Sitting of 20 March 1862

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1o Law of Property Amendment.
2o Mutiny; Marine Mutiny.

FLOODS AND DRAINAGE IN IRELAND.

  QUESTION.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he rose to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the effect of the floods over the district from Roscrea to the Shannon, and to the flooding of the tributaries of the Barrow; and whether he proposes to introduce any general Drainage Bill for Ireland this Session?
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he was not aware that the Government had received any information on the subject to which the hon. Member referred; and as at present advised, he thought the Govern-

  1873
  ment were not prepared to bring in any-general measure relating to drainage for Ireland.
  COLONEL DICKSONsaid, that in consequence of the answer which had been given by the right hon. Baronet, he would on an early day move for leave to bring in a Bill on the subject of drainage in Ireland.

ENTRANCE FROM PICCADILLY TO PARK LANE.—QUESTION.
SIR HARRY VERNEYsaid, be wished to ask the First Commissioner of Works, Whether, in consideration of the inconvenience and danger arising from the narrow entrance from Piccadilly to Park Lane, he will take measures to open the communication from Park Lane into Hamilton Place?
MR. COWPERsaid, that this communication between Hamilton Place and Park Lane was recommended by a Committee of the House of Commons in 1855. It was fully considered by the Government in 1856, but the difficulties were found to be such that no steps were taken. The difficulties were these:—When Hamilton Place was laid out, in 1809, it was intended to be a street without any thoroughfare, and those who now held from the Crown leases of those houses had taken those leases on the understanding that that arrangement was still to continue. If a communication were to be made from Hamilton Place to Park Lane, it must pass not only through gardens which were now considered a portion of Hyde Park, but likewise through two gardens held on lease in connection with the adjoining houses, which were let on terms that had now forty years to run. Under these circumstances, the Government were not prepared to take any steps. It appeared that these gardens could not be taken without an Act of Parliament, since the trustees were not willing that Hamilton Place should be made a thoroughfare; that Act of Parliament must direct a purchase of the property, and if so, a considerable amount of compensation would probably be awarded. It must be remembered also that Hamilton Place was not of the width required for an important thoroughfare, as the distance between one area railing and another, at one extremity of the street, was not more than thirty-eight feet. He thought the better way to improve the communication would be by widening Park Lane, and he recommended his hon. Friend to turn his
1874
attention rather to the widening of Park Lane than to the extension of Hamilton Place.

PROVISIONAL COMMITTEES OF ITALY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has received any official account of the meeting of the "Provisional Committees of Italy," held at the Paganini Theatre, at Genoa, on Sunday, the 9th of March, and of the subsequent proceedings of those bodies; and whether he will lay Copies of such Despatches on the table or state their import?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, Her Majesty's Government had received accounts of those meetings, as they received accounts of' other incidents of interest or importance which might happen in other countries; but he thought it would be unbecoming in them, and inconsistent with due regard to the dignity of the Italian Government, if they were to lay those papers on the table of the House, as he should think it unbecoming in the Italian Government, and inconsistent with due respect towards the Government of this country, if that Government were to lay before the Italian Parliament any papers connected with public meetings held in the Free Trade Hall, Birmingham, or the Rotunda, Dublin.
  MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, he wished to inquire, Whether the hon. Gentleman will lay on the table any recent Despatches received from Sir James Hudson?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, he hoped in the course of the Session to lay upon the table some of those papers.
  MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, a debate was about to come on—[Cries of Order! order!]
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he would beg to ask, whether the hon. Gentleman will lay the papers in his possession upon the table before the debate on Italian affairs was to come on?
  MR. LAYARDreplied, he was not able to give any promise.
  LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, as he did not understand from the hon. Gentleman that he would present the papers to the House, he begged leave to ask him, whether by Monday next he would be prepared to give an answer to the question?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, of course they had at the Foreign Office a large number of Despatches from their Minister in Italy, but no address had been moved for papers, and when his hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Cochrane) asked a general question, whether he was prepared to lay papers on Italian affairs on the table, he was not able to give any other answer than that which he had already given.

POOR LAW AMENDMENT (IRELAND) BILL.—QUESTION.
MR. GREGORYsaid, he had been requested by the Poor Law Reform Committee sitting in Dublin to ask the Chief secretary for Ireland, Whether he will give some intimation as to the time when it was intended to go into Committee on the Poor Law Amendment Bill?
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, on Monday.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he did not think is was finally determined what the business for Monday would be, and therefore perhaps the hon. Member for Galway would repeat his question. He understood it was intended to bring on the Civil Service Estimates on Monday.

MARKETS AND FAIRS (IRELAND) BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, he wished to move that it be an instruction to the Committee to make provision for an equalization of weights and measures in all mercantile transactions in Ireland.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he thought it undesirable at that stage of the Bill to raise so large a question, and he would therefore suggest to the hon. Gentleman to withdraw his instruction.
  MR. GEORGEsaid, he thought it would be necessary to agree to these instructions, or otherwise, when the House went into Committee, it might be found that they could not deal with the subject.
  COLONEI, DUNNEasked, whether it would be possible to discuss the whole question when they came to be in Committee if the instructions were not agreed to?
  MR. CARDWELLsuggested, that the best course to pursue would be to allow the Markets and Fairs Bill to pass; and then, if it were the wish of the Irish Members, to bring in a Bill afterwards for the regulation of weights and measures generally in Ireland.
  MR. SPEAKERexpressed his opinion that the Committee would not be able to consider the question raised by the hon. Member for Clonmel (Mr. Bagwell), unless the instruction were agreed to.
  Motion agreed to.
  Instruction to the Committee, that they have power to make provision therein for extending the equalization of Weights and Measures to all mercantile transactions in Ireland.
  House in Committee.
  Clause 1, agreed to.
  Clause 2 (Extent of Act).
  MR. LONGFIELD MR. LONGFIELD moved the addition of the following words in the commencement of the clause:—
  "This Act shall extend to all markets and fairs held in Ireland under charters, letters-patent, custom, or otherwise, but"
  Clause, as amended, agreed to; as were also Clauses 3 to 8, inclusive.
  Clause 9 (Contracts to be made by denominations of Imperial weight otherwise to be void).
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he would propose to omit lines 7 and 8, the effect of which would be to extend the provisions of the Bill to all classes of mercantile contracts in Ireland, and not confine them simply to transactions which took place at fairs and markets. His real object was that where articles were sold by weight, whether at market or not, the Act should apply.
  LORD NAASsaid, he would remind the Committee that if the Amendment were carried, it would affect the sale of commodities all over Ireland. It was most expedient that the experience of similarity of weights and measures should be tried in the first instance at markets and fairs, where the standard weight was more known and understood than in remote districts. A provision which might very usefully be rendered applicable to contracts in the case of fairs or markets, might be found to operate somewhat oppressively if brought to bear upon the validity of transactions taking place between persons outside their pale.
  SIR EDWARD GROGANsaid, he should support the Amendment, on the ground that if it was fair to establish a uniform system of weights in markets, it was equally fair that the system should be applied to private transactions outside markets.
  MR. O'BRIENsaid, he thought the clause went far enough in the mean time.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, it was absolutely necessary, if the Bill was intended to work satisfactorily, that the provision under discussion should be extended as proposed by the hon. and learned Member for Mallow.
  COLONEL DICKSONsaid, he hoped the Amendment would be pressed.
  COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he hoped that every Irish Member would give his assent to the Amendment, because public opinion in Ireland was, he believed, fully prepared for the change.
  GENERAL UPTONsupported the Amendment.
  MR. POLLARD-URQUHARTsaid, he agreed with the noble Lord the Member for Cockermouth (Lord Naas) that the change effected by the Bill was as much as could be attempted at present by legislation.
  MR. WHITESIDEsuggested, that in private transactions it should be left optional with the parties to buy and sell by weight or measure as they pleased; but that if they dealt by weight, they should be bound to adopt the weights sanctioned by the Legislature.
  MR. H. A. HERBERTsaid, that from local knowledge and from the tone of the letters he received when holding office in Ireland, he could assure the House that the popular desire was that there should be an assimilation of weights for all purposes.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, as the measure referred only to fairs and markets, he thought it would be undesirable to extend its provisions beyond the limit proposed. If, however, there was a general wish on the part of the Irish Members to adopt the amendment, he should not object.
  Amendment agreed, to.
  SIR EDWARD GROGANsaid, he would suggest the addition of the word "sheep" after "carcasses of beef."
  LORD NAASsaid, he objected to the Amendment, as mutton was generally sold in small quantities.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he did not see why dead sheep should not be sold by weight when dead pigs were.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. E. P. BOUVERIEsaid, he thought it would be a very stringent proceeding to render all contracts by weight void if not made by avoirdupois weight. It was easy to pass an Act declaring that there should
  1878
  be uniform weights and measures, but it would be exceedingly difficult to get it carried out. Such a law had existed for years in England, but it was disregarded in many districts, it being almost impossible to alter the ordinary habits and dealings of the people. He did not speak of large transactions in markets, but of petty dealings in villages and country districts; and, unless the public mind in Ireland was prepared by much discussion for the change, it would produce great confusion and litigation. He would, therefore, suggest that the propriety of modifying the latter part of the clause should be considered at another stage of the Bill.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, that, in fact, no material change would be effected by the clause. The same weights applied to all articles except butter and wool.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he thought the words were so large that they would include contracts made in jeweller's shops, where articles manufactured from the precious metals, were sold by troy weight. They might even extend to the dealings of the Bank of Ireland in bullion.
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, to meet that objection he would propose the addition of the words "excepting articles usually sold by troy weight."
  Words inserted; Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 10 (Mode of Weighing; Deductions prohibited).
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid he wished to move that the words, "Markets and Fairs" be omitted throughout the clause. That was a verbal Amendment consequential upon the amendments made in the previous clause. His object was to extend the operation of the clause to dealings elsewhere besides in markets and fairs.
  SIR ROBERT PEELasked, whether it was intended by the Amendment to apply to all weighings in shops?
  MR. LONGFIELDreplied in the affirmative.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he thought it would be necessary to introduce some words to show that the weighing was for sale, or it would apply to the weighing necessary in a gentleman's kitchen.
  MR. WHITESIDEsaid, he would suggest the addition of the words "every article sold by weight."
  Amendment agreed to.
  SIR FRANCIS GOLDSMIDsaid, he would suggest that the words "at a public weighing-house or place" should be

