel, slaver or otherwise; and it was only in cases where our cruisers bad well-founded suspicions that a vessel was not an American that they had a right to visit her. That rule was laid down by his noble Friend with perfect accuracy, according to the instructions he caused to be drawn up under the direction of Sir George Cockburn, Dr. Lushington, and others acquainted with international law. They were then certainly approved by the American Government, and he did not know what new circumstances had arisen to cause difficulties in those waters. If our officers obeyed their instructions it was impossible that there could be any such difficulty, and be hoped he should not hear that those instructions, to which the American Government had never made any objection had been changed. They were sufficient for the purpose, the American Government had no objection to them, and if they were only acted on with caution there could be no difficulty. For when our cruisers had a suspicion that a vessel bearing the American flag, was not an American, the officers were bound to write in the log what it was that caused that suspicion. It was not from mere caprice that they would overhaul a vessel bearing

2215
the American flag, but there must be reasonable suspicion that she was not a vessel of the country whose flag she carried before they could venture to visit, still less to search her. This was necessary, for, in the first place, a vessel might hoist no flag at all, and all you had to do was to ascertain what she was, and if then she turned out to be a pirate, you could deal with her; or if she was a Spanish vessel, or a vessel belonging to a Power with which you had a treaty, you could deal with her. In the case of an American vessel, or a vessel belonging to a Power with which we had no treaty, we could not interfere in any manner; even if she was full of slaves she might go on her way and we could not arrest her. That was the law of the case, and in which the American Government had acquiesced. That being the case, he was at a loss to understand what was meant by British outrages in American waters. He agreed that it was desirable to limit the action of our squadron more to the coast of Africa than had recently been the case, rather than to direct them to the coast of Cuba. He was satisfied, looking to the spirit of conciliation in which this matter had been treated, that unless the American Government had very much changed since he had to deal with them, we could not fail in bringing it to a satisfactory conclusion. He would only say a word with regard to an Act relative to Brazil which had been introduced by him, and was called by his name, but which he believed in Brazil was called the Algerine Act. When he brought in that Act he assured the Brazilian Government that nothing would give him so much pleasure as the arrival of the day when he should move the repeal of that Act. He was not sure that the time had arrived yet; but he hoped and believed that Her Majesty's Government, who must have more information on the subject, looked forward to the same object: the conduct of Brazil had entitled that country to much consideration; and he would only recommend to the care of the Government the realization of the hope which he had ventured to express when he introduced the Act in question into that House.
TEE EARL OF HARDWICKEsaid, that the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Aberdeen) observed that there must have been some great change or there would have been no difficulty in bringing about an arrangement of this matter with the American Government. The noble Earl
2216
should recollect that the feelings of that Government were more acute on this subject than they were before, inasmuch as it was not the practice when the noble Earl was in office for the British squadrons to appear in such large force on the coast of Cuba, or for the cruisers to enter the ports for the obvious purpose of watching the state of the shipping. What had been the cause of the alteration of the system he did not know, but there had been no allegation of the officers of the navy having conducted themselves without their usual caution, while at the same time they had displayed their zeal and activity in the cause in which they were engaged. Perhaps some of them had a little overstepped the line within which we should desire them to keep, and it might turn out that we were not altogether clear of some degree of blame in this matter. He was not surprised at the indignation expressed on this subject by the right rev. Prelate and the noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham), whose name was identified with the cause of the poor African. It was natural that he, as well as other noble Lords, should express themselves warmly, considering the long course of policy we had pursued, and the great sacrifices we had made in order to put down the slave trade and ameliorate the condition of our unfortunate coloured brethren. That indignation must be aggravated when we considered that up to within a very short period a great diminution had taken place in the export of slaves, and a great improvement in the cultivation of the soil of Africa by the native chiefs and their dependants; while the exports of palm oil and other legitimate traffic of the country for 1857 amounted to no less than £1,500,000 in value. It was, he admitted, dispiriting to hear, under such circumstances, of the chiefs on the coast taking up arms and making inroads into the interior for the purpose of slave bunting. The noble Earl (Earl Grey) was rather severe on the French Government for having stimulated the slave trade. That trade had been aided and abetted by ships of France; but, on the other hand, he was bound to say that the course pursued by the French Government itself was in strict accordance with the desire we had expressed as to the system, and there was every reason to believe that the French Government were prepared to make a total change of policy in this respect, and that seeing the dangerous tendency of the present system they would no longer persevere in it.

