The Press.
London, England, 1858-06-19 00:00:00

592

On the order for going into committee upon the
Sale and Transfer of Lsnd (Ireland) Bill,
Mr. Sergeant DEASY called attention to the claims
of Master Flanigan, whose case was the subject of a
short discussion ; after which the house went into
committee upon the bill, and was occupied iu con-
sidering its clauses during the remainder of the
sitting.
THE 44 cAauem."
In the evening,
Mr. S. FITZGERALD, in reply to Mr. Sergeant Deasy,
stated that the arrangement by which the King of
Naples bad placed the Cagliari and her crew at the
disposal of ber Majesty was not made with the con-
currence of the Sardinian Government ; that the
vessel and her crew had been set at liberty without
any categorical demand on the part of the Govern-
ment of Sardinia.
MR. BARBER'S PETITION.
Mr. BRADY moved for a select committee to inquire
into the allegations contained in the petition of
William Henry Barber, and to consider and report
whether any and what redress should be afforded to
the petitioner ; or whether any and what other steps
should be taken in reference to the matters alleged.
He detailed the facts of the case, and dwelt upon
what he considered to be the wrongs and cruel treat-
ment of the petitioner.
Sir J. PAKINGTON observed that the case was so
peculiar in its nature that it might be fairly con-
sidered as an exception to the general rule ; but he
suggested an alteration in the wording of the motion,
so as to direct the inquiry of the committee into the
allegations of the petition, and whether any and what
steps should be taken with reference thereto.
After some remarks by Mr. BRIGHT and Mr.
Bavux, the motion, amended as suggested, was
agreed to.

Mr. BAXTER moved the following resolution :
That, in the opinion of this house, an Under• Secretary
of State for Scotland should be appointed, to perform the
political duties at present attached to the office of Lord
Advocate.

He urged the multifarious and anomalous duties
belonging to the office of Lord Advocate ; that these
duties being divided between London and Edinburgh,

...
it was difficult to find him when he was wanted; that

his judicial functions interfered with his political
duties, so that Scotland had only part of his time and
attention in either ; and that if there was an Under-
Secretary in that house to attend to the political
and general business of Scotland, the Lord Advocate
could devote his whole attention to his judicial
duties. He objected likewise to the undue influ-
ence which the present system gave to a practising
lawyer.
The motion was seconded by Mr. W. EWART.
Mr. BOOVERIR thought that Mr. Baxter had
failed to substantiate by any proof his allegation
that the duties cast upon the Lord Advocate were
neglected, or inefficiently performed. According to
his experience, the Scotch legislative business was
well managed, and he did not think that the pro-
posed change would be of any real benefit to
Scotland. Scotch business in that house could not
be well conducted, he said, by any but a Scotch
lawyer.
Mr. Snarnto supported the motion, suggesting,
however, an alteration in the wording of it.
Mr. E. ELLICE had a very strong opinion adverse
to the motion, which proposed to hand over the
affairs of Scotland, he said, not to a Secretary of
State, a member of the Cabinet (to such a proposi-
tion be should not be opposed), but to a mere
subordinate.
Sir J. Gown( likewise opposed the motion, not
being satisfied that the appointment of an Under-
Secretary of State for Scotland was desirable, or that
it would be useful or acceptable to the people of
Scotland.
Mr. CRAUFURD spoke strongly in favour of the
motion, which was opposed by
Mr. W. WiLuAms, who was not convinced of the
necessity of creating a new office.
The Low) ADVOCATE said, before be agreed to the
motion, he must be satisfied that the office was too
laoorious for an individual to perform ; that the
proposed change would really relieve the holder of
she office ; and that the portion of the duties trans-
ferred to the new officer would be performed as well
as they are at present ; and be could not assent to
any one of these propositions. He thought that if
an Underi.zecretary of State in the Home Depart
went were V.. be appointed who was to devote his
attention solely to Scotch business, he would not
know "hat to do toqh his time.
Lord DUNCAN opposed the motion, as well as
Lord PALMERSTON, 19510 said he could not concur
in the resolution for the reasons assigned especially
by the Lord Advocate. An Under Secretary of State
could not take the place of the Lord Advocate in
Scotch business in that liousc. The Secretary of
State for the Home Department wit responsible for
every act of the Crown pertaining to public affairs
in Scotland, in which he took the advice of the Lord
Advocate ; but if this resolution were adopted, in-