  1879
  omitted, so that the words should run, "every article sold by weight."
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he Was willing to accept this Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he would then move to omit from line 31 the words "without any" and to insert the words "and no."
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he objected to the Amendment, as, coupled with another Amendment to be subsequently proposed, it would revive the exploded system of penalties for deduction. The Cork butter-market was now the most flourishing market in Ireland, and it dated its prosperity from the time when the old restrictions were abolished. He hoped those restrictions would not be revived.
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, that the Bill would be inoperative without this Amendment, and another in line 34. He wanted to provide, by these Amendments, that no deductions should be claimed or made by any purchaser for beamage or on any pretext whatever, under a penalty of £ 5. He had, however, no objection to diminish the penalty, and say "not exceeding £ 5."
  LORD NAASsaid, he thought that the penalty would operate very hardly, especially as the Act made every contract void which broke the law. He thought it dangerous to impose a penalty for an act which might be committed through ignorance.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid that he was of opinion that the only way of compelling justice to be done to the poor farmers was, that of imposing a penalty in certain cases. He thought that few persons would remain in ignorance of the Act long after it was passed.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he should be willing to accede to what appeared to be the general wish of the Committee and accept the Amendment.
  COLONEL DUNNEsaid, that in Cork market, some years ago, there were more frauds committed than he could enumerate. The trade of that market had been improved, no doubt; still he was in favour of imposing a penalty in every case where a fraud should be committed.
  MR. BEAMISHsaid, that the Select Committee to whom this Bill had been referred had not thought it necessary to insert a penalty, and he hoped the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland would not consent to any alteration being made in the clause.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that as it
  1880
  seemed to be the wish of the Committee that these deductions should be prohibited, the penalty was the only way of effecting that object.
  MR. HENNESSYcontended, that the alteration proposed to be made in this clause would operate to the great injury of Cork butter market, which was now one of the most flourishing in the world.
  MR. GEORGEsaid, he approved of the Amendment, it being in his opinion a most admirable one, and it would, no doubt, give great satisfaction to the farmers of Ireland. The clause would be wholly inoperative without a penalty in cases of improper deductions.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, he hoped that the Home Secretary would, at the same time tell the Committee whether, if such a law existed in England, without the penalty, it was not inoperative.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he could not answer the question; but he could assure the Committee that the clause would be inoperative without the penalty.
  Amendment agreed to; Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 11, agreed to.
  Clause 12 (Compulsory weighing at Public weigh-house of Corn and other commodities in Schedule A).
  COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he wished to call attention to a petition from the inhabitants of Mountmellick, Queen's County, objecting to the provision that the articles to be weighed on market days should be brought to the public scales as impracticable. It was probable that on a market day there would not be the means of weighing at the public scales the quantity of corn sold in that town.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, he wished to move the omission of certain words which would have the effect of making it optional to the buyer or seller to have an article weighed in the public market. A Resolution had been passed by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce to the effect that compulsory weighing was a matter of very questionable propriety, and would not only operate as shackles on trade, but would be often tortured into an instrument of fraud.
  MAJOR KNOXsaid, he objected to the Amendment. The buyers of flax had frequently been brought up for having heavy weights in their stores with which the flax bought by them was weighed, the effect being that the seller lost a certain amount of his flax. He therefore considered that the compulsory part of the clause was of great importance.
  SIR HUGH CAIRNSsaid, he hoped the Committee would not consent to the Amendment, as, unless the weighing were compulsory, the enactment would be nugatory. However, the clause as it stood would strike completely at that large and very beneficial class of sales which were effected by sample. It would also injuriously affect sales of flax, because though the article would have to be overhauled and tossed about in the market, and a considerable part of a winter's day would be thus consumed, the buyer would have no security that the flax which might be brought to his store was the same as he had purchased. The matter had occupied the attention of the flax-buyers in Ireland. They did not desire to be exempt from any proper regulation, and they proposed two alternatives; one was that flax should be made an exception from these particular clauses of the Bill; and the other, and probably the better, was that, inasmuch as all the merchants who bought flax bought it to a large extent, those merchants should have in their own stores proper sets of weights, and that authorized officers should attend at the stores to weigh the goods and collect the tolls.
  MR. BLAKEdeclared, that unless the clause was compulsory, the Bill would be utterly valueless; and the Amendment, if carried, would strike at the entire root of the Bill.
  LORD DUNKELLINsaid, he should support the Amendment. He could not admit that as a rule the buyer was in the habit of dealing harshly with the seller. Though such might be the result of the experience of hon. Gentlemen from the North, it was not the practice throughout the rest of Ireland.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, that the Amendment struck at one of the principal features of the measure. He had always been under the impression that the adoption of a provision for compulsory weighing in markets had been agreed to as a compromise to settle the question. The Commissioners had visited thirty counties, and had found that they were all unanimous in favour both of compulsory weighing and of equality as between buyer and seller. In Limerick, which had one of the most important markets in Ireland, the frauds that prevailed had been so great that the town actually petitioned for an Act to introduce a compulsory system—an example which
  1882
  had been followed by Cork, Belfast, and Londonderry. He should, therefore, like to see the same system universally in use. He felt that there was a good deal of justice in the observations of the hon. and learned Member for Belfast relative to sales by sample, but he did not concur in what had been suggested in reference to the sales of flax. For his own part, he could not see the necessity for having special machinery for weighing in the stores of the flax-buyer.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, he was glad to hear that the right hon. Baronet intended to persevere with the clause, which he considered the most essential portion of the Bill. He was continually met by complaints on the part of country folks of the use of irregular weights and measures by private traders.
  LORD NAASsaid, he could but admit that such frauds were practised, and that it was desirable to put an end to them; but he was, at the same time, afraid that it would be found impossible to enforce the provision that everything should be weighed in public market.
  MR. DUNLOPsaid, he had received strong representations on the part of his constituents, many of whom were large purchasers of flax in Ireland, against the clause, unless it were accompanied by some such limitation as that which had been proposed.
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he would urge upon the Government to persevere with the principle of compulsory weighing.
  MR. H. A. HERBERTsaid, that if the clause were expunged, the efficiency of the Bill would be in a great measure destroyed. Great frauds were committed in Ireland in consequence of the want of such a system as was proposed. A Commission reported a few years ago, that when proper market accommodation was once provided, all agricultural produce should be both sold and weighed in the public market under the superintendence of a sworn weighing master.
  MR. GEORGEsaid, he could not agree with the Amendment proposed by the hon. Gentleman behind him. He was afraid, however, that if the sales by sample were interfered with it would create much discontent.
  COLONEL LESLIEremarked, that compulsory weighing prevailed to a large extent in England.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, there could be no doubt that the clause under discus-