2217
On the other hand, he was bound to say that the French Government were sincere in their desire of engaging these persons as free labourers. The moment they were received on board ship their manacles were struck off, and their wages were reckoned from that hour, their unhappy condition being entirely changed. He only did justice to the French Government in making that declaration, for they had stated that upon satisfactory proof being afforded them of the impolicy of the system of negro emigration, they would be prepared to abandon it. Though he was not competent to say what steps had been taken by his noble Friend, he could confidently state that they were steps which would meet the views of noble Lords opposite, and show how honestly Government had acted in this matter.
THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, he had heard with great satisfaction the observations made by the noble Earl (the Earl of Hardwicke). He hoped that the noble Earl would lay upon the table those papers to which he had referred, and which conveyed such a satisfactory announcement as to the intentions of the French Government in respect to African labour.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEsuggested that the noble Earl should give notice of a Motion for the production of those papers.
THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, he would certainly move for the production of the papers to which he alluded. There was no doubt that a system had been for some time carried on in Africa which in effect occasioned all the evils of the slave trade. Both Spain and France were rivals in the African market, offering a certain sum per man; and it appeared to him that there was no difference in the treatment of those negroes whether they were conveyed to Cuba or to a French colony. Such a system, whatever it might be called, was nothing more nor less than a slave trade. Now, it would be most gratifying to them to know that in consequence of representations made by our Government to the Government of France, the latter had declared their intention to make a complete change in the system they had been pursuing. He therefore wished for the production of those papers upon the authority of which the noble Earl made his declaration.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: In answer to the Motion made by the noble Earl, I think my noble Friend will, on
2218
consideration, agree with me that no public interest would be answered by placing those papers on the table of the House; because they relate, more or less, to something like a controversy that has been going on for some time between the two Governments as to the results of this new French system. On the one hand, we have had cases described to us in which it appears that those labourers from Africa were comparatively well treated by the French, and were by no means placed in that state of subjugation and misery which we are induced to believe was the fate of other unhappy beings. There is no doubt that the French Government can produce instances, and has produced instances, and has challenged investigation into them, showing that there was much tenderness displayed in the shipping of those people, and that great care was taken of them afterwards. But in my opinion that does not at all affect the main question. Whatever they may say of it, the system can be nothing more nor less, in my opinion, than a renovation of the slave trade.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYonly wished to ask the noble Earl if any correspondence had taken place between the two Governments on the subject of the vessel which had been retaken in the Liberian waters, or, if any correspondence had taken place at all that would elucidate the matter, whether he had any objection to place it before the House.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURYwas understood to say that the information which the Government had received upon the subject had come from a Mr. Chillingworth and was not of an official character.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYtrusted some inquiry would be made, and that the subject would not be lost sight of, for as the matter at present stood he thought great injustice had been done.
Petition to lie on the table.

OATHS BILL.—QUESTION.
LORD DENMANrose to inquire of Her Majesty's Government if the Report of Reasons for the Lords insisting on their Amendments to the Oaths Bill might be proceeded with forthwith, in order that the Commons might elect whether to return the Bill to that House, with a demand for a free Conference. There were two Bills before the House, one introduced by Lord Lucan, and the other by Lord Lyndhurst, and he thought some decided opinion should be expressed—one Bill be determined on,

2219
and sent down, with Reasons why the Amendments were insisted upon.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEsaid, the question was one the settlement of which the Government thought lay rather with that House than with themselves. He should only add that, so far as the Government were concerned, they were desirous that the Bill, which had already been the subject of a Conference, should go down to the other House of Parliament with the Reasons which their Lordships had assigned for insisting upon their Amendments.
LORD REDESDALEcontended that the proper course would be for the offer of compromise to come from the other House. The Commons were prepared to pass the Bill altogether, and it was they who should concede. For his own part he thought that neither the Bills introduced by Lord Lucan or by Lord Lyndhurst ought to be entertained.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYconsidered it expedient that their Lordships should have the opportunity of expressing their opinion. He did not think it would be expedient to send the Bill down to the House of Commons without expressing the Reasons why their Lordships insisted on the Amendments they proposed.
THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, he thought the best course would be to say at once they could not agree to the Commons' Amendments. The Bill ought to be sent down to the Commons, and could be returned with an Amendment in the sense of either Lord Lucan's or Lord Lyndhurst's Bill, and it would then be open to their Lordships to accept that Amendment by way of compromise.
EARL GRANVILLEcontended it would be more convenient that the various propositions before their Lordships should be considered before the Bill was returned to the House of Commons. He did not see either the advantage or the dignity of referring back this question to the House of Commons, and leaving it to take the initiative in the matter.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, their Lordships intended to persist in their Amendments, and carried them by a very considerable majority. He apprehended that the Straightforward and proper course then to have adopted would have been to have sent the Bill back to the House of Commons with their Lordships' Reasons for insisting on their Amendment Unfortunately some difficulty was interposed, and some suggestion made that possibly by re-
2220
taining the Bill in their Lordships' House an opening might be made for a compromise. He thought if a compromise were desired it should not proceed from their Lordships, but from those who wished it. He retained his own opinions firmly and conscientiously; he regretted that he had heard nothing whatever to induce him to think a compromise of the question desirable. Entertaining those sentiments, he was, at the same time, extremely desirous that their Lordships should meet the question as fairly and as properly as possible. It appeared to him that the proper course would be to send the Bill down as he had suggested; and then, if any noble Lord chose to bring forward any question by which this long-agitated matter could be renewed, it would be competent to him to do so.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that a compromise of the question had been already offered by two of their Lordships to bring in Bills to meet the difficulty which presented itself, and after that step had been taken, it was ungracious to ask the Commons to initiate a compromise. He did not think the other House could, consistently with its own dignity, depart from the course which it had already taken. It would be trifling with the whole question to say they would not proceed with the two Bills which had been introduced, but would send back the first Bill to the House of Commons with their Reasons for disagreeing to it. He therefore trusted their Lordships would not depart from the resolution they had come to to proceed with the consideration of the two Bills.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONthought the proposal made by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack was the best. He maintained that any proposition for a compromise ought to come from the other House of Parliament.
After a few words from the Earl of CLANCARTY, the subject dropped.
House adjourned at half past Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten, o'clock.