Fthatto not nurritingn in Varlinnunt.
PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.
Boutin OF Loans. Monday, Feb. 6. Code of Malta ; Statement by the Duke of Newcastle—Pauper Schools; Question and Answer—" Peace or War" ; Lord Clan- ricarde postpones his Motion ; Conversation. Tuesday, Feb. 7. Railway Accidents; Conversation—The Navy List; Lord Hard- wicke's Motion.
Thursday, Feb. 9. Consolidation of Statutes; the Lord Chancellor's Statement in reply to Lord Lyndhurst. Friday, Feb. 10. Eastern Question ; Conversation and Statements. House oe Commoxs. Monday, Feb. 6. New Writ for South Devon—New Mem- ber, Mr. Beamish for Cork—Militia; Question and Answer—Parliamentary Oaths; Lord John Russell's Bill ordered. Tuesday, Feb. 7. Parliamentary Oaths Bill, read a first time—The Stannaries Court Bill, leave given—Public Business ; Committee appointed—Medical Prac- titioners Bill, leave given—Breach of Privilege, Irish Members ; Committee ap- pointed. Xedne-sday, Feb. 8. New Member, Sir William Heathcote for Oxford University —Mr. Hudson's Speech in Vindication of himself.
Thursday. Feb. 9. Hull Bribery Commission ; Question and Answer—Breach of Treaty, Portugal; Appointment of Committee ordered, by 126 to 74—Leadership of
the House ; Mr. Cayley's Motion—Assessed Taxes Bill, read a third time and passed—Navy Estimates, presented.
Friday. Feb. 10. New Members ; ColonelMerbert for Ludlow, and Mr. Clive for South Shropshire—Diplomatic Costume ; Question and Answer—The Fleets ; Ques- tion and Answer—Reform Bill ; Conversation—Corrupt Practices at Elections ; Lord John Bissell's Bills, leave given—Law of Settlement ; Mr. Baines's Bill, leave given.
TIME -rABLz.
?he Lords.
Hour of Roar of Meeting. Adjournment. Monday 5h 52m Tuesday 5h 6h 35m Wednesday No sitting. Thursday 5h6h 40m Friday 5h . 6h Om Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday ........
Sittings this — this
The Commons.
Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment, 4h . . 611 30m
4h .. lb 45m Noon 111 Om
4h ... 71 dim 4h .(M) 12h 45m Sittings this Week, — this Session.
4; Time, 5h 7m 7; — 14h 22m Week, 5; Time, 1911 43m
Session. 9; — 35h 45m
" PEACE on WAR."
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE had given notice that, on Monday, he would call the attention of the Peers to the state of this country with relation to the question of peace or war." At the sitting of the House on Monday, he said, that from the language held by Government last week, he considered that the Emperor of Russia had virtually if not formally rejected the proposal which had been made to him. But, seeing from the public papers that no formal reply had been received, and that a semblance of negotiations was still going on at Vienna, he for one should be sorry to occasion any discussion that might prevent a peaceful termi. nation to those negotiations. Therefore he would not that night discuss some necessary points ; the consideration of which, however, could not be delayed many days. " Our position, whatever it is, is becoming so critical, that Parliament must be accurately informed thereupon before many days elapse." He would not interfere with the faintest prospect of peace until negotiations are formally closed ; but would content himself with asking whether any answer had been received from the Emperor of Russia, and whether any instructions had been given to our Minister at St. Petersburg ?
The Earl of CLARENDON said, he was much obliged for the considera- tion shown by Lord Clanricarde in postponing any discussion which he thought " might operate prejudicially to the slight chances that still re- main of maintaining peace." Only that afternoon had he received an official statement of the facts respecting terms on which the Emperor of Russia stated that he would be prepared to negotiate for peace. Only on the 2d of February the Vienna Conference was called together, and those proposals, or rather counter-project, were communicated to the Conference by Count Buol. Lord Clarendon had not yet had time to show the official despatch on the subject to his colleagues except Lord Aberdeen ; so that he preferred not to enter into details. But it was his duty to say, that "the terms of the Emperor's proposal were quite unacceptable, and not of a character to allow of their being sent to Constantinople. Upon this point no doubt existed for a moment in the minds of the Conference."
With respect to the second question, Baron Brunnow called on Lord Clarendon on Saturday evening, and placed in his hands a note, announ- cing that the answer given by Lord Clarendon to his inquiries was not of a kind that permitted him to continue diplomatic relations with this country, and that therefore they were suspended. Baron Brunnow took leave on Saturday evening, but as it was too late to depart, Lord Clarendon un- derstood he was to leave London early on Monday.
Lord Clarendon promised in the course of the week to lay before the House the note of Baron Brunnow, the despatch of the Russian Govern- ment, and his own answer.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said, he had always thought and said that the dispute must terminate in war ; and he now did not regret the post- ponement of discussion, because any retrospect of the conduct of Govern- ment could not be profitable in the slightest degree. But he should deeply regret if Ministers were deluded by anything that has recently taken place into relaxing, indeed into not increasing, their preparations for war.
" I have no doubt we are at the commencement of one of the most formid- able wars in which this country has ever been engaged. I deeply regret that the people of this country do not appear at all aware of the magnitude and probable duration or the dismal consequences of that war. It is un- doubtedly true that it is a war for which this country is not responsible, nor are her Majesty's Ministers responsible for it. I acquit them altogether. I think that, whatever they have said on the subject has been said with ability, and that they have been ably seconded by the various gentlemen holding diplomatic appointments at the different European courts : but I do conjure Ministers to increase to the utmost possible extent the preparations for mediate war. War is inevitable; and what is absolutely essential to the preservation of the best interests of this country is, that on the breaking up of the ice we shall show a superior fleet in the Baltic. Are we able to do that? If we be not, Ministers are most deeply responsible to the country; for they have had their eyes opened, and could not have been in ignorance of the danger pressing upon us. I will say no more now. I desire that your Lordships should have the opportunity of considering the whole subject : but what I now earnestly press Ministers to do is to increase to the utmost extent the preparations for immediate war, and for a war which will be one of the greatest in which this country has ever engaged." Lord CLANRICARDE concurred In much that had fallen from Lord Ellenborough. He agreed in thinking that the war would turn out to be " one of the most disastrous on which we ever entered." (Murmurs, and cries of " No ! '') "I do not mean to this country, but to humanity." (" Hear !" from Lord Aberdeen.) But he could not agree that a retrospect would be useless. Ministers are not entirely irresponsible for the present state of affairs. What had been said by Ministers and their agents abroad had been said with ability ; but very often the right thing had not been said, and much ought to have been said that was left unsaid. The present state of things cannot continue long. He would bring forward the motion on Tuesday week. Earl FITZWILLIAM agreed with Lord Clanricarde, that the present state of things could not last 'long. In his opinion, " the present state of things has already lasted much too long." " If I were disposed," he continued, "to find fault with a single syllable of the statement which has been made by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, it would be because he still seems to indicate that there lurks in his mind even the shadow of a shade of hope that there could be any other termination to this state of things than war, as has been an- nounced by the noble Earl [Ellenborough) on the upper bench. With all that that noble Earl addressed to your Lordships I do not entirely agree, because I cannot believe that it was quite impossible to avert, at an early stage of the negotiations, the state of things at which we have now arrived. That, how- ever, is a question which, however it maybe determined in any man's mind,
can make no alteration whatever in the course which Parliament and the country must now take. Whether Ministers deserve credit for the whole of the negotiations in which they have been engaged, or whether it be the opinion of any man that in some particular parts of the negotiations they may have failed, of this I am sure, that it is the duty of every man to afford them the strongest support when they shall be engaged in that war with which before the discovery of steam ; and, practically, the order tends to give is aware of the tremendous character of the conflict., he would not stop to dis- can be no other alternative but war or disgrace." They were therefore The motion was withdrawn.