  1883
  sion affected sales by sample, and his right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary would be prepared to consider that matter on the Report.
  MR. E. P. BOUVERIEsaid, he hoped that the question of flax would be considered. Such a clause as that under consideration would produce great confusion among the buyers and sellers of flax, and interfere with the natural current of trade as between them. It was proposed to make it penal to carry on such transactions above a certain amount in the weighing-house, and the ticket of the weigher was to be conclusive of the weight, and then by Clause 16, a penalty was to be inflicted if the buyer or seller refused to be bound by that weight. There was no security that the article delivered at the store-house would be identical in weight and quality with the flax or corn bought and. weighed in the market.
  MR. VANCEsaid, he would suggest that the articles brought into the market should be alone weighed, and that any contract dependent thereon should take effect without the public weighing of the bulk.
  MR. RICHARDSONsaid, he approved of the principle of uniformity of weights and measures, but it was quite impossible to have the article of flax weighed in the public scale. The farmer never would be able to get paid on the same day, seeing that flax alone in many cases would occupy nearly all day to weigh. He also objected to any clause which prevented the farmer from protecting himself by re-weighing the article.
  MR. GREGORYsuggested, that the clause should be postponed, and brought up again on the Report, with Amendments.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, that as the general feeling of the Committee was against his Amendment, he would withdraw it, though his opinion of its policy was unchanged.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  SIR HUGH CAIRNSsaid, he thought that the difficulty with regard to samples might be cured by inserting the words "and delivered" after "sold," so as to make the Act apply only to articles sold and delivered in the market.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, that on the bringing up of the Report he would insert a clause to exempt flax. With respect to the samples, he would consider the suggestion of the hon. Member who had brought that point under consideration.
  Clause agreed to; as was also Clause 13.
  Clause 14 (Penalty).
  LORD JOHN BROWNEproposed to increase the penalties for fraud by weighers by rendering the offender incapable of holding office in future.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he doubted the expediency of the Amendment.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, he would withdraw it.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 15 to 37 inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 38 (Local Public Inquiry thereon).
  LORD NAASsaid, he wished to draw the attention of the right hon. Baronet to the extent of the powers of inquiry conferred by this and the 77th clause upon the Lord Lieutenant. By those clauses the Lord Lieutenant had power to depute to any person or persons he desired to appoint as Commissioners to inquire whether the existing market accommodation at a particular place was sufficient; whether new markets should be established, and where; and they would also have to settle market days, and to make inquiries of a very extensive nature, many of which would require that counsel should be heard. He (Lord Naas) was of opinion that some one person of experience and legal knowledge should be appointed for the purpose. A salary of £ 1,000 or £ 1,200 a year would obtain the services of such a Commissioner; whereas, if there were numerous local inquiries, the expense would be endless and the costs great. As the expenses were to be defrayed out of the Consolidated Fund, there was no difficulty now as to the funds, but he believed that his suggestion, if adopted, would tend towards economy.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, the Government had not desired to increase officials, but rather to leave local enterprise great liberty to regulate its own affairs. But on a new system, no doubt, a competent person would be required; and therefore he thought that, for a time at least, some person of standing should be at the disposal of the Lord Lieutenant. With the consent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer he had determined, if it met with the approval of the Committee, to take power to nominate persons to conduct any inquiries which might be necessary, and to draw on the Treasury to the amount of £ 500 a year, for five years, in order to meet the expenses. He thought an officer with a salary of £ 1,200 a year un-

