The Press.
London, England, 1856-06-07 00:00:00

porteVings x arliantent.

APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE TIOUSE OF LORDS.

on Tuesday, on tho order for going into cora-

mittee,
Lord CAMPBELL rose to deny a statement that he
had expressed his `0 admiration "of the bill. There
was nothing in it to admire. The bill went to
remedy certain grievances, and he approved of it,
without regarding it with admiration.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said he wished to remark,
before going into committee, that the bill contained
no reference to Scotch appeals. His opinion was
that all Scotch appeals should be removed from
the jurisdiction of the house, and referred to a court
of final appeal for Scotland, composed of persons of
great weight and authority. He admitted, indeed,
that the sentiments which be had expressed were
not general in Scotland, but he believed that they
would gain ground, and that the day was not far
distant when Scotch appeals would be banished from
the house.
The Earl of DERBY said that while Lord Abcrdeen
maintained his peculiar opinions he was forced to
admit that the sensible people of Scotland were
satisfied with the present system of appeals. With
regard to himself, lie could only say that, though on
the committee he had stated the case of Scotch ap-
peals as constituting one of several objections raised
against the existing system, he had carefully ab-
stained from committing himself to any of those
objections ; nor did he think that any such case had
been made out in Scotch appeals as to call for a
change in the existing jurisdiction. He was at a
loss to understand what Lord Aberdeen meant, for
first he advocated the entire removal of Scotch
appeals, and then he contended for the right of a
Scotch judge to sit in the supreme tribunal of that
house. Now, though the bill did not necessarily
place a Scotch judge on the appellate bench, it did
not exclude them, and, in fact, the Scotch judges in
this respect stood exactly in the same position as the
other judges of the United Kingdom.
L )rd CAMPBELL explained to the house the posi-
tion which Lird Wensleydale would fill in conse-
quence of the refusal of the Government to create
him an hereditary peer. The noble lord would be
perfectly free to represent the city of London, or any
borough, in the other house.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave his support to
the bill, but remarked that the resolution of the
house which excluded Lord Wensleydale was only
an expression of opinion, and could not have the
force of an act of Parliament.

Lord FITZWILLIAM expressed his opinion that the
house had got into a difficulty from which it could
not be extricated by the present bill.
Lord ORANVILLK admitted the difficulty, but
hoped the case of the house was not so hopeless as
Lord Fitzwilliam seemed to suppose. The Govern-
ment had advised the Crown to exercise what it
considered was a part of the royal prerogative. A
large majority, however, among whom were many
noble lords of no particular party, thought differently.
The whole matter of the appellate jurisdiction was
then considered, he was bound to say, in no party
spirit, and the result had been the present measure,
which tended to remedy an acknowledged evil—the
weakness of the appellate jurisdiction of the house.
The Government had thought it desirable to come to
a satisfactory arrangement of the question in dispute,
but it did this without admitting that it was wrung
in the course it had originally proposed, and still
less that any resolution of the house could bind the
Crown.

-Lord DERBY acknowledged the spirit of fairness in
which the Government had acted throughout this

discussion.

Their lordships then want into committee, and the
clauses of the bill were agreed to.
On Thursday, on the report of amendments on
this bill being brought up,
Lord MINTO moved a modification of the Bth
clause and the addition of a proviso that nothing in
the act should be construed as limiting tile rights of
the prerogative.
The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed himself of
opinion that the bill ought to be allowed to pass as it
then stood, without any amendment.
Lord DENMAN believed the bill would satisfy no
one. He thought it right to be distinctly under-
stood, with regard to Lord Wensleydale and others,
that a peerage was granted for past services, and not
as a Condition for performing future work. He was
so opposed to the measure, and so convinced of its
inexpediency, that he would move that it be read a
see md time that day six months.
The LORD CHANCELLOR informed the noble lord he
could not then move such an amendment. _

Lord DENMAN gave notice that he would do so on
the question that the bill be read a third time, and
divide the house upon it.
The Earl of MINTo withdrew his suaendment, and
The report was received.

THE PRESS.

OUR RELATIONS WITH AMERICA.

Mr. DISRAELI, on Thursday evening, rose and
said :

Seeing the noble lor3 at the head of the Government in
his place, I take the opportunity of inquiring whether it
be true that our Minister at Washington has quitted that
capital at the request of the President of United States ;
and, if that report be true, whether it is the intention of
the Government to make any statement to the house to-
day as to the relations at present existing between this
country and the United States?
Lord PALMERSTON replied :

Her Majesty's Government have received information
indirectly of the fact to which the question of the right
hon. gentleman has reference, that Mr. Crampton had
received his passports and bad quitted Washington for
Toronto. There has been notking received from him as
yet, and I have no further statement to make at present.
Lord GRANVILLE, in the House of Lords, in reply
to a quf stion from Lord Hardwicke on the same sub-
ject, said her Majesty's Government had received no
official intimation on the subject.