ml ; that Captains should be eligible for flag appointments who had com- port to the successors of the crown, and closes with these And all mended one or more rated ships during war, or during six complete years of these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear, according to peace, or five of peace and war ; and that Commanders and Lieutenants the express words by me spoken, and according to the plain common sense should serve one year and two years before they were eligible for the rank of and understanding of the same words, without any equivocation, mental Captain and Commander. On the 10th of August this order was repealed evasion, or secret reservation whatever. And I do make this recognition, by another ; but in 1851 the Government reverted to the former system, acknowledgment, abjuration, renunciation, and promise, heartily, willingly, and ordered that officers on the active list who had not served for their flags and truly, upon the true faith of a Christian." Lord John showed how this under the order of 1827 should be removed to the reserved, in fact to the
retired list. Having taken by chance sixteen officers on the reserved and no longer exists, and does not require to be guarded against.
sixteen on the active list, he found the united ages of the former amounted forThe oath Lord John would propose contained, he was sum, quite enough to 1027, those of the latter to 1038. The absurdity was, that practically .theAs.eic3Rrity ofothe Crown,. in these words— the spirit of the orders in Council was not adhered to ; for when an officer • do sincerely promise and swear that I will he faithful and bear true arrived at a certain point, he found the door of promotion shut in his face. i allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria, and will defend her to the utmost of my
While a Captain was rejected who had not served his full term of six
years, Government would take an officer and give him a magnificent ship, mearkpeerksnoon,,vne crown, rorlifensitty; : and her heirs and my utmost t endeavours a treasons to odnisscal disclose t and With a broad pendant, who had never before commanded anything but a toreus conspiracies which I shall know to be formed against her, or any of them; ' small vessel. Naval officers are not sorry that the orders in Council and I do faithfully promise to maintain, support, and defend, to the utmost of my tehr ftuhrethseurciciems=onfotfhtehcerronn:n whicha better uccegicorn4 tazaieit entitled liberties act
exist, but all admit their injustice in certain instances. Lord Hard- q
The Earl of ABERDEEN, sympathizing with the object of the motion, Pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, person, state, or potentate, hath was bound to oppose it, from a sense of duty to the service and the public. or ought to have any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or pre- It is remarkable that not one of the Boards of Admiralty that has ex- Lord John showed that the present Roman Catholic oath contains words
war.
Lord CLARENDON was sorry his answer had been thought meagre. He could assure both Lord Beaumont and Lord Fitzwilliam, that he had held out no expectations that "fresh negotiations may be entered into, and that peace may still be preserved."
These negotiations have, as he had before stated, "now been brought to a close at Vienna" ; but, anxious to satisfy the House, he had added that new proposals put forward by Russia were wholly unacceptable, and "there- fore there was an end of them." It was true that Count Orloff, having executed that particular portion of his mission that referred to the relations subsisting between Russia and Austria, and was about to depart from Vienna, had prolonged his stay ; " but what object he has in this, I really am unable to state." As to the question relative to instructions to the British Minister at St. Petersburg, Lord Clarendon said—"As it was half-past six o'clock on Sa- turday when Baron Brunnow called upon me, and as it was necessary in this, as in all other measures we have adopted, or shall adopt, to have previous communication with the French Government, it was not possible at the mo- ment to send instructions to our Minister at St. Petersburg. But we have already held communication with the French Ambassador on the subject ; and instructions will be sent to Sir George Seymour and General Castlebajac tomorrow, which will place them on exactly the same footing as the Russian Ambassador here, and diplomatic relations between the two countries and Russia will be suspended. [This statement evidently made a strong impression on the House.]
NAVY ESTIMATES.
When Sir JAMES GRA.RAM presented the Navy Estimates for 1854-'55, on Thursday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL announced that they should be taken on Friday the 17th instant.
THE NAVY LIST.
The Earl of HARDWICRE called attention to the state and conditions of the Navy-list. In doing so, he disclaimed all intention of giving offence, and said he would not mention a single name. There are twenty-two Admi- rals on the " aetive " list, the youngest of whom is seventy-five years of age ; the youngest of the Vice-Admirals is sixty-nine ; and of the Rear- Admirals nine or ten are fit for service. This state of things was the re- sult of orders in Council and regulations. The first order in Council affecting the list was issued on the 30th June 1827: it provided that Captains, who by seniority had reached the head of the list, should be deemed eligible to be superannuated with the rank of retired Rear-Admi- ramed by Sir George Cockburn. Not a single officer has been promoted who had not complied with the conditions of that regulation. Cases of individual hardship must occur, and he regretted that it was so. Lord Rardwicke himself; and others in a similar condition, might think an alteration necessary ; but to be of use, a regulation must be in- variably adhered to. Lord Aberdeen said he had conferred with Sir James Graham, and it was his opinion that no fairer mode to preserve efficiency could be adopted than to require a reasonable qualification on the part of the officers to be promoted. Any relaxation of the rule would Put an end to that equitable proceeding which has hitherto characterized the conduct of the Crown. He had therefore come to the conclusion that the Present system is the most just and advantageous to the service that had yet been proposed.
After some observations from Lord Coeerreseka, indistinctly heard, the experience might be acquired. The service in rated ships was a service the noble Earl on the upper bench has threatened us." Whether the country before the discovery of steam ; and, practically, the order tends to give is aware of the tremendous character of the conflict., he would not stop to dis-
to. the country men not the best acquainted with the service as it is but as cuss ; but he was sure, from the communications he had had, that " there
never was a war in which the Government was more cordially supported than it used to be. No man in the Navy was more deservedly esteemed than it will be in that in which we are about to engage." (Cheers.) But he was Sir George Cockburn ; yet their Lordships must consider the difference confident Lord Ellenborough did not mean to impute to the country un- between the service in 1827 and the service in 1853. In 1827, many willingness to support the Government. years had not elapsed since the war when captains had not to wait long
Lord Baansioerr could not help observing, that the reply of Lord Cla- for promotion ; but now, at the end of forty years of peace, the rule is mutton was more meagre than was desirable. If he understood rightly, exclusion' not promotion. He recollected that, in 1846, Sir Robert Peel, the Emperor of Russia had refused to consent to the last note from Vienna ; on behalf of the Crown, claimed the power of promoting any officer to and not only refused, but had offered new terms of such a nature that the any rank in the Navy. That is a power that should never be confided Powers could not possibly admit them. Further negotiations must muse- to the Admiralty. It has been rightly reserved to the Crown ; and as the quently be altogether out of the question. When the Emperor has with- whole merits of any officer to be promoted would be brought before the drawn his Minister, refused our ultimatum, and insulted Europe by offer- whole Cabinet, there was ample guarantee that the power would not be ing at the eleventh hour terms that he knows must be refused, " there improperly exercised.
entitled to know whether our Minister at St. Petersburg had been re- called. Since he had read the despatches on the table, he was willing to give Ministers more credit for what had passed than he was previously inclined to do ; but we have arrived at a point when hesitation or the holding out of false hopes of peace would be highly culpable. Let us, if into a full consideration of the entire subject, and set forth the oath he such be the case, not hesitate to acknowledge that we are in a state of proposed as a substitute for the oaths now taken.