  1885
  necessary, and he hoped the Committee would accept his proposal as a fair compromise.
  MR. MAGUIREsaid, he believed that a Bill to lessen the number of official persons in Ireland would be a great boon to the country, and that at the end of the five years it would be difficult to root out a gentleman with £ 500 a year. A lease of five years would be a lease for life, with the probability of a claim for compensation. In his opinion the proposal savoured of a job.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, that, as no doubt he should be in the House at the end of the five years, he would take very good care that the gentleman should be rooted out. It was important to employ persons free from the influence of local prejudices.
  MR. BEAMISHsaid, he would assent to the proposal, though he should strongly object to a permanent office.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, he thought it absolutely necessary that the inquiries should be conducted by one person, so as to avoid conflicting decisions.
  LORD NAASasked, whether all the inquiries would be intrusted to one individual?
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, not unless the local authorities desire his presence. They would, otherwise, be empowered to make the inquiries themselves.
  LORD NAASsaid, that that being the case, he could hardly accept the proposition. He did not think it would work well unless there was uniformity of decision.
  MR. MAGUIREsaid, he thought that the clause had better remain as it stood.
  LORD NAASsaid, he desired to know by whom the expenses would be borne?
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, that in a former Bill extensive powers were intrusted to commissioners, whereas by this Bill they were given to the Lord Lieutenant; in Council. In England the promoters of Bills with respect to fairs and markets paid all expenses, and he had thought that it was only reasonable that the different localities in Ireland should bear the expenses of Orders in Council. His right hon. Friend, however, had persuaded the Chancellor of the Exchequer to allow £ 500 a year for five years for the expenses of carrying the Act into effect, and he understood that the money would be expended in addition to the provision made by the undertakers. It would be desirable
  1886
  that many inquiries should go on simultaneously, that all fairs and markets in Ireland might be the more speedily brought within the operation of the Act.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISremarked, that the matter might be safely left to the decision of the Government.
  MR. H. A. HERBERTsuggested, that the precedent of the Savings Banks Act should be followed. Under it power was given to appoint a barrister to settle disputes. Mr. Tidd Pratt, having been appointed, went down to various parts of the country and arranged all matters under the Act; and in the same manner one barrister could transact the duties under the Bill.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, he agreed with his noble Friend opposite. He thought that as various intricate questions would arise under the Bill, it was desirable to have in the first instance, a person of considerable authority and weight to decide them, so as to prevent any conflict of decisions. He, however, preferred the proposal of the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) as it only involved a temporary arrangement.
  LORD NAASsaid, he would suggest an Amendment to the effect that instead of appointing the commissioner for five years, he should be appointed for whatever term the Government might hereafter direct.
  MR. HASSARDobserved, that there ought to be power under the Bill to appoint at least three commissioners.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, there was an advantage in having only one commissioner, as his decisions would be uniform.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, that the object of the Government was to appoint only one individual; but it might be necessary to have more in the event of demands for decisions coming from different parts of the country at the same time.
  Clause agreed to; as were also Clauses 39 to 54, inclusive.
  Clause 55 (Order in Council).
  MR. HASSARDasked, whether the tolls were to be paid on the entry of the articles into the market?
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, that the reply must affect seriously the cattle jobbers—a useful class, who went from one fair to another. The sellers should not be asked to pay tolls if they did not part with their goods.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the question could be more suitably raised in the schedule.
  Clause- agreed to; as were also Clauses 66 to 68 inclusive.
  Clause 69 (Petition of Local Authorities or Ratepayers).
  MR. HASSARDsaid, he proposed to insert words to the effect that where it was proposed to establish a new market in the vicinity of or within a mile of another market, notice should be given to the owner or lessee or to the party in receipt of the tolls thereof, at least one month before such application should be considered.
  Words inserted.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 70 to 76, inclusive were agreed to.
  Clause 77 (Expenses of Execution of Act).
  MR. GREGORYsaid, he wished to add a proviso to the clause, to the effect that the Lord Lieutenant in council should appoint an inspector for five years, at a salary of £ 500 per annum to conduct any inquiries into the state of the markets and fairs, and the requirements of the public in relation thereto.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, the Government did not wish to be bound to. give any stated sum for any stated period, but to be left entirely free, and the effect of the proviso would be. to create a permanent office for at least five years.
  LORD NAASsaid, his proposition was to appoint only one inspector, but it was evidently the intention of the Government to appoint a variety of inspectors, and. it would be better for the Committee to decide the question at once.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he could assure the noble Lord that it was not the intention of the Government to appoint a variety of persons.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, the Vote for £ 500 a year would be in the Estimates, and any hon. Member might oppose the grant.
  MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he thought the intention of the Government was clear. Circumstances might arise to make it necessary for them to appoint more than one inspector at the same time; for instance, one might be required for the north and another for the south of Ireland. He thought the Government ought not to be bound to any stated course of action.
  MR. H. A. HERBERTsaid, he was of opinion that some words ought to be inserted to restrict the operation of the Clause.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, he would suggest that, a proviso to the effect, that all inquiries under the Act should be carried on by the same person, as far as practicable, would meet the views of all parties.
  Amendment proposed,
  To add at the end of the Clause the words "Provided all inquiries under this Act shall be conducted by the same person, as Far as practicable."
  MR. GREGORYsaid, he would accept that Amendment in lieu of his own.
  Question put, "That those words be there added."
  The Committee divided: —Ayes 38; Noes 47: Majority 9.
  Clause agreed to.
  Remaining Clauses agreed to.
  MR. BLAKEthat in certain towns the weigh-masters were entitled to receive one halfpenny per hundredweight for discharging their duties; and if they were allowed to make that claim under the new Act, they would obtain the lion's share. In towns so circumstanced he application would be made for the adoption of the Act, and he would propose, therefore, that the salaries of such persons should not exceed what they had been in receipt of on an average for the preceding five years. He proposed to insert a provision after Clause 20, enabling the owners or persons entitled to the tolls to discharge from or retain such weigh-masters in office on the terms indicated by him.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he must oppose the proposition.
  MR. BLAKEurged the right hon. Baronet to assent to the proposal.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he would promise, on bringing up the Report, to introduce a clause oh the subject.
  Clause negatived.
  MR. BLAKEsaid he would then propose, after Clause 23, to introduce the following clause:—
  "From and after the passing of this Act the appointment of weigh master of butter and taster of butter, under the Act of the fifty-second year of George III., cap. 134, shall be invested in and made by the mayor, alderman, and councillors of the boroughs and towns corporate in Ireland, instead of the mayor and aldermen only of such borough or town corporate, as is by the said Act prescribed."
  MR. CARDWELL said he must oppose the clause, as being quite inconsistent with the earlier part of the Bill.
  MR. HASSARDsaid, no such office as that of taster of butter was contemplated by the Bill.
  Clause negatived.
  Schedules agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Thursday next, and to be printed. [Bill 52.]

COPYRIGHT (WORKS OF ART) BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  House in Committee.
  Clause 1 (Copyright in Paintings, Drawings, and Photographs).
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALstated that he had prepared some amendments with the view of giving effect to suggestions made by hon. Members on former occasions.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he wished to ask for some explanations with respect to the copyright in the copy of a picture, which it was proposed to give by the Bill. He would admit that the Bill was an improvement on that of last year. He should, however, be glad to know whether the term "painting" in the bill applied to original pictures only, or included a copy, so as to give copyright in a copy whilst there was no copyright in the original. He was also anxious to know whether his hon. and learned Friend (the Solicitor General) was prepared with a clause providing for registration at Stationers' Hall, or some place else, in order that title in respect to copyright might be ascertained.
  MR. WHITEsaid, he wished to direct the attention of the hon. and learned Solicicitor General to the necessity of providing, by some clause, that publishers of prints should put their names and the date of publication on those prints. For the last ten years publishers had been much in the habit of publishing engravings without any name or date.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid it was intended to include in the Bill copies of original paintings, because any man knew that copies might be made under circumstances that would render the copying of those copies as injurious to the owner as if they were original works. In the case of a fresco, for example, it might become necessary to take a copy for the; purpose of preserving the subject, and nothing could be more unjust than that a
  1890
  person making such a copy should be deprived of his work. The principle on which the law gave a copyright in engravings would seem to apply to all such copies. But by the clause dealing with that matter no injustice would be done to any one, for that clause preserved the right of persons to make their own copies. There might be copies which ought to be protected, and no harm could be done to the public when the right to make copies from the originals would remain. As to the question of registration, it had occurred to him that that subject might be brought forward, and he had prepared two clauses providing for a registration of the written title to copyright. These he would bring up at the proper time. As to the point referred to by the hon. Member for Brighton, they all knew that a practice existed among engravers of selling what were called "proofs before letters," which were without any name. He believed that every person who did that exposed himself to a great danger of losing his copyright. That case was provided for under an existing Act.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he thought that the observations of his hon. Friend (Mr. Bentinck) had hardly been answered. He would put the case of an artist selling a picture, and retaining no copyright in that picture. If the artist afterwards made a duplicate original, how would matters stand? They all knew that those things were often reproduced in that way, and it was difficult to determine between copies and duplicate originals. How was the second picture to stand? Was there to be a copyright in it, or not? He wished the hon. and learned Gentleman would let all the questions under this Bill be decided by a court of record.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he would consider before the bringing up of the report whether words should not be inserted to the effect that an original work being sold without copyright, no subsequent copy or repetition of the same work should be entitled to copyright.
  SIR MATTHEW RIDLEYsaid, he was glad that a system of registration was to be established. Such a system was absolutely necessary for the security of property.
  MR. HARVEY LEWISsaid, he thought that it would be dangerous at present to include photographs in a Bill of the kind. Photography was not a fine art, but a mechanical process. At some future

