66 that though the disarmament, which I should heartily wish to see take place immediately as preliminary to the Congress, is not yet decided on, yet that both Austria and Piedmont have formally made a declaration that they will not attack one another, and that they will abstain from hostilities. Therefore, unless some untoward and almost impossible accident should occur, we may hope that peace will not be broken, and that the Congress, which will probably assemble at the end of next month, will eventuate in those results which your Lordships and all Europe desire. MANOR COURTS, ETC. (IRELAND) BILL. THIRD READING. Order of the Day for the Third Reading read. invariably decided in favour of the plaintiff. "Do you mean, one of the witnesses was asked, "that the plaintiff's always obtain verdicts?" "I don't mean to say that," he replied, "but I say this, that the plaintiff's win in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred." Another of the defects of these courts was that their patents were vague, many of them having never been translated out of the barbarous Latin in which they were originally drawn up. Disputes as to jurisdiction were constant; the seneschals being paid by fees of course had an interest in extending the limits of the manors; while, on the other hand, the defendants contending that the senesoften disputed the decrees, and the consechals had overstepped their jurisdiction, quence was not unfrequently riot and criminal charges therefrom arising. Another objection was that the courts were often held in public-houses, and the juries had to decide without having the advantage of a retiring room, but sitting amongst the suitors, and amidst temptations to drink and riot. Many other ob Moved, that the Bill be now read 3a. THE EARL OF LEITRIM urged two objections to the measure; first, that it provided no compensation for the lords of manors, who by its operation would lose their present right of appointing the offi-jections might be urged to these courts, cers of the manor courts; and, secondly, that no case had been made out for interfering with the manor courts at all. The noble Lord moved, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE said, that the disclosures made before the Committee of the House of Commons in 1837 proved to demonstration that there were in the constitution of those courts defects inherent in the system of such a character that it was impossible but that injustice should be wrought so long as they continued. He admitted that it was most unfortunate that the evil had not been corrected long ago; but the lapse of time had neither weakened the case nor removed the necessity for legislation. It was in the power of lords of manors to appoint any person as seneschal who could give security to the amount of £500, and though in some cases they had taken pains, in others they had shown carelessness in their selection. Then the class of jurors was objectionable. Many persons were in the habit of serving as jurors for the sake of the treat of liquor which they received from the suitors. In the next place, the plaintiffs were generally money lenders, the defendants people of the poorer class. The result had been, as broadly stated by the witnesses, that the cases were almost but enough had, he thought, been said to prove that Her Majesty's Government had exercised a wise discretion in proposing to abolish them altogether. In some places the bailiffs and officers of the courts were in the habit of acting as attorneys, and it appears that in one case a woman was in the habit, for a fee of one ls., of undertaking the cause of one or the other party to the suit. He trusted that, for the sake of the dignity of public justice, their Lordships would consent to abolish these courts. As to the other objection raised by his noble Friend, that the Lords of these manors ought to be compensated for the loss of their rights of appointing the judges, how would the noble Earl measure the value of a right of nomination to an office which was paid, not out of fixed property, but which was remunerated by fees for services performed? If an officer received fees, what did he receive them for? For discharging certain duties, and the fees were only paid accordas he performed the duty. Let him cease to perform the duty, and from that hour he ceased to be entitled to fees. was the right of nomination to these offices worth anything? Was it worth a shilling? He confessed he did not think it was. Had he such patronage he certainly should refuse to exercise it. The right of nomination was worth nothing; and, therefore, Then the Lords of manors could have no possible claim for compensation. The question of compensation for the seneschals themselves was quite another thing. An appeal from the manor courts could only be brought now to the assizes; but by the present Bill an appeal would lie from the petit sessions courts to the court of quarter sessions, so that disputes might be settled more speedily and more cheaply. He trusted that their Lordships would concur in the third reading of a measure which would effect a great improvement in the law. THE EARL OF BANDON hoped that the Amendment would be withdrawn, as he thought the Bill contained some beneficial alterations. VISCOUNT DUNGANNON said, the existing system was a mockery of justice. Disgraceful scenes of drinking, carousing, and riot often took place in the publichouses where these courts were held; and a great boon would result from the abolition of the courts in favour of the substitute provided by this Bill. THE EARL OF LEITRIM made a few remarks in reply. Amendment withdrawn. Motion agreed to. rally. At present the only remedy the companies have against parties committing this fraud is by civil action; the Bill renders it punishable by fine and imprisonment, in the same manner as other violations of the by-laws. Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a ; agreed to. Bill read 2 accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday next. House adjourned at Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, March 28, 1859. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.—3o Petitions of Right ; Affidavits by Commission, &c. VOTE OF WANT OF CONFIDENCE. MR. W. O. STANLEY: I beg leave to give notice, that in consequence of the very Bill read 3 accordingly, with the Amend- explicit declaration made by the Attorney ments. Amendments moved, and negatived. Bill passed, and sent to the Commons. RAILWAY TICKETS TRANSFER BILL. SECOND READING. Order of the day for Second Reading read. LORD REDESDALE. in moving the second reading of this Bill, said its object was to meet a grievance under which railway companies suffered with reference to the Transfer of Railway Tickets, one which had pressed more particularly on the Brighton Railway. The public enjoyed great advantages through the instrumentality of these return tickets, which to accommodate the public, were issued at a cheap rate, but which, owing to their being fraudulently transferred in the way they were, resulted in a loss to the company. The Brighton Company, in one of their own private Bills this Session, desired a clause should be inserted to correct this evil, but he (Lord Redesdale) objected to conferring on one railway the privileges another did not possess; but having considered the subject, he now proposed the present Bill, which would meet the case in connection with railways gene General for Ireland, in the course of the debate on Friday last, that he should consider a vote in favour of the Resolution of the noble Lord the Member for London as tantamount to a vote of censure, I shall withdraw my notice of a vote of want of confidence in Her Majesty's Government. BONDING WAREHOUSES. QUESTION. MR. HADFIELD said, he wished to inquire of Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if Government propose to give Bonding Warehouses to large manufacturing towns. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that subject had been very much considered by the Government; and he had to state that it was not at present their intention to establish a system of Bonded Warehouses in the manufacturing towns. TIE LICENSING SYSTEM (SCOTLAND). QUESTION. SIR ANDREW AGNEW said, he rose to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is prepared to state the names of the gentlemen composing the Royal Commision appointed to inquire into the working of the Public Houses Act (Scotland), and whether the inquiry intended to extend to the whole | its advantages, it will be open to them to licensing system in Scotland? THE LORD ADVOCATE said, that as the names of the Commissioners whom it was proposed to appoint in that case had not yet received the sanction of the Crown, it would be irregular for him to communicate them to the House; and with respect to the second part of the question he had to state that it was proposed the inquiry should be as extensive as possible, and should embrace every subject which could fairly come within the scope of the labours of the Commissioners. REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL. QUESTION. MR. DARBY GRIFFITH said, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the plan of uniformity of franchise between Counties and Boroughs is considered by Government to form an essential principle of the proposed Representation of the People Bill, on which the fate of the Bill is to depend; or whether, on the contrary, it is only one of those details which, though forming part of the original suggestions of Government, is to be considered to be open to any alteration or omission in Committee which this House in its wisdom may determine upon ? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, in answering the question of my hon. Friend, I would venture to call the attention of the House to the extremely inconvenient manner in which this Bill to amend the Representation of the People is debated. It is debated, if I may use the expression, wholesale and retail. We have had it treated wholesale for four nights in a debate which has been sustained on both sides with unflagging interest and unfaltering power; and I shall be perfectly ready, when the opportunity shall be afforded to me to vindicate the policy and to explain the intentions of Her Majesty's Government. I must however say, in answer to my hon. Friend, as I have already said in answer to a question from an hon. Gentleman on the other side of the House, that I cannot, within the scope of a fair answer, give the information which he desires. Speaking generally, I would say that we have placed before the House a measure which expresses the policy which the Government would recommend. If there are any Gentlemen who think that on the whole the disadvantages of the course which we recommend counterbalance or overweigh vote against the second reading of the Bill. That is the legitimate course. If the Bill goes into Committee I shall, on the part of the Government, listen to any proposition that is made on any Clause, in that spirit of candour which becomes the Government. If the decision at which the Committee arrives on any definite proposition is contrary to the course which the Government has recommended, then it will be open to us to consider that decision, and act in the manner which we think our duty justifies. MAIL CONTRACTS. QUESTION. MR. COWPER said, that as some persons had, from an answer given by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer a few nights ago, derived the impression that the Government were prepared to enter into a Contract for Mail Service without any reference to the House of Commons, he wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether he intends to commit the Government to the expense of a third Mail Service to North America, in addition to the two Mail Services, for which a sum of £176,340 is inserted in the Packet Estimate, before a Vote for this purpose can be submitted in Committee of Supply. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER:-Sir, it is my duty to answer the question of the right hon. Gentleman. The Contract to which he alludes is not completed, but is at present before the Admiralty, for their consideration. tract relates to a Service which would not commence this year, and therefore there will be no necessity to take a Vote on account of it. That con MASTERS OF THE INDIAN NAVY. QUESTION. COLONEL FREESTUN said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether it is proposed to grant to the Masters of the Indian Navy the same privileges regarding Pensions and Furlough to Europe which the other Officers of the Indian Service enjoy? LORD STANLEY said, there could be no doubt that the position of the masters in the Indian navy was in many respects anomalous and unsatisfactory; but the question what steps should be taken to improve their condition was included in an other and a much wider one, namely, what were the arrangements which should for the future be adopted with regard to the Indian mail. He was in communication with the Governor General upon that sub ject, and he expected shortly to hear from him; but in the meantime he could not undertake to answer the question of the hon. and gallant Member. was, to leave out from the word "That," to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "This House is of opinion, that it is neither just nor politic to interfere, in the manner proposed in this Bill, with the Freehold Franchise as hitherto exercised in the Counties in England and Wales; satisfy this Ilouse or the Country, which does not and that no re-adjustment of the Franchise will provide for a greater extension of the Suffrage in Cities and Boroughs than is contemplated in the present Measure," THE LOMBARDO-VENETIAN QUESTION. instead thereof. EXPLANATION. MR. WHITESIDE :-Sir, before the House proceeds to the Orders of the Day I have to ask its indulgence for a few minutes. At the close of the debate on Friday night the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Viscount Palmerston) said, that I had misstated the proposal made by the Austrian Government with reference to Italy in 1848, and that that offer was only that Lombardy should be constituted a Duchy, under the control of an Austrian Grand Duke. In consequence of the confusion occasioned by the departure of Members from the House, I have been reported to have said that I acknowledged I was mistaken. I made no such acknowledgment, nor do I intend to do so. On the 24th of May, which was a date subsequent to that to which the noble Lord referred, the following offer was made to him, as appeared No. 377 among the documents paper relating to those occurrences:— from It MR. EDWIN JAMES said, he rose to state briefly the reasons why he should support the Resolution of the noble Lord the Member for the City of London. was a very remarkable feature of this debate that not a single Member unconnected with the Treasury Bench had addressed the House who had not, to use the language of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, condemned," wholesale and retail," the vital and substantial principles of the measure. The Resolution of the noble Lord the Member for the City of London, was directed against the three main principles of the Bill. It asked the House to affirm that the enfranchisement contemplated by the Bill was unsatisfactory and inadequate; that the proposed disfranchisement was unjust and a violation of the ancient constitutional franchises of the country; and that the non-extension of the franchise in boroughs doomed to disappointment a large and intelligent class of the community. How had the Resolution been met? It had not been debated merely upon its merits, but the hon. and learned Solicitor General, departing from the ordinary practice of Parliament, had thought it right to im pute personal motives to its author. The country had been warned by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Colonies against Americanizing the House of Commons; but he thought that no more effectual mode of Americanizing the debates of that House could be adopted than that of introducing per REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL. sonal attacks into so grave and impor SECOND READING. ADJOURNED DEBATE.- -FIFTH NIGHT. Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment proposed to Question [21st March], "That the Bill be now read a second time;" and which Amendment tant a discussion as the present. When the hon. and learned Solicitor General rose on Friday to repel an insinuation made against him by the hon. Member for Dovor, showing that he was rather thinskinned himself on the subject of personal attacks, he (Mr. Edwin James) certainly some half-dozen men here, or obviate the objections of some half-dozen there-to regard it as a great triumph of Parliamentary skill and Ministerial strength to scramble through the Session of Parliament, and to boast of having met with few and insignificant defeats-I say this is a state of nister, and which cannot be of advantage to the things which cannot be satisfactory to any MiCrown, or to the people of this country. But, my Lords, to enter on the duties of office, not with a precarious majority, but with a sure minority of the other House of Parliament-to be aware that from day to day you were liable to defeats at any moment by the combination of parties amounting to a sure majority and only waiting for the moment when it would be most convenient to introduce Motions for the attainment of such an end; to be a Minister on sufferance; to hold such a position without any security for enforcing your own views; with the fear of exposing your own friends and the country-your friends to perpetual mortification, and the country to constant disappointment-to undertake the responsibilities and the duties of office under such circumstances, and in such a state of things, would be such an intolerable and galling servitude as no man of honour or character would voluntarily expose himself to, and such as no man willingly would submit to, except from motives of the purest patriotism, and on proof of the absolute necessity of such selfsacrifice."-[3 Hansard, cxxxvi. 1336.] expected that he would express some traordinary and unusual occasions, he would be apology for an imputation of motives incon-enabled with life and energy to carry out his plans, sistent with the rules of that House, and and to mature and accomplish his objects, and practically as well as nominally control and gowhich every one who knew the position vern the legislation and internal economy of this and character of the noble Lord felt to be great country. On the other hand, to hold that entirely unmerited. But, to pass from that high and responsible situation dependent for suppoint, he wished to enter his protest against port from day to day upon precarious and uncertain majorities, compelled to cut down this meathe publication of a letter written by Earl sure, and to pare off that- to consider with reGrey to the noble Lord the Member for gard to each measure not what was for the real Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) on the sub-welfare of the country, but what would conciliate ject of the present Bill; because he (Mr. Edwin James) thought there could be no course more inconvenient than that upon the eve of a great debate in the House of Commons, a noble Lord, not reserving the expression of his opinions for the proper place and opportunity, should address a letter to a representative of the people in that House, which not merely suggested to him how to vote, but which told him that it might be made public for the purpose of influencing the votes of others, and which almost imputed factious motives to the noble Lord the Member for the City of London. That was a practice which was highly inconvenient. If the letter of Earl Grey had been written to any constituency, or any elector pending an election, it would have been an infraction of the Resolution which that House passed in 1802, declaring that no Peer should concern himself in an election; and, even as it was, he regarded it as a highly inconvenient and objectionable interference with the proceedings of the House of Commons. Lord Grey had written an Essay on Parliamentary Government, and while in his There never, in truth, was anything so letter he suggested that the Government prophetic as the speech of Lord Derby were the proper parties to introduce a Re-in 1855 which spoke among other things form Bill, in his pamphlet he said that the of the necessity of unanimity in the Caonly Government which could safely intro- binet. It was a political photograph of duce a measure of reform, or any great the present state of the Government. So constitutional change, was a strong Go- far from being unanimous, two Ministers vernment, and not one existing only on the had recently left the Cabinet, and the sufferance of a majority; and in the same country had learned from their revelawork he quoted a speech made by Lord tions that up to a few days before the Derby in the House of Lords on the 8th of introduction of the present Bill, there February, 1855, on the position of a Go. was no unanimity whatever in the Government existing upon a minority-exist-vernment upon its principal provisions. ing, in fact, from the want of cohesion among the Liberal party. The right hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), seemed to sit like Marius, "My Lords, I can conceive no object of higher looking down upon the ruins of the Admior nobler ambition, none more worthy of the nistration which he had abandoned, and anxiety of a true patriot and lover of his country, wondering how, during the death-struggles than to stand in the high and honourable position of the Chief Minister of the Crown and leader of of his former colleagues, they could perthe councils of this great Empire, assisted and sist in attempting to thrust their Bill upon supported by colleagues combined with him by the House and the country. No better unity of sentiment and mutual and personal re- illustration of the weakness of the Governspect, and with the knowledge that this and thement, and their unfitness to pass a Reform other House of Parliament would give to such a Minister the assurance that, except on most ex- Bill could be found than the surprising [Fifth Night. |