It was, be observed, almost a profanation to make persona bind themselves in the presence of Almighty God to engagements which are many of them totally out of place, and some of which have no reference to the present time. The first eath is the oath of fidelity—" I, A. B., do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty : so help me God." That is plain and intelligible; but in the next oath there are assertions quite unnecessary at the present day. Here Lord John entered into a critical account of the dangers which those oaths were framed to meet during the violent contest at the Reformation respecting the supremacy of the Crown ; quoting a lucid description of the objects of the oaths delivered by Lord Plunket in 1823, and showing that the oath of supremacy was in- tended as a test to separate the well-affected from the disaffected. In con- formity with this view, Lord Eldon bad said, with respect to relieving Earl Marshals from the oath of supremacy, that the oath of allegiance contained the oath of supremacy. Now the first part of that oath is totally unneces- sary. It is—" I, A. B., do swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure as impious and heretical, that damnable doctrine and position that princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope, or any authority of the See of Rome, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever." He did not believe that any persons hold such a tenet at the present day. The next affirmation of the oath of supremacy is—" And I do declare, that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, preeminence, or author- ity, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm. ' But Roman Catholics, the objects of suspicion when and against whom this oath was framed, have been relieved from its obligations ; while Protestants are obliged to say that no prince, power, or potentate, has or ought to have any authority in this realm! The next oath, the oath of abjuration, was intended against different dan- gers, and might be defended, when framed, as necessary to the security of the country. The last time this oath was altered, in 1766, there was a de- scendant of James the Second in existence : the oath says—" I do solemnly and sincerely declare that I do believe in my conscience, that not any of the descendants of the person who pretended to be Prince of Wales during the life of the late King James the Second and since his decease pretended to be and took upon himself the style and title of Kin.. of England by the name of James the Third, or of Scotland by the name of James the Eighth, or the style and title of King of Great Britain, bath any right or title whatsoever to the crown of this realm ; or any other of the dominions thereunto be- longing; and I do renounce, refuse, and abjure any allegiance or obedience to any of them." But it is generally known that there are no descendants of James the Second now existing ; and is it not a mockery to call upon Members to "renounce, refuse, and abjure allegiance and obedience' to persons not in existence ? The oath of abjuration goes on toordrorsne sup- ml ; that Captains should be eligible for flag appointments who had com- port to the successors of the crown, and closes with these And all mended one or more rated ships during war, or during six complete years of these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear, according to peace, or five of peace and war ; and that Commanders and Lieutenants the express words by me spoken, and according to the plain common sense should serve one year and two years before they were eligible for the rank of and understanding of the same words, without any equivocation, mental Captain and Commander. On the 10th of August this order was repealed evasion, or secret reservation whatever. And I do make this recognition, by another ; but in 1851 the Government reverted to the former system, acknowledgment, abjuration, renunciation, and promise, heartily, willingly, and ordered that officers on the active list who had not served for their flags and truly, upon the true faith of a Christian." Lord John showed how this under the order of 1827 should be removed to the reserved, in fact to the
sentence, especially the closing words, had been framed to meet the Jesuits, who, like Garnet, inculcated and excused mental reservation. That danger
sixteen on the active list, he found the united ages of the former amounted forThe oath Lord John would propose contained, he was sum, quite enough the spirit of the orders in Council was not adhered to ; for when an officer • do sincerely promise and swear that I will he faithful and bear true arrived at a certain point, he found the door of promotion shut in his face. i allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria, and will defend her to the utmost of my
her against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever which maybe formed against
for wicke suggested that an opportunity should be given for officers to pur- of the subject,' is and stands limited to tne Princess Sophiga, Elecfress of Hanover, chase chase their commissions, upon a fair calculation of the value of their pay. and the heirs of her body, being Protestants; hereby utterly renouncing and ab- He moved for a Select Committee to inuire into the subject. , jurine any obedience or allegiance unto any other person claiming or pretending a
right
'to the crown of this realm. And I do declare, that I do not believe that the The Earl of ABERDEEN, sympathizing with the object of the motion, Pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, person, state, or potentate, hath was bound to oppose it, from a sense of duty to the service and the public. or ought to have any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or pre-
eminence, directly or indirectly, within this realm. So help me Cod."
It is remarkable that not one of the Boards of Admiralty that has ex- Lord John showed that the present Roman Catholic oath contains words isted since 1827 has thought proper to deal with the regulation then insulting to Roman Catholics • that the clause abjuring any intention to sub- vert the Church establishment conscientiously bindsmome, and not others, from attempting to subvert the established Chureh of Ireland : and he laid it down that "it ought to be on no man's conscience that he is not at liberty to give his vote, with respect to political and temporal matters, as he thinks fit." He thought the oath was no security to the Protestant religion ; for if the ma- jority of the House were opposed to the Protestant religion, the oaths would be no security whatever. Hence a simple oath is more desirable. With regard to the words "on the true faith of a Christian," Lord John showed that they were not introduced for the purpose of excluding persons of the Jewish religion : And he cited Baron Alderson in support of that view. But supposing the oaths are left as they now stand, a very serious question arises, which liad been stated with great legal clearness and, force by Lord Lyndhurst. " No British subject, no natural-born subject of the Queen, ought to be deprived of the rights enjoyed by his fellow-subjects, unless ho has committed some crime, or unless he is excluded by some act of Parlia- Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said, no doubt the rule is a just rule, but it would be desirable to reconsider the details of the orders in Council. There is something contrary to reason in saying that an offtper should be qualified for a flag after having served six years in a rated ship, yet rot qualified by having served in another ship where equal or even superior
PARLIAMENTARY OATHS.
Lord Joule RUSSELL, in moving that the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider the oaths at present administered to Members of Parliament on taking their seats, and also to persons taking office, went ment directed against him or against the class to which he belongs. That is the true principle of the constitution ; and such being the case, these per- sons can only rightly be excluded by the concurrent voice of the two Houses of Parliament, and with the assent of the Crown. If you exclude them by the casual operation of a clause which was never directed against them, or against the class to which they belong, you unjustly deprive them of their birthright." (Cheers.) That is great authority and unanswerable rea- soning.
Should the Legislature not think proper to make an alteration of the oaths, there arises a further question. The House of Commons would be bound to con- sider the position in which a person would be placed who should come to the table and should say the oath isnot binding on his conscience. Mr. Pease was allowed to make his simple affirmation as a Quaker, and take his seat. That the law in that case was doubtful, was admitted by those most in fa- vour of the admission of Mr. Pease, and who carried a bill enabling persons of his persuasion to make affirmation in future. Now if the law remain in its present state, with the declarations of Baron Alderson and Lord Lynd- hurst, it would be for the House to say "whether or not, you, sitting in this House, have not with respect to your own Members as good a right to say in what terms the oath should be taken, as Lord Hardwicke sitting in his court, in the case of Omichund and Barker." In fact, it would be a question for the House, "whether it should not prefer the course taken in the case of Mr. Pease to that which has since been taken with respect to gentlemen of the Jewish persuasion."
Lord John moved, with confidence, that the House resolve itself into Com- mittee to consider the oaths taken by Members. (Cheers.) The only other speaker on the occasion was Sir FREDERICX. THESIOF,R. He did not oppose the introduction of the bill ; he reserved his opposition-for the second reading. But he expressed an opinion that Lord John Russell
would not put in execution his threat of following the case of Mr. Pease ; for he had himself opposed the adoption of that course in 1852. Did Lord
John forget his arguments in 1852 ? (Opposition cheers.) At that time, he disdained to introduce by a sidewind that which could not be intro- duced openly ; and declared that the words "on the true faith of a Christian " were not the form but the substance of the oath.
He warned the House, that the change proposed was an attack—he would not say an insidious attack—on the Established Church ; that it omitted all recognition of the supremacy of the Queen ; that it would weaken the Protestant religion ; and that it would destroy the Christian character of the House.
The House having gone into Committee, leave was given to bring in a bill to substitute one oath for the oaths of supremacy, allegiance, and abjuration, and for the oath now taken by Roman Catholics.