  1891
  period it might be expedient to give protestion to photographers.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALobserved, that although, strictly and technically speaking, a photograph was not in one sense to be treated as a work of fine art, yet very considerable expense was frequently incurred in obtaining good photographs. Persons had gone to foreign countries—to the Crimea, Syria, and Egypt—for the purpose of obtaining a valuable series of photographs, and bad thus entailed upon themselves a large expenditure of time, labour, and money. Was it just that the moment they returned home other persons should be allowed, by obtaining negatives from their positives, to enrich themselves at their expense? He could not consent to exclude photographs from the Bill.
  MR. HENNESSYsuggested, that at all events photographic portraits should be excluded. A visit to the Holy Land was not necessary for taking the portrait of the hon. and learned Gentleman, and yet it would be hard to prevent the public from obtaining a copy of his likeness.
  Clause agreed to; as were also Clauses 2 to 4.
  Clause 5 (Penalties on fraudulent Productions and Sales).
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he wished to inquire what was meant by the words "every offender shall forfeit to every person aggrieved." Was it the man who painted, or who purchased the picture, or both?
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, the words in practice sufficiently explained themselves. The person aggrieved would be the artist whose name was fraudulently used, or the person on whom the fabricated work was fraudulently palmed off, or it might be both.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 6 (Recovery of Pecuniary Penalties).
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he would then ask the hon. and learned Gentleman whether he would consent to strike out those clauses giving summary jurisdiction to magistrates? It was hardly fair to throw upon them the decision of questions which were to be determined not by reference to any Act of Parliament, but simply upon opinions given that a particular thing was painted by a particular person. Matters of that nature ought to go before a court of record, which would be protected in case it came to a wrong decision. In-
  1892
  quiring into such questions as whether a man was still living, or had lived within the last twenty years, must necessarily occupy a great deal of time, and be very embarrassing to a tribunal pressed with other business. The jurisdiction, moreover, was to be determined by the residence of the offender; and if the magistrate made a mistake as to his residence, he was a wrongdoer from the beginning. Nothing was more difficult than to fix a man's residence, especially men of the class who would be likely to commit these offences. The hon. Member for Cirencester was once questioned with regard to his residence, and replied that he resided sometimes at one place and sometimes at another, being a Lord of the Treasury. He was then asked where he slept, and he replied that he usually slept most in the House of Commons. The proper jurisdiction of justices was to keep the peace, and had nothing to do with the settlement of disputes between artists and photographers, which were often carried on with the greatest bitterness. If a short and sharp way of settling differences were requisite, why not send the cases to the County Courts?
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, the clause to which the right hon. Gentleman objected was taken, he believed, in substance, if not in form, from two Acts in pari materiâ, which had not been found productive in practice of any of the inconveniences anticipated from this measure. Strong representations had been made to him, that if cases such as the Bill was intended to meet were driven into the Court of Chancery or the courts of common law, the value of the remedy would be destroyed. He believed it would be quite without precedent to give such power as was suggested to the County Courts, which had no criminal jurisdiction.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he did not think the other Acts to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred could be said to be in pari materiâ. There was comparatively little difficulty in turning over page after page of books and seeing whether they contained the same words, while nobody but an artist could undertake to say that one picture was an imitation of another. The penalty inflicted, moreover, was not strictly a penalty, inasmuch as it did not go to the Queen or to the country, but to the person aggrieved. It was, therefore, more in the nature of damages.
  MR. CONINGHAMsuggested, that the

  1893
  clause should be made to extend to the case of engravings.
  MR. BENTINCKhoped the hon. Gentleman would give way on the question of referring decisions in matters of art to the justices. At all events, it ought to be made optional.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he could not see why the same remedies which were applicable to copyright in books and designs should not be applied to copyright in pictures. He saw no objection to extending the penalties to breach of copyright in engravings.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he thought the proceeding prescribed in the clause a most anomalous one. He moved the omission of the word "either."
  Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 38, to leave out the word "either."
  Question put, "That the word 'either' stand part of the Clause."
  The Committee divided: —Ayes 29; Noes 21: Majority 8.
  Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Remaining Clauses agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Thursday next, and to be printed. [Bill 53.]
  House adjourned at Twelve o'clock.

THE LATE INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT —SALARIES OF THE OFFICERS.

  PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, there is some information on a matter personal to myself which I am anxious to give, as I think it important that it should be well understood, in reference to a discussion that took place in this House on Tuesday last. I find that the Bankruptcy Bill was read a second time in the House of Commons on the 14th of February; it went into Committee on the 18th of February; it was discussed very fully in Committee on the 18th, 21st, and 25th of February, and on the 18th of March. On the last of these dates the Bill, as amended, was reported; and on the 21st of March the report was fully
  1856
  considered; every part of the Bill was gone through, save a formal Resolution with reference to Stamp Duty, which was ordered to be considered, and was, in fact, considered and passed on the 22nd, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time. On the 22nd of March a return from the Insolvent Debtors' Court clerks, which had been presented on the previous day, was ordered to be printed; and on the 22nd of March the House adjourned until the 8th of April; and on the 8th of April the Bill was read a third time and passed without discussion. I make this statement for the purpose of showing that the Return made by the clerks was not, as has been supposed and asserted, on the table of the House of Commons at any time during the discussion of the Bill.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: I have to express my deep regret that the noble and learned Lord should have thought it necessary to revert to anything which passed in the painful discussion on this subject which took place the other evening. The noble and learned Lord is entirely correct in stating that during the time when discussions were taking place upon the Bankruptcy Bill this Return was certainly not before the House, and consequently, as a Parliamentary paper, could not have been seen by the noble and learned Lord. But that does not alter the facts of the case. In order to show the sources from which the incomes of these officers were derived, a Return was moved for in the House of Commons immediately on the introduction of the Bill, and that Return was laid on the table of the House of Commons before the Bill was read a third time. The attention of every Member in the house of commons, and I should have thought more especially of the Attorney General, was called to that Return by the fact of its being ordered to be printed on the 22nd of March. According to the noble and learned Lord's perfectly correct statement, the Bill was not read a third time till the 8th of April, and I should have thought that would have afforded sufficient opportunity to the Attorney General, or whoever had the charge of the Bill, to supply any defect, or to correct any error, which by that Return was pointed out.

WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS INTO HER MAJESTY'S POSSESSIONS ABROAD BILL.—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that before the House went into Committee, he was anxious to state why he could not accede to the suggestions made on a former evening by the noble and learned Lord opposite (Lord Chelmsford). The creation of a power of appeal to the home tribunals would be certain to give rise to dissatisfaction in the Colonies; and there really was no reason why such a power should be given, because, if the writ Habeas Corpus were refused in the Court of Queen's Bench, the applicant was enabled, as the law stood, to apply to the Court of Common Pleas. A fugitive slave, like Anderson, was really not exposed to such danger as was generally thought, because the Courts by their decision were not enabled to yield him up; it was necessary that the warrant should be signed by the Governor General. In fairness, however, to the noble and learned Lord opposite, he would state that the Bill as originally draughted contained the very clause which he had suggested; but in accordance with the opinions of the high legal authorities to whom it had been submitted it had been altered to its present shape.
LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, his experience led him to think it was dangerous to allow Courts to refuse a writ of Habeas Corpus where no right of appeal existed by which their decisions could be tested.
House in Committee.
Bill reported without Amendment.
Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a to-morrow.

OFFICERS' COMMISSIONS BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYsaid, that some petitions had been sent to him against this Bill, which he should present to-morrow. The explanation which had been given by the noble Earl the Lord President had removed from his mind all objections to the measure, and he hoped that they would have the same effect upon the minds of the petitioners.
  EARL DE GREY AND RIPON, referring to a suggestion made by a noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) the other evening, that commissions signed under this Bill should bear on their faces that they were signed in pursuance of authority under the sign manual, said that he thought that such a provision would more conveniently be introduced into the Orders in Council than into the Bill.
  House in Committee.
  Bill reported without Amendment.
  Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3ato-morrow.

EDUCATION—THE REVISED CODE OF REGULATIONS.