Lord Joina RUSSELL proposed to take the second reading of the bill on that day three weeks.
THE LEADERSHIP OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Mr. CAYLEY moved for a "Select Committee to consider the duties of the Member leading the Government business in this House, and the ex- pediency of attaching office and salary thereto." He had not communi- cated with Lord John Russell, for the House of Commons alone ought to decide this question. Mr. Cayley went into the circumstances of Lord John's joining Lord Aberdeen ; accepting the Foreign Office ; then re- signing it, but remaining a member of the Cabinet, and adviser of her Majesty—he presumed, in his capacity as Privy Councillor ; and taking his seat as leader of the House.
The salary Lord John Russell would have received, had he been First Lord of the Treasury, would have been 50001. a year ; but that office being now held by a member of the Upper Howie of Parliament, the noble Lord sits in this House, performing the labours of its leader, without any salary whatever. That position must be distinctly understood. And what, then, are the labours of the office held by the noble Lord ? The leader of the House of Commons has to be here early and late ; he has to make himself master of every question introduced, whether by Government or by an in- dividual Member of the House ; the whole of-his mornings must be occupied in making himself master of those questions, and the whole of his evenings have to be passed in debating them when they are introduced. At Mr. Canning's death, it was prophesied that the office of leader would never again be held with a public department : in 1835, Sir Robert Peel tried it, but when he subsequently became First Lord of the Treasury, he hold that office alone. The business of the House has increased. The sit- tings of the House in 1839 averaged three hours a day, but they now aver- age eight hours, and towards the close of the session they average ten hours a day. At the same time, the length of the session has extended from 120 to 140 days, and the average sitting of the House ie somewhere about 1000 hours in the course of a session. In 1752 the divisions during the session were 15; in 1851 they were 127, and in 1852 they were 242. The journals of the House forty years ago occupied a space of 427 pages ; now, with the pages and type the same, they occupy 2400 pages. The number of petitions have greatly increased, considerably extending the labours of the House : in 1837 the petitions numbered about 7000, in 1847 they were 15,000, and in 1848 they were 18,000. Now, all that increase is attached more or less to the office of leader of the House. And how had Lord John Rus- sell found the experience to enable him to lead the House ? He had ex- perience in almost all public departments, beginning as Paymaster of the Forces, and successively filling the offices of the chief Secretaries of State in succession.
As to the constitutional part of the question, perhaps Lord John would advise the House of the proper course. Mr. Cayley did not wish to make this an exceptional case, but to deal with it on general principles. If he wished to make an exceptional case of this,—if he were to say, the noble Lord the Member for London possessed qualities fitting him for the office ; that he had a greater constitutional knowledge, perhaps, than any other Member of the House ; that he exhibited more tact and readiness and tem- per in debate than almost any other Member; that his courage under all circumstances was proverbial; that his services had been such as to add lustre to his name; and were he to add as a crown to those qualities, that he possessed that mild simplicity of demeanour without which real dignity can scarcely exist,—perhaps the House would desire to hear some honour- able Member speak upon those matters more appropriately than he could pretend to do. But he did not intend to put the case upon those points. He could appreciate the morbid sensibility of Lord John in not taking the pension he was entitled to ; but he did not think the example was a good one.
Sir CHARLES WOOD opposed the motion. He trusted the House would pr recognize the principle of attaching a salary to an office that does not -IA trial% and the duties of which cannot be defined. It is clearly incom. with the constitutional practice that a salary should be given to n except for the discharge of official duties.
=am Witatems said it was not a proper time to createnew d add to the burdens of the people.
Mr. Watroas agreed with Sir Charles Wood as to the very great in. convenience of attaching a salary to a position totally unknown to the constitution of the country. Members were apt to talk gravely of Minis. terial responsibility ; but responsibility there is none except by virtue of the office that a Minister holds, or possibly by the fact of his being a Privy Councillor.
A Minister. is responsible for the acts done by him; a Privy Councillor, for advice given by him in that capacity. Until the reign of Charles the Second, Privy Councillors always signed the advice they gave ; and to this day the Cabinet is not a body recognized by law. As a Privy Council. for, a person is under little or no responsibility for the acts advised by him, on account of the difficulty of proof. It was a part of the Act of Settlement that Privy Councillors should sign their advice ; but two years afterwards the clause was repealed. Now, would it be wise to increase the anomalies of the constitution with respect to the responsibilities of Ministers ? Besides, the Crown might select a person to fill the position of leader of the House without that person being obliged to go back for reelection. The country would be deprived by this means of knowing who were the responsible ad. visers of the Crown; for, except from the circumstances of the individual being a Privy Councillor and sitting upon that bench, and speaking as the organ of the Government, the country has no means of judging who are the con- stitutional advisers of the Crown. It was stated during the debates in 1806, that Lord Mansfield, although holding no office under the Government, sat in the Cabinet and advised it for a period of five years. He intended to offer no reflections upon the arrangement made by the Government in the present instance. It was the future inconvenience which might result from this precedent that he was pointing out.; and he warned the House, that this practice, if followed, might lead to inconveniences which they might have to deplore, although he hoped the occasion would never occur.
. Lord Jolter Roseau, did not rise to speak to anything that personally concerned him ; but to ask the House to pause before it gave assent to the constitutional doctrines laid down by Mr. Walpole. He unduly re- stricted the responsibility of Ministers. Lord Somers was impeached for the advice he gave King William the Third in regard to the treaty of Partition, not as Lord Chancellor, but as Privy Councillor ; and the articles of impeachment against Lord Oxford, respecting the surrender of Tour. nay, had nothing to do with his conduct at the Treasury.
" I hold that it is not really for the business the Minister transacts in per- forming the particular duties of his office, but it is for any advice which ho has given, and which he may be proved, before a Committee of this House, or at the bar of the House of Lords, to have given, that he is responsible, and for which he suffers the penalties that may ensue from impeachment. If this is the case, it is quite obvious that, whether a person holds an office totally unconnected with the business upon which he is consulted, or whether he holds no office whatever, the constitutional argument is exactly the same. Take a case that happened only the other day, and of which there is an ac- count in the blue-books recently laid before the House. Lord Clarendon states, that on a particular occasion, it not being easy to collect the members of the Cabinet, there was a meeting at the Foreign Office, consisting of him- self, the First Lord of the Treasury, the Home Secretary, and Lord John Russell. He states that those four Ministers arrived at an opinion which they communicated to her Majesty. Now, supposing the advice which we
then gave had been of a nature dangerous to the independence of this country, or that it had rendered us liable to the charge of being guilty of a high crime and misdemeanour, I conceive that every one of us—the First Lord of the Treasury, the Home Secretary, and myself—would have been equally re• sponsible with the Foreign Secretary for tendering that advice." He trusted that Mr. Cayley, having heard the opinion of the House, would not press his motion. Lord John said he quite agreed in the dot. trine that it is advisable that the organ of the Government is this House should, generally speaking, hold office." Motion by leave withdrawn.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE STATUTES.