  QUESTION—MOTION FOE PAPERS.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDrose to ask the Lord President, Whether it was intended to provide by the new Minutes of the Committee of Council on Education that scholars in night schools should be examined with scholars of day schools. The system of night schools was, in his opinion, one of the most important parts of the recent movement for the advancement of education in this country. He had two reasons for thinking so: first because night schools, like ragged schools, received a large number of the population who but for them would obtain no schooling at all. His second reason was still more important. The children of the working classes being necessarily drafted off to labour at a very early age, the best instruction that could be given to them was that given at night schools. And there was another fact deserving of notice. The education given to children in the day school, although it seemed to be lost, was left potentially in their minds, and was capable of being called forth by subsequent instruction. The night school, as it were, took up and carried out that potentiality, by awakening again that instruction in the child's mind which had appeared to be lost. But if it was a most important system, it was also a most delicate one to handle. The children who attended the day schools were sent there by their parents, and kept there whether they liked or not; but the scholars who attended the night schools went there of their own volition, and if offended by anything which was distasteful to them, would cease to attend. If, therefore, it was expedient to introduce examination into such schools at all, it ought to be introduced with the greatest caution. But, in fact, it was not so much needed in night as in day schools. In the day schools the pupils had, for the most part, no desire to learn, and it was therefore necessary to stimulate their wish for learning by prizes, and to test their proficiency by examinations. In the night schools, on the other hand, the pupils were persons who went there of their own free will, and from a desire to learn, and therefore it was not necessary that examinations should be continually brought to

  1859
  bear upon them in order to keep them up to the mark. As he read the Revised Code, he was afraid that it was intended that these scholars should be examined with those in the day schools; and he need hardly say anything to show how offensive it would be to grown up persons to be examined with children. Was that what the Government really intended? The only mention of the subject which he found in the Code was the intimation that "scholars attending in the evening only may be presented for examination in any group at the discretion of the managers." From that it would appear that such scholars might be examined in any group the managers pleased, but that in one group or another they must be examined. The adoption of such a course would, he was convinced, be most injurious to night schools, and he therefore hoped that the noble Earl would be able to state that he had misunderstood the Code. He had also to present to their Lordships a large number of petitions from schools belonging to all religious denominations, and in all parts of England, from Cornwall to Durham, but many of them in his own diocese, praying their Lordships to take such steps as they in their wisdom might see fit to prevent the Revised Code, as it had been now altered, from being adopted as the law of national education in this country. Many of these petitions were accompanied by most earnest letters from the managers of the schools, pointing out that they had not been adopted as ready-made petitions, but as the expression of their views upon a subject of which they had personal knowledge. One point brought out in these petitions was, that the amended Revised Code would not, in regard to infant schools, answer the intention of the framers. Children of a tender age were often kept away from school by the weather and other external causes, and regular attendance on their part could not be secured. Several assumptions had been made by those who shared the views of the petitioners against the new Code, which he desired to correct. It was an error to assume that in opposing the amended Code they committed themselves to an approval of everything in the old one. He and others had pointed out several amendments which were required in the latter; and their objection to the new Code arose because they believed it would either aggravate existing evils or provide a remedy which was illusory. It was equally an error to say that those who had for-
  1860
  merly opposed the old system had now fallen in love with it. Their hostility to it was directed against the proposal to divorce religion and education; and when the concordat with the Church was afterwards effected, they had been able to support the system with consistency; and in the same manner many who opposed the first proposition were now able to support the new Code as it had been altered. Again, nothing could be more unjust than to speak as if the petitioners were complaining merely because they feared that they were going to lose a large sum of money from which they derived personal benefit. The fact was that they had been giving twice as much as they received, for they gave not merely money but time, thought, care, and labour to the work of national education; and if they now complained, it was because they apprehended injury, not to themselves, but to the cause which they had at heart. He wished also to move that two papers be laid on the table of the House—one was a Return which had been given to an Address of the house of commons, containing copies of memorials transmitted to and correspondence with the Committee of Privy Council on Education touching the Revised Code; the other was a copy of the scheme of inspection for diocesan Inspectors of Education in the diocese of Oxford. His object in asking for the latter paper was to show that the petitioners did not, as was alleged, confine themselves to mere objection, but had proposed a scheme which might easily have been engrafted on the Revised Code. The great evil of the proposed new system was the mode of grouping the children for examination. By their plan children were divided into certain classes according to their progress, and examined in the subjects which were assigned to each class. The capitation grant might be proportioned to the rise of the children into these several classes. While a stimulus would thus be given to advance the education of the children, the managers would be afraid to push them on too fast, lest they should jeopardize the grant by breaking down under the examination. In that way the true end of examination would be served, which was not to ascertain whether on a given date a particular John Tompkins had attained this or that stage in his education, but whether the school at which John Tompkins attended was doing its work properly. The great evil of the Revised Code was that it was a bill of pains

  1861
  and penalties on the managers of schools, devised as if they were only using their schools as an instrument for extracting public money, and as if they ought to be suspected and watched at every turn, instead of being treated as generous and noble-minded men, who gave themselves up disinterestedly to the great cause of education. Before sitting down he entreated their Lordships' attention to a pamphlet by Mr. Birks, in which it was clearly demonstrated that the statement in the Report of the Commissioners that a large proportion of the children went away untaught from the schools was founded on a statistical mistake. The right rev. Prelate concluded by moving
  "That there be laid before the House,
  "Copies of all Memorials and Letters which have been addressed to The Lord President of the Council, or to the Secretary of the Committee of Council on Education, on the Subject of the Revised Code, by the Authorities of any Educational Society, Board, or Committee, or of any Training School:
  "Of any Correspondence between the Committee of Council on Education and any of Her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools, or any Managers or Teachers of Schools, on the Subject of the Revised Code:
  "Of any Correspondence between the Committee of Council on Education and the Lords of the Treasury, or the Civil Service Commissioners, respecting Candidates for Employment in the Public Service who have been in receipt of Public Payments as Queen's Scholars in Training Schools; and of Two Circulars addressed by the Committee of Council on Education to Training Schools (Males), dated respectively the 14th Day of April, 1859, and the 23rd Day of November, 1860, on the same Subject: And,
  "Of the Correspondence which passed in January, 1861, between Mr. Holland Echersby and the Committee of Council on Education, and in April, 1861, between Mr. John G. Bell and the Committee of Council on Education, relative to their respective Applications for Permission to accept Appointments in the Public Service."
  Also,
  "Copy of Scheme of Inspection for Diocesan Inspectors of Education in the Diocese of Oxford as transmitted to the Committee of Council on Education."
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he was glad to find that the right rev. Prelate had now come round to the view he had expressed the other night as to the great object of night schools. That object, undoubtedly, was to render education as continuous as possible, and to induce children who were withdrawn to labour from the day school to attend the night school. As soon as the Revised Code was passed, it would be the duty of the Government to issue instructions to the Inspectors to hold separate examinations of the scholars at the day
  1862
  and night schools whenever it was practicable, so as to obviate the objection to a common examination, which the right rev. Prelate had urged. With regard to the evening schools, there must, of course, be some test of efficiency, and it must be admitted that it was impossible to rely on the test with which the right rev. Prelate said he was perfectly satisfied. The right rev. Prelate had alluded to the very large mass of petitions which he had presented on this subject. But there were obvious reasons why persons who had a pecuniary interest, even though it were only for philanthropic objects, should, by the most powerful organization, endeavour to produce an effect upon Parliament. The noble Earl opposite hoped that the Resolutions which were to be proposed in the other House would pass. He hoped that they would not pass, because they were negative propositions, involving the expenditure of more money and less efficiency. But, whether they passed or not, the public required the subject to be considered, and it would be impossible to deal with the question for the future if this golden opportunity were not seized in order to come to some settlement upon it. The right rev. Prelate said he should be able to prove that some of the facts upon which the Commissioners relied were not correct.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORD: Not the facts, but the inferences drawn from Mr. Norris's report.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he was not aware that the Commissioners had drawn their inferences particularly from Mr. Norris's report. With regard to the point in Mr. Norris's report which Mr. Birks attacked, as to the proportion of children who were withdrawn from the schools by their parents before they reached the higher class, he had received a letter from Mr. Norris which, by a singular coincidence, had reached him after it had been moved for in the other House; and, while Mr. Norris in that letter controverted Mr. Birks as to certain figures, he admitted that there was one point upon which there had been an error in his calculations. But whether 55 per cent or 75 per cent of the children left school without that elementary knowledge which they ought to possess, the case for an alteration in the system was equally strong. It was stated by Mr. Horace Mann that the Post Office authorities were obliged to limit the test for the employment of letter-carriers

  1863
  to their being able to read one or two addresses, to add up a few figures, and write their own names and addresses, because When more was required it was found that an immense proportion of the candidates were rejected. It also appeared that in a militia regiment wholly composed of young men, out of 63 per cent half could not read at all, and the other half could only read the easiest lessons. Now it appeared by Mr. Arnold's report on Holland that out of 7,000 recruits 6,000 could read, write, and cipher correctly, and it was a disgrace to England that such an enormous number of children should leave school without any adequate knowledge. He would take the opportunity to correct several errors which the right rev. Prelate made on a former occasion. He was rather puzzled at first to ascertain why the right rev. Prelate should be in such haste to anticipate Lord Lyttelton's Resolutions; but when he had heard Lord Lyttelton's speech, it was clear that the right rev. Prelate suspected that the noble Lord, upon a reconsideration of the details, would make admissions most damaging to the case of those who were wholly opposed to the principles and details of the Revised Code. He admitted that it was not easy for any one to master a great many details, but he was surprised to hear the right rev. Prelate say that there was a difficulty in getting the younger classes to attend school, inasmuch as the whole attendance reports showed that the younger classes were those who attended the best, because they were of an age when their parents were glad to have them away from home and comfortably taken care of during the hours of work. The right rev. Prelate stated that £ 800,000 of the Government money produced £ 2,000,000 of voluntary contributions. It happened—and by the Report of the Commissioners, which could not be questioned, it was proved—that, instead of £ 2,000,000, the voluntary contributions were £ 500,000 for day schools, and £ 250,000 for building schools and training colleges, or only £ 750,000 in all. The right rev. Prelate had in some degree explained that discrepancy, because he said to-night that the voluntary efforts were double what was given by the State when they took into account the loss of time and the loss of money. But when the right rev. Prelate gave a specific sum of £ 2,000,000 as the amount of voluntary contributions,
  1864
  their Lordships were not likely to suppose that the value of the time given up to schools by clergymen and lay managers had been estimated. The right rev. Prelate also said that no pupil-teacher had left a training college more than four years, and therefore it was unjust to say that the system was a failure. He had never said that it was a failure. On the contrary, the Government had always said it was a great success; but, with the Commissioners, they were of opinion, and he believed it could be proved, that, like all other human institutions, there were defects in it, and those defects were so important that it was well worth while to try to rectify and remedy them. With regard to the particular statement as to the four years, the fact was that pupil-teachers began to leave the training colleges more than nine years ago, so that they had had an experience of more than double the time mentioned by the right rev. Prelate. There was another statement, that during the last 15 years the number of scholars had increased from 500,000 to 2,500,000, and upon that point he could not imagine where the right rev. Prelate got his statistics. There were no figures in existence, as far as he knew, as to the number of scholars 15 years ago. But 10 years ago the number was 2,000,000, and 20 years ago it was 1,200,000, or more than double the number stated by the right rev. Prelate as the number of scholars only 15 years ago. He had no objection to the production of the papers moved for. They had been granted in the other House; but whether it was really for the public interest that the public money should be spent in reprinting very elaborate pamphlets was another question. However, the Government, being attacked, and having no other wish than to give every possible information on the subject, could have no objection to their production. Neither had he any objection to the production of the papers asked for by the right rev. Prelate, which respected the scheme of inspection proposed in his own diocese. He found that the propositions had reference to secular and religious instruction. The requirements under the head of secular instruction were very simple, and analogous to those exacted by the Government under the new Code; but under the head of religious instruction he found that the children were expected to read the Athanasian Creed, which contained many words which must be wholly unintelligible to the children

  1865
  who, under the rules applicable to secular instruction, could only read monosyllables. With regard to the system of grouping schools, the system of grouping by age was certainly less complicated than any other; but he could not approve the suggestion of the right rev. Prelate to give the higher proportion of the grant to the higher classes in the schools, lessening as the classes descended. It was with the education in those classes that the Royal Commissioners were most concerned, and it was for the lower classes that the greatest encouragement and stimulus were needed. The evil now complained of was that the lower classes did not obtain sufficient attention; and if they were made the less remunerative portion of the schools, they were not likely to be better taught. With regard to Mr. Birks's pamphlet, he was almost ashamed to say that he could not understand a great portion of it. The diagram at the end had puzzled him terribly; he could make nothing of it, and a gentleman of great mathematical acquirements to whom he had submitted it could only describe it as a "parabolic curve."
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, if he had been aware that his noble Friend had intended to call on him to justify the figures which he quoted a fortnight ago, he would have come provided with the necessary materials for that purpose. He was quite aware that he had made a mistake with reference to the time the pupil-teacher system had been in operation; he read from the paper before him "1858" instead of "1853," and then calculating from the former date said that it was only four years since the first pupil-teachers left the training colleges; but the argument he used was that the pupil-teacher system had not been tried for a sufficiently long time to enable them to pronounce it a failure, and to justify them in going back to the old system of monitors; and the difference in the number of years did not affect the argument in the slightest degree. With regard to the other figures, he believed them to be exactly correct, and capable of being proved beyond a doubt. With reference to the objection of the noble Earl as to the remuneration for the various classes, it was quite obvious, that if the highest class was the most remunerative, the object of the teacher would be to get his pupils on as fast as possible, so as to fit them to undergo the examination provided for the upper-
  1866
  class children. As to the night schools, he could only repeat his former objection to lowering the age at which the pupils were to be admitted to them; as he said formerly, the young children being brought into them could only abash the elder members of the school. The noble Earl had said it would be the duty of the Privy Council to lay down rules, but he should be glad to have an explanation of the meaning of the existing clause to which he had called attention, which said the managers should prescribe the group in which the pupils in the night schools should be examined. He would not now attempt to explain the meaning of Mr. Birk's pamphlet on which the noble Lord had attempted to cast ridicule; he was quite sure the noble Earl, when he had looked at it again, would perfectly understand it.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the object of the Government was not to do away with the system of certificated masters and pupil-teachers, but to maintain the excellent machinery as it now existed. The point they wanted to know was, not what the schools could teach, but what the pupils really were taught, so that they might get at some tangible result.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that the discrepancy that was pointed out some days ago between the ordinary reports of the School Inspectors and the statement of the Royal Commissioners as to the character of the schools and the acquirements of the scholars had been fully explained. When the reports were examined, it would be found that the inspectors reported the schools as "excellent" or "good," in reference to the attainments of the first-class and not of the ordinary scholars. Now, a schoolmaster, had a right to be judged by reference to the scholars that had been longest with him. The Royal Commissioners had judged by inspections of the second and third class, and they found that almost all the John Tomkinses were incapable of reading intelligently or counting. The right rev. Prelate said this was not what the State required. But, with all respect to the right rev. Prelate, he must maintain the opposite proposition. What the children knew, what they carried from school, was what the State had a right to inquire into. The right rev. Prelate ascribed the deficiency to the irregular attendance of the children. But on this point the evidence of the Royal Commission was emphatic and complete. It was not true