Lord LYNDHURST prefaced a question to the Lord Chancellor, on this subject, by a statement showing that it has occupied the attention of Government at intervals during the last, three hundred years. He told how the question was firat started by Edward the Sixth ; strongly pressed in the reign of Elizabeth ; brought forward by James the First, who in a characteristic speech referred to the "overflow " of statutes—" crossing and cuffing each other ; under the Republic, or as some prefer to call it the Commonwealth, a Committee was appointed, of which Sir Bel- strode Whitelock, Sir Matthew Hale, and. Mr. Ashley Cooper afterwards Lord Shaftesbury, were members; - and after the Restoration the subject was again inquired into : but in all these instances nothing was done. From the Restoration the subject slumbered until 1806, when there was a Commission ; followed in 1831 by another Commission to consolidate the Criminal Law. At the present time a Commission is sitting, and it is the duty of their Lordships to keep watch over its proceedings. Their Lordships would pardon him for referring to what had taken place in the United States. In some instances the acts of our Transatlantic bre- thren would seem to justify the belief that men, like plants, acquire fresh vigour from being transplanted. In the State of New York, all our statutes, up to the time of the Declaration of Independence, were in force. From that period there had been an immense accumulation of statutes arising out of their new position. The inhabitants of that State were in the same un- fortunate position as ourselves in this respect; but they resolved to get rid of the evil, and in 1835 competent persons were appointed to consolidate the statutes. In two years from that time the object was accomplished, and in a manner that was quite satisfactory, not only to the legal profession, but to the general public of the State. Twenty years had since elapsed, and the new code had lost none of its popularity. In the State of Massachusetts the statutes had been consolidated as successfully and satisfactorily as in New York. Let us not be ashamed to copy from our brethren on the other side of the Atlantic. It should be a great encouragement to us to find that, after all, the task we have in view is so easy. The tardiness of Governments is remarkable when compared with private enterprise. If a diatinguisked London bookseller should determine on revising the statutes, the work would be well executed in three years at the furthest. The masa of absurdities in the statute-book would astonish their Lord' ships. When he held the great seal, he introduced an act for the purpes removing some of the absurdities to be found in the statutes directed agates! Roman Catholics. The absurdities were so apparent that the act was camel with the unanimous consent of both Houses. The absurdities thus remol were only a sample of those which remain behind. Their Lordships would hardly believe that there is in the statute-book an act which prohibits an Irish bishop from bringing an Irish servant into this country under a BeveT1 penalty.. It would interest a noble Duke [lluceleuchj who was not then his place to know that by another act of Parliament no person is allowed t° have more than 3000 sheep, under very heavy penalties. These are 011 samples of the rubbish and nonsense which disgrace our statute-book. The'• are altogether 16,000 public general statutes ; and of these nearly 14,0
might be swept away without the slightest inconvenience, while the re- mainder might be reduced to moderate compass by the process of consolida-
tioLon.
rd Lyndhurst pointed out the best mode of proceeding : to strike oft'
obsolete nonsense, to consolidate the remainder under distinct heads, to amend them where amendment is required, and when the common law can- not be separated to incorporate it with the statute law. At present it is im- possible to wade through the statute-book in order to find out and examine every statute relating to the same subject. Lord Lyndhurst concluded by asking what course the Lord Chancellor intends to pursue respecting the re-
ports of the revision of the statutes ? -
The Loan CHANCELLOR said, the country would feel indebted to Lord Lyndhurst for having brought the subject forward. Oh the 31st of March last year he instructed the Commissioners to ascertain what statutes are in force, what have been repealed, what have become obsolete, and to consolidate those in full force. The Commissioners ascertained, that out of nearly 17,000 statutes, 2500 only were living acts of Parliament; and these were then proceeded with in the work of consolidation by two of the gentlemen assbciated with Mr. Bel- lenden Ker. Other gentlemen, he believed, were employed to consolidate the law upon particular subjects. At all events, the three different plans suggested by Lord Brougham's Commission were attempted to be carried out.
One of these plans was merely to consolidate the law in the language of the existing statutes ; another was to consolidate the law with a view to its being amended ; and the third plan was to consolidate the law on the particular subject, both as it was at common law and as it was by statute. These gen- tlemen commenced their labours in the first week in April, and ended them in July ; when they made a report, in which each Commissioner stated his views as to what appeared to him most advantageous to be adopted. One of them made a digest of the law relating to distress for rent. As to the course
he intended to pursue, all that could be done was to get competent persons to reduce the statute-law into a consolidated and neat form ; and then to get the Lord Chancellor, or some other competent person, to propose that that condensed form should become law.
He contended that the mode adopted at New York could never be listened to in this country. There, new matter is introduced, and adopted by the Legislature as new law. In England, every clause would require to be con- sidered as if it were introduced fbr the first time. At the beginning of last session, a bill framed on a sketch by the Criminal Law Commissioners, and relating only to one head—murder and injury to the person—was introduced, referred to a Select Committee, and at the end of the session was still an im- perfect bill. He referred to this to show, that if too much were attempted they would attempt something which might be theoretically right but im- practicable. If his anticipations were realized, he should retain the services of a certain number of gentlemen at the bar, to constitute a sort of unpaid commission to superintend the consolidation of all the statutes. As Lord Brougham was not present, the Lord Chancellor stated that he should postpone the introduction of a measure relating to testamentary juris- diction until Monday.
Lord CAMPBELL was glad no attempt would be made to codify the whole of the statute and common Iaw. All French law was not contained in the Code Napoleon—no, nor one-twentieth part ; and there would be just as much reason and no more justice in speaking of the Code Napo- leon as a codification of the laws of France as to speak of a code of the laws of England. The excellent treatises on the great heads of law, like those of Lord St. Leonards, answer all the purposes of a code.
In reply to a remark by Lord LYNDHURST, the Loan CHANCELLOR observed that it would be mere pedantry to say that the Commissioners must not in any case, or in the least degree, touch the common law.
Limn= Luainxrv.
Mr. Colima moved for leave to bring in a bill to extend the jurisdic- tion of the Stannaries Court, define and regulate the cost-book system of mining, and to limit, in some degree, the liability of partners in cost-book mines. A great impetus has recently been given to mining operations in this country. Since 1836 the jurisdiction of the Stannaries Court has been extended to all minerals in Cornwall ; and, combining law and equity, it has had a salutary effect. The object' of the present bill is to extend the jurisdiction to the tin-mines of I/evon. That will cause no additional expense ; for the Vice-Warden of the Court accepted office on the understanding that if his jurisdiction be extended it should be done without an increase of salary.' Another portion of the bill related to cost- book mines, which were exempted from' the Joint..Stock Act of 1845, but not defined by that act; and the ceitsequence is that many companies evade the Joint-Stock Cordpanien Ad.' that would he remedied by the bill. The third portion of the bill trenchedupon the limitation of the liability of partners. He proposed, that persons engaged in the mines that had conformed to the provisions of this act:should be entitled to borrow money on the terms of lenders participating in the profits, without being liable beyond the amount of their shards ; and publicity should be given, by means of the registration, as to the extent of each shareholder's liability. By the law of this country, any man who enters into a trading partner- ship, or who lends a farthing to a trading cencern,, but takes no part in the management, is liable to his last acre and his last Shilling. That law is opposed to the laws of every civilized country. The commercial prosperity of Venice, the dikes and dams of Holland, were raised under a system of limited liability ; French jurists have approved cif. it ; and America has adopted it. If adopted in England, it would tend to promote improvement
towns, in gas-works and water-works, and especially in labourers' dwell- ings. The present law bears with peculiar hardship on mining companies. In the North of Devon, a mine was discovered on the estate of a farmer ; the company presented him with five shares for his courtesy ; he became liable for their debts, and was ruined. Persons of respectability are debarred from embarking in mines, and they are given up to speculators. The bill would place mining schemes on a solid foundation ; and interest the labourer in commercial transactions, not merely as a labourer, but as a capitalist. If the experiment tailed, they could retrace their steps; if it succeeded, it would be an important event.