  1867
  that the attendance was so irregular but that with good teaching the children could be made to read and write fairly, and acquire a fair amount of arithmetic, before they left school. The right rev. Prelate, like many others, appeared entirely to misapprehend the object of the new Code. They had to deal with a class of children who on the average left school before they were twelve years of age. They had to go to employments by which they could earn money for their parents. The problem was to teach these children before they left school such a degree of facility in reading and writing as would finable them when they left it to carry on their own education thereafter. In order to do this they must see whether they were taught a certain amount of elementary knowledge. Surely, the principle that the children should be examined to this extent was one that did not deserve the censure of the right rev. Prelate. He was not, however, saying that the particular scale upon which the examination was proposed to be adopted ought or ought not to be altered. As to the pamphlet that had been referred to, he agreed with his noble Friend the Lord President that it was difficult to understand. But it admitted that, with regard to children under ten years of age, and their deficiency in the elementary points of reading and writing, the complaints of the Inspectors were more unanimous than on any other subject. It admitted that the statement of the Royal Commissioners as to the elementary education was, in the main, correct. Again, in a letter to the Guardian newspaper, one of the managers of a national school, while pointing out the disastrous consequences to those schools involved in the new Code, described the results of an examination of children by groups, with the purpose of showing the disastrous effect of the new Code. The specimen given was this:—The writer asked the Inspector to examine his school as it would be examined under the new Code, and the result was this—that of group 2 twenty children presented themselves; of these only six could read, none could write, none could count Of group 3 fourteen presented themselves; of these only three could read up to the standard, three could write, none could count. Of group 4, out of ten children, none could read, none could write, and only three do counting. This was an instance sent by a manager of a school to show what would
  1868
  be the effect of the new Code; and it amounted to a distinct confession that, as matters stood, there had been great neglect in the elementary branches of education. These discussions might be very tiresome, but at the same time the subject was of such importance that no opportunity should be lost for elucidating it in every point of view. He was glad that none of the fears expressed at the commencement of these discussions as to the effect of the new rules on religious education were now heard. It was now fully. understood that the old system of inspection as regarded religious and moral education, was not done away with by the new Code—the old system would remain, but there was superadded to that system an inspection as to elementary education.
  LORD OVERSTONEexpressed his hope that the people of England would perceive the value of the principle of examination as a test of the efficiency of a school; and as there were few of their Lordships who had not been in early life in schools where there was such an examination, he appealed with confidence to them upon the matter. His own early history had proved to him the importance of this principle. In the public school where he had been educated an imperfect system of examination prevailed; but he passed thence under the hands of the late Bishop of London, to whom he owed a deep debt of gratitude for having first taught him the full value of examinations, and the necessity of continuing them in every form as the only means of rendering a man's reading really efficient. The people of this country might rest assured that where a school submitted willingly to the test of examination the system of instruction followed there was a sound one; and, on the other hand, they might with certainty come to an opposite conclusion wherever they found an unwillingness or an inability to undergo such a test. He remembered, that being once on a visit to a gentleman who took much interest in the education of the lower orders, and who had established a large school for the education of pauper children, he was asked, in company with another gentleman, to examine the children; and their knowledge was such that he said, "You are giving the lower classes of the people an education which even the higher classes are often unable to obtain." He confessed that he should have been much better pleased if, instead of all the protests and

  1869
  ingenious arguments by which the new Code wag opposed, the school managers had said, "You have made mistakes in your new system; you will find them out as you proceed; but we believe that the children in our schools are efficiently taught, and we shall not therefore object to, we rather welcome an examination of them." This would have been far more satisfactory, and would have inspired him with far greater confidence in a system which was maintained at such great expense to the public, than the course which had been taken by the school managers and their advocates. When it was declared that a large percentage of children on leaving school at present could not read, or write, or go through the ordinary process of ciphering, was it to be supposed that these children could be capable of becoming useful or moral citizens? It was a farce to continue the present vast expenditure, and to keep up the present complicated machinery, if the great majority of the children sent from schools supported by the State were so imperfectly taught. The State had a right to require that these schools should undergo the ordeal of examination, and should show in this way that they were worthy of the support which they received, and that adequate results are obtained for the large expenditure incurred by the State.
  LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, he agreed most cordially with his noble Friend in the principle which he had just laid down. Having listened to various speeches made against the Code, and especially to that of the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Oxford), he was lost in astonishment at the opposition raised by the managers to the principle of examination. They were asked simply to admit that which they would enforce in the case of a model farm. The bailiff said to the owner, "You have admirable farm buildings, the farm is admirably stocked, and everything is as it should be." But the reply would be, "Show me a balance-sheet;" and none of their Lordships would be satisfied to be told that the means employed were everything which could be desired. Amateur farmers were, no doubt, obliged to rely a good deal on the authority of their bailiffs; but the Government of the country was not an amateur institution, and when it expended large sums of money in promoting education, it was bound to see that some results were obtained for its expenditure,
  1870
  and some test was absolutely necessary to ascertain this. On one point he had felt some difficulty—namely, in reconciling the different views of the Inspectors with those of the Commissioners; but the explanation given that evening seemed a satisfactory one—namely, that the one took stock of the knowledge which was to be found in the schools, while the Commissioners took stock of the ignorance; that the one looked to the bright and the other to the dark side. But if the two reports were taken together, it would be seen that a great amount of ignorance existed. The most difficult part of the Revised Code was the system of grouping; but he confessed that the more he had thought upon this question the more convinced he had felt that the best system was that of grouping by age. He thought that the great object was to make the child come to school at as early an age as possible, and go through a regular course of instruction for as long a time as possible. It was well known that there was not much difficulty in getting the children of the labouring classes to school early; and looking to this fact, he thought that they were justified in laying down a system of grouping from the age of seven years upwards to that of twelve. This brought him to the question of night schools. The right rev. Prelate said, that the elder boys would be driven away from the night school by the provision which required that they should undergo an examination, and that in their case such a provision was peculiarly unnecessary, inasmuch as it might be taken for granted, from the mere fact of their attending such a school, that they were disposed to turn their opportunities to the best account. He (Lord Wodehouse) admitted the first part of the right rev. Prelate's proposition, but he did not concur in the second. He believed that such boys would be especially anxious to submit to the test of an examination, and to give proof of the progress they were making. With regard to pupil-teachers, he was of opinion that it would be desirable to allow them, under less restrictions, to be employed in small schools. But even in that way the Revised Code would not reach the poorer schools, and he hoped his noble Friend, the President of the Council, would consider the propriety of still further relaxing the rules in regard to those schools, so that they might receive some amount of the Government aid. He at the same time admitted that great cure

  1871
  would be necessary in making such relaxations. It was urged against the Revised Code that a loss would result to the managers, and it was stated in pamphlets written on the subject that in the country managers would not be able to secure the money they had a right to, and that the effect would be their not acting so generously towards schools as they had hitherto done. It seemed to him that to some extent a remedy would be found for that in making a bargain with the master that a portion of his salary should depend on what the managers should receive from the Government. If he failed to bring children up to the standard, it was reasonable that a large amount of the deduction should fall on him. With regard to the training schools, he was extremely glad that his noble Friend had withdrawn a part of the provisions of the Revised Code as it originally stood. He thought that the training schools stood on a different footing from the ordinary schools, and he was convinced that they could never depend upon a large subscription for them. There was this difference between them and the village schools—that, as regarded the latter, every proprietor felt, or ought to feel, a great interest in the education of the children on his own property, and subscribed accordingly; but when they came to an institution like the training school, which stood in his county town, or perhaps in the neighbouring county town, one could not get him to subscribe his money for such an establishment. He ventured to say, that if managers were questioned on the subject, they would state that there would be a great difficulty in maintaining training schools without Government assistance. Under these circumstances, he did not think it was unreasonable to ask that, while Government possessed large powers in respect to the regulation of those institutions, they should contribute more liberally to them than they did to other schools.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDin reply said, he thought his noble Friend the President of the Council would do him the justice to say that the point he had always pressed on him was that schools should be allowed to claim the benefit of capitation and other grants if they could stand an examination, and prove that they were first class, whether they had certificated masters or not—that schools in which there were not certificated masters or pupil-teachers should, if they chose to signify to Her Majesty's
  1872
  Inspector that they wished to be examined and stand a first-class examination, be allowed all the advantages now given to schools with certificated masters and pupil-teachers. In this way they would have clergymen and others trying to bring up schools such as he had referred to till they reached the highest position. There was no dissonance whatever in the views which he had expressed. He looked upon the examination of schools as all-important; but be thought it objectionable that the whole of the grant should be made to depend on the result of a particular examination. In the letters which he held in his hand from school after school the testimony was the same. They all believed, that if the present Code were carried into effect, they would lose the power of having the higher class of teachers. In the multitude of petitions or in the crowd of pamphlets that had been poured forth on the subject of education, he did not know of one which advocated anything but the strictest and most accurate examination of every school.
  After a few words from Earl GRANVILLE, which were inaudible,
  Motion agreed to.
  Papers ordered to be laid before the House.
  House adjourned at half-past Seven o'clock, till to morrow a quarter before Five o'clock.