A conversational discussion followed. The Arronisnr-GerseitAL said, he would willingly pay attention to the bill, but he could not pledge him- self or the Government. Mr. HUME avowed himself a recent convert to the principle of limited liability, and confessed to all the zeal of a new waved. Mr. MOFFAT was in favour of applying the principle to the mining companies of Devon and Cornwall. Mr. H. VIVIAN thought it Would be undesirable to introduce limited liability generally into our commercial system ; but he would concede the principle in the case of mining concern; railroads, and large speculative undertakings. Mr. WILLIAM Bnowsr said, this country owes much of its prosperity to the credit of the British merchant, and that credit would be greatly impaired if we had a system of limited liability. Lord GOnemrcll said, the existing date of the law could not be per- mitted to last long. That the Board of Trade should grant charters of limited liability to certain bodies, which are denied by the law of the land, is untenable. It is virtually a power of granting monopolies. It is a strong argument in favour of a change of the law, that the Legislature should be obliged to grant this power to the Board of Trade to suspend its operation. Lord Goderich gave his support to the measure especially on the ground that it would promote the interests of the working classes, lessen disputes between capital and labour, and bind together the interests of masters and workmen more than any other measure that could be brought forward.
Mr. CAnnwerm reminded the House, that a Commission, consisting of eminent legal and commercial men, is now engaged in a careful inquiry into the subject; and in sanctioning the first reading of this local bill, the House was not passing an opinion ay or no on the greater question. Leave given.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE : IRISH MEMBERS : MR- HUDSON.
Mr. ISAAC Burr, on Tuesday, called attention to an article published in the Times newspaper of Monday, and a previous publication in the Dublin Freeman's Journal, in which a trafficking in places was imputed to Members of that House. Mr. Butt said the paper in question was a libel on the House, and therefore constituted a breach of privilege. He should follow the precedent of 1834, when the Examiner, which contained a re- port of a speech accusing Mr. Shell of voting against a bill while he urged the Minister to press it forward, was handed in as a breach of privilege, and a Committee of Privileges was appointed. The present case was shortly this.
At a dinner given at Tuam, attendedby the Archbishop of Tuam—be hoped the Solicitor-General for Ireland was not taking a note of the title—Mr. Lucas, Mr. Smith, Mr. Moore, and some others, Dr. Gray, a person of some position, made a speech. Dr. Gray stated, that at the time when paid Guardians were appointed in Ireland to administer the affairs of the Poor- law Unions, a friend of his consulted him as to a proposal made to him by a Member of the House of Commons to obtain for him the appointment of a paid Guardian if he would pay to the Member so obtaining the appointment one year's salary. Dr. Gray had ascertained, however, that this office of paid Guardian the Government were just about to dispense with ; and, therefore, if his friend had purchased the appointment at the price of one year's salary, he would only have enjoyed the office for about five months. (Laughter.) Another gentleman stated, that he knew of his own knowledge that a Mem- ber of this House received 5001. on condition to obtain the place of Sti- pendiary, Magistrate for the person paying the money, and with a promise to be paid 5001. more when the appointment was made. It was stated that the Minister was hard-pressed for votes on one occasion ; that the appointment was obtained ; and that then (it was hard to say whether this aggravated the infamy of the transaction) this gentleman who had purchased the office of Stipendiary Magistrate turned round on the Member who had got the place for him, and refused to pay him the second 5001. (Laughter.) Mr. Butt proposed that these statements should be subjected to investigation before a Select Committee. All doubt as to whether the article in the Times was a breach of privilege would be set at rest by the following passage. " We have satisfied the theory of the constitution, as far as the Irish division of the empire is concerned, with no sparing hand ' • but we have not succeeded in obtaining a body of representatives which an Irishman could look upon with pleasure or an Englishman without dismay. In the name of constitutional govern- ment, we may be permitted to ask, what does the section of Irish Members represent beyond the embodied wish of some hundred needy men to obtain place, salary, and position ?"
Mr. Butt intimated that he did not mean to follow up his motion by any penal proceedings against the newspapers. The time has gone by when the House could maintain its character by proceedings of that nature.
Mr. Joins O'Coxxerm seconded Mr. Butt's motion, that the Clerk read the whole of the article from the Times. This having been done, Mr. Burr moved that the matter of the said complaint be referred to a Committee of Privilege; to examine and report. Mr. Jonx O'Coxxerm, in seconding this also, expressed his opinion that Irish Members are not justified in complaining of the Times, when " our own newspapers have set the example of defaming and maligning" the Irish Members. As to the charges themselves, Mr. O'Connell believed that they would be found to be " utterly baseless—that they will be found to be mere miserable calumnies." The appointment of paid Guardians had now ceased for nearly three years, and for that time Dr. Gray must have kept these charges locked up in his breast. If any gentleman had presumed to consult Mr. O'Connell upon the details of such a transaction, he did not know whether he might not be hurried to some act of heat, but this he knew—not for one day, one hour, or one minute, would he consent to bottle up the subject. Dr. Gray has placed himself in this position—to some extent he is an accomplice in the matter. As to Mr. Kelly, he actually lent his aid in this " gross, base, disgraceful, infamous, and unconstitutional proceeding." They were much indebted to Mr. Butt for taking up the question ; but it ought not to have been left to him. There were Members of Parliament present at the dinner, and they were bound either to vindicate their brother Members, to join in the denun- ciation, or bring the matter before Parliament. Lord JOHN EnssErm said—" I think the House cannot have the slightest hesitation in acceding to the motion." (Cheers.) It was due to the honour of Parliament and to the character of the Government and the Irish Members. They had Dr. Gray and Mr. Kelly, the persons who made the charges, and therefore they had the means of investigation : and " I trust that investigation will be pursued to the utmost extent." Mr. Joins BALL said, he thought he could contribute a little informa- tion as to one of the transactions. The Government were not, as had been stated, responsible for the appointments of paid Guardians. The persons who were responsible were Mr. Twisleton, the late Chief Pour- law Commissioner in Ireland, the present Chief Commissioner Mr. Power, or "the humble individual who now addresses the House." Mr. Ball vindicated the characters of the two former. Fortunately, he had in-- troduced the practice of requiring that every recommendation connected with appointments should be made by public official letters ; "and I be lieve every single appointment made—at least during the time I was con- nected with the department—can be traced to official letters." He earnestly hoped these transactions or allegations would receive a most searching investigation.
Mr. LucAs said, as an appeal had been made to him, it would be un- becoming in him not to offer a few observations. He was not personally cognizant of the two cases stated by Dr. Gray and Mr. Kelly, but he was present when they were stated. One he had never heard of before ; but the other he had heard stated by Dr. Gray on many previous occasions. That was part of his answer to the complaint that Dr. Gray had never stated this case of corruption.
Though in no way mixed up with these particular accusations, Mr. Lucas said that he approved of the line of argument they were meant to illustrate. " I have frequently," he continued, " brought similar accusations in a general way myself. (A laugh, and cries of "Bear, hear!") I believe
them to be true. I have no doubt whatever they are true; and I will say
this—that it is utterly impossible for any gentleman to take a part in the political conversation that goes on with reference to the management of pub-
lic affairs in Ireland, without hearing, very frequently, cases of this kind
mentioned upon evidence which it is impossible for any man to disbelieve. The difficulty in dealing with cases of the kind is simply this: you hear a
case mentioned—it is mentioned to you in private as a matter of conversa- tion, by persons well acquainted with the facts, by persons whose evidence you cannot disbelieve; but you are not at liberty to mention their names ; you cannot break the seal of confidence under which the facts have been re- vealed to you. I have heard many Members of this House relate facts of a similar kind, and I believe it is utterly impossible for any gentleman ac-
quainted with the details of political atthirs to disbelieve that such transac- tions as this have taken place." Mr. Lucas went on to show, that the Times did not make its accusations solely on the statements of Dr. Gray and Mr. Kel- ly. Months before, in September last, the Times made a very much stronger statement. It was a delicate subject to pry into the mysteries of newspapers, but "we know it is not nobody who writes the articles in the Times.' "I don't know—perhaps nobody in this House knows—whether the article in question may not have been written by a Secretary of State. (Laughter from the Opposition.) Perhaps, at all events, it may have been written by a Secre- tary to a Board." (Cries of "Hear !" and renewed laughter from the Opposi- tion.) At any rate, one of the proprietors of the Times "is a Member of this House—a supporter, not the least efficient supporter, of the present Govern- ment," and cognizant of the rumours and talk of the Treasury-bench. Mr. Lucas expressed his belief that the accusations brought against the Irish Mem- bers generally are unfounded. He had not brought any accusation against Irish Members who sat on that [the Opposition] side of the House. (" Hear, hear !" from the Opposition, and ironical cheers from the Ministerial side.) His ac- cusations had been directed against those " who for a long course of years have been connected in a commerce of corruption by successive Whig Govern- ments." (Opposition cheers.) Mr. Lucas referred to the charge of corruption brought last cession by Mr. Duffy ; and proceeded to read and comment upon an article from the Times published in September last, showing that the Irish liemh'ts are a truculent yet convenient body, eager for place, and easily managed by gifts of places; that " the proper field for an Irish patriot's exertions is not the House of Commons but the Treasury" ; and that "the Irish Member is a very serviceable animal—all the more serviceable for not being nice in his habits." (Great laughter.) "It is not too much to say," con- tinued the article, " that hardly a single measure would have passed for the last twenty years but for this facile and well-paid Swiss corps. Mr. Lucas asserted that by this system the Whigs maintained themselves for a series of years in power. He mentioned that facts had been stated to him, but he was not at liberty to name his authority. [This statement was met by laughter.] " Well, honourable gentlemen opposite seem to think that throws some doubt on the accuracy of the statement?" (Minis- terial cheers.) Then, addressing the Irish Members on the Ministerial bencheih. he said, " You don't wish to hear the statement made (Cries of " no!" and counter-cheering.) You wish to have a decent veil thrown over the inevitable infamy. ("No, no !") Oh, then, you do wish to have the facts stated ? (A laugh.) The facts were, that a man came to a friend with 91. offering that sum for a place. He asked the man why he brought 91. ; and the man said, that was the exact sum given by the person whose death had created the vacancy, " to such and such a Member of Parliament, naming him." (Cries of "Name.," but Air. Lucas did not name.) He went on to say, that just before the Parliament met in which the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was to be proposed, Mr. Sheil, in reply to a question, said " 'Lord John Russell has calculated everything minutely., —' [some one con- nected with the Treasury] holds the Irish Members in the hollow of his hand.' " (" Hear, hear !" and laughter.) Mr. Sheil had explained what was meant by one gentleman holding many other gentlemen in the hollow of his hand, in this way : when the Government is hard pressed, a circular is sent round, stating that such and such a place was vacant, and that it awaited their recommendation to have it filled up ; and that the place is not filled up until after the division. Mr. Sheil added, that Members sold these recommendations to brokers. The Committee would not find that they had nothing to inquire into. Mr. Lucas said he had telegraphed to Dublin to tell Dr. Gray .what had occurred, and only five minutes before he rose to speak he received this message from Dr. Gray—" I am ready to attend at tho bar of the House." (Cheers.) Mr. Tuoires DUNCOMBE hoped the Committee would at all events have Mr. Lucas before them. Mr. Lucas said he believed the facts stated to be perfectly true, and Mr. Duncombe was sure Mr. Lucas would not say that unless he had reason for the belief. Mr. Duncombe drew attention, not to an after-dinner speech, but to a statement made on oath by a Mem- ber of that House before the Court of Chancery. The statement was made by Mr. George Hudson, that be had distributed 63001. in shares " to cer- tain persons of influence connected with the landed interest and Parlia- ment," to secure their good offices ; but that he could not disclose their names, as he had distributed the shares under a pledge of secrecy. Mr. Duncombe quoted an article from the Times' calling for an investigation. Would not Lord John Russell, he asked, take some notice of the subject when he brings in his bill to prevent the bribery and corruption of the poor electors ? Is a man who takes a pot of beer or five sovereigns to be placed in comparison with those who corrupt Members of Parliament ? He must say, that Mr. Hudson, in having to disgorge the large sum of 54,0001. would be the most ill-used of men, unless the parties he corrupted returned him the money [that is, the 63001.] he was compelled to return to the company.
The motion was agreed to without dissent. [As soon as the discussion, which was listened to with the utmost interest, was brought to a close, a general movement was made on the part of Members towards the door, and a buzz of excited conversation immediately succeeded to the deep si- lence which had been maintained throughout the debate.]
On the following day, Mr. HUDSON came down to the House and of- fered a vindication of his conduct, which was very coldly listened to. He complained that Mr. Duncombe had given no notice of his intention to bring his name forward. " On my honour," he said, " I never made or intended to make any charge against any Member of this House." It was utterly impossible for any gentleman to charge him with ever having said, directly or indirectly, that he ever tampered with a Member of that House. "The charge is as false and malicious as it is unjust and untrue." Mr. Duncombe had talked of disgorging ; but no tribunal would say that " what I am called upon to disgorge, I ever, to a large extent, received." Therefore his position was one of misfortune—" I have been morally right but legally wrong." Mr. Hudson, much affected, alluded to his transition from pros- perity to adversity. He invited his accusers to "take me from my cradle and follow me to this day, and fix upon me if they can any charge of dis- honourable conduct," and be would bid adieu to that House and his publie position. Mr. Hudson reiterated his innocence ; and gloried in the public works he had done—works projected "in the plenitude of my power' —end condemned at the moment, but nearly every one of which he had lived to see carried out—" works which will beat comparison with that honourable Member's [Mr. Duncombe's] conduct either in putdio or in private life." "If money had been my sole object, means were placed in my power of such a gigantic nature that I might have revelled in it to any amount." He re- peated the invitation to appoint a Committee to follow him from his cradle to the present day. "I am ready to meet inquiry."
Here the subject dropped.
DESPATCH OF BUSINESS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. On the motion of Sir JOHN PAXINGTON, a Select Committee was ap. pointed to consider whether by any alterations in the forms and proceed. ings of the House the despatch of public business could be more effectually promoted.
The SPEAKER said, he had prepared a manual of the forms and orders of the House ; and he submitted whether it would not be well to refer that manual to the Committee.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that it be so referred.
MEDICAL Pitearrriorenns.
Mr. BEADY has obtained leave to bring in a bill for the registration of qualified practitioners, and for amending the law relating to the practice of medicine in Great Britain and Ireland. As the law stands, any un- principled person can call himself a physician, surgeon, or apothecary. The bill would give to the medical profession the same protection which is extended to other professions and trades.
DISTRICT PAUPER SCHOOLS.
Lord L•frreLeme inquired whether Government intend to propose any measure for the establishment of district pauper schools in single unions where they are sufficiently populous, or in a congregation of unions where they are small, which should be entirely unconnected with the workhouse. The Inspectors appointed some years ago had strongly tes. tified that no adequate good is attainable from workhouse schools. A " permissive " power was given to boards of guardians to establish schools, but it had remained a dead letter.
Earl GRANVILLE entirely concurred with Lord Lyttelton as to the in- effectiveness of workhouse schools. The schoolmasters experience the greatest inconvenience : they are subject to the jealousy of the work- house master ; they have to deal with children whose inherited physical and moral constitutions require to be treated with more than ordinary care ; yet they are debarred from employing industrial training, and they are badly paid. The boys are contaminated by the language they too fre- quently hear, and the girls are brought up in communication with the mothers of illegitimate children. He believed the plan suggested by Lord Lyttelton to be one of the best that could be devised for putting an end to hereditary pauperism ; which had, in truth, become an hereditary disease. There had been cases in which the same family names appeared on the workhouse-books for upwards of a century 1 Lord Palmerston has been anxiously considering the subject with the view of framing a practical measure, which he hoped might be introduced during the pre- sent session.
CRIMINAL CODE OF MALTA.
In reply to a question from the Earl of Siterreennier respecting the criminal code of Malta, the Duke of NEWCASTLE said, he should be most happy to afford the fullest information in his power. At the close of last session, a question bad been raised in the other House of Parliament effecting the criminal code of Malta. That code, as their Lordships were aware, had been under the consideration of successive Go- vernments, as well as the Legislative Councils of Malta, for many years. Numerous attempts had been made to reform that code ; but the greatest difficulties had always intervened, and it was not until the end of last session that any effort for that purpose had been successful. A code, however, was then adopted ; and, under the circumstances of the case, although olleions had been taken to a portion of it, the Government felt that it would most undesirable to throw back upon the island the consideration of the whole code, more particularly as the objections whioh had been taken to it here applied to one clause only relating to offences against religion. It would be remembered that power had been reserved to the Crown to enact ordinances upon this subject by an order in Council. A bill is now before the Council for that purpose; and he had advised that the code, as it had been sent home, should be reenacted, with the single omission of the chapter relating to offenees against religion. Lord Josh RUSSELL gave a similar reply to a question put by Mr. KINNAIRD.
THE REFORM Brat.
Lord JOCELYN asked whether " the leader of the House of Commons" intended " to bring under the consideration of the House on Monday the 13th the proposed measure of reform at this period, when the foreign relations of this country are so urgent." Lord. JOHN RUSSELL.prOinptly replied—" I will answer that question on Monday the 13th." (A laugh.)
HILITLL
In reply to Mr. Blume, Lord PALMERSTON stated, that in a measure to consolidate the Militia laws, he should propose that a Militia force should be organized for Scotland ; the period of enrolment to depend on the votes of the House. And in reply to a similar question put by Colonel DUNNE with regard to Ireland, Lord P.iissz.uszoN said, " I see no reason for placing the three countries on a different footing."
PORTUGUESE CLAIMS: BREACH OF TREATY.
Mr. Twonces CHAMBERS moved for a Select Committee to investigate the claims of Yuille, Sbortridge, and Company, against the Portuguese Government, for losses incurred through breach of treaty. The case was shortly this. Yuille, Shortridge, and Company, were wine-merchants, who had given a bond for 21,0001. to one Oliveira, a Portuguese. An action was brought on the bond, and judgment given again and again fae the defendants. But they were still pursued even into courts to wino by treaty British subjects are not amenable, up to 1848, when the plain' tiff died. The company had lost 100,0001. by this litigation. Mr. HORSFALL seconded the motion. No country had received more from this country than Portugal, and none bad been mere ungrateful Since 1815 she had been paid 2,850,0001. in order to induce her to sup' press the slave-trade ; and the means she adopted to carry out such sup- pression are patent to the world. Mr. ATHERTON and Mr. DIOBY SEYMOUR. supported the motion. Lord JOHN Russell, opposed it. He pointed out, that claims come be fore the Home Government for eettlement in different ways. Gene011-1 speaking, they are settled by the foreign Government at the instance of our representatives. But sometimes they involve considerable nicety, and are referred home ; and sometimes, as in the case of America, they are settled by arbitration. To introduce a subject of this kind to the House, would be unusual, dangerous, and a bad precedent, as it would be agreeing to more violent proceedings than have yet been adopted or thought justifiable. He was not defending the Portuguese Government in this or several other cases; but it would be inexpedient to go into the ease without the papers, and he must oppose the motion.
Mr. Burr said that Lord John's speech was no answer to the case which had been made out. Portugal had stipulated in treaties ever since 1654, that disputes involving British subjects in Madeira should be adjudicated in certain courts. In this case those courts decided in favour of the de- fendants ; yet, in violation of the treaty, they are harassed about through successive courts. He thought that laying a voluminous correspondence before the House would not be the best way of getting at the facts.
After speeches in support of the motion from Sir Joan SHELLEY and Mr. OLIVEIRA, the House divided—For the motion, 126 ; against it, 74. The motion was consequently carried by a majority of 62.
RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.
Lord MobrrEaoLn asked the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, whether he would object to lay before the House, as speedily as possible,
the returns of railway accidents down to the present period ; and also to keep Parliament informed of such accidents as occur from time to time ? It is some time since any efficient returns have been laid before them and unless public attention were immediately called to the facts, efficient responsibility would never be reestablished. As to the excuses offered by companies for accidents, he attached no importance whatever to them. They were asked to compare the number of accidents with the number of
persons who travel ; and they were told that the question should be passed by with indifference, the proportion is so small. He could not recog-
nize that doctrine; for so long as any accident occurred which could have been averted, they were bound to inquire into it. Not the propor- tion, but the actual damage to life and limb, must be looked to.
Earl Frrzwlia,tsar suggested, that there were certain reasons—he would not exactly say what—that might render it desirable to commence legis- lation on the subject in the House of Lords. Perhaps it might not be desirable to state the reasons openly, but he left them to the silent con- templation of the Government.
Lord STANLEY of ALnzauxv said, Government is anxious to apply a practical remedy to the evil. The President of the Board of Trade has given notice that he intends to introduce a measure which might correct some of the evils ; and the fact that a Committee of the other House has inquired into and reported upon the subject affords a reason why the measure should be first introduced into the other House. Great conve- nience, however, would result from Lord Monteagle's suggestion ; and he proposed not only that the reports of the accidents of last year should be laid on the table, but that reports of accidents as they occur should at once be published.
Earl GI= said, he was not sanguine that the other House would send up an effectual bill. But their Lordships have the power in their own
hands. They may determine not to grant any new powers for amalga-
mation or extension without a thorough inquiry how the companies have used for the public interests the power already possessed, or without in- serting in the bill such clauses as may be necessary for the efficient pro- tection of the public. Great abuses in railway management prevail : the most common is that of companies fighting against companies at the expense of others.
Lord CAMPBELL was of opinion that new legislation on the subject is indispensably necessary. The rights of her Majesty's subjects are not sufficiently protected. Lord Campbell pointed out two defects in the present laws. One is, that railway companies are not liable for any unlawful acts done by their ser- vants. Persons travelling by railway are frequently imprisoned at stations and barbarously treated; but when they bring an action, the company say, "we gave no orders to warrant the proceeding," and the plaintiff is non- suited, although it might he proved that the offending policeman or porter had acted under thi orders of the stationmaster. The second point relates to contracts. When an action on a contract is brought against a railway company, they say, "As a corporation we can only contract under our cor- poration-seal, and unless you can show that the contract is under that seal, you must be nonsuited." Such is the law. It may be applied to all cor- porations, with one convenient if not necessary exception—municipal cor- porations can hire cooks without contracting for their services under the corporation-seal! (Laughter.)
HOLL BRIBERY COMMISSION.
Mr. Wnsox PATTEN noticed that the report of the Hull Bribery Com- mission contained the enormous number of 2000 pages ; its weight was eleven tone six hundredweight ; 82,000 questions were put to the wit- nesses; and the cost of printing only, for both Houses, was 17501. Had any questions been put to the Commissioners as to what rendered this enormous expense necessary? Mr. WiLsoie said, the Treasury had exercised every power to mark its disapprobation of the excessive expenditure caused by this report. The Commissioners received five guineas a day, and usually 501. each for pre- paring the report ; but the latter had been disallowed. The report was signed by only two out of the three Commissioners ; and these two, he believed, had done all they could to bring the inquiry to an earlier termi- nation.
Previous page
