The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-26 00:00:00

I IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 25.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Fir.; O'CIOCk.

LEGAL EDUdATION.
Lord LYNDHURST asked the Chief Justice whether
he was satisfied with the present state of legal education?
Lord CAIIPBELL said ho thought the state of legal
education had hitherto been very disgraceful, but re-
cently steps had been taken to place this in a much
better condition, and he hoped that these improvements
would be carried much further.
Lord BROUGHAM said that, as a bencher of Lin-
coln's Inn, he wished to say that he thought it was the
desire of his brother benchers to carry the improvements
lately adopted much further. For his own part, he
thought the degrees sought to be conferred ought to be
the result of compulsory examination.
Earl GRANTILLE brought up the report of the
Select Committee on the mode of Printing the Papers
and Proceeditgs of the House, and made several sug-
gestions, the nature of which did not reach the gallery.
A short conversation ensued, in which Lord Redes-
dale, Brougham, Lord Monteagle, the Earl of
Derby,
took part, when the first and
On the thrd recommendation, via.:—"
second r Lordee o
and
mpL co
nrdd a Greyton s
of the report were adopted.
That in the
takingthpe amlaeneine oani Select Committee,
the Peer proposing
ethveenquestion
i v e
proposed,ion
the question, sad the respective votes thereupon of each
Peer present, Se entered on the minutes of evidence or
on the minutes of the proceedings of the Committee (as
the case may to), and then reported to the House on the
report of such Committee,"
The House divided....
Contents . 41
Non-contents e. ''•
Majority
THE LATE CONVENTION WITH FRANCE.
The Mewls of CLANRICARDE then asked the
question of which he had given notice—viz., whether
her Majestj's Government intend to announce to Par-
liament anycorrespondence with her Majesty's Ambas-
sador at Earls or the French Ambassador in London,
concerning the law lately enacted in France, which
occasioned tie withdrawal of the Surrender of Criminals
(Convention with France) Bill presented to the House.
The Noble Marquis then went on to say that the Bill on
this subject Which had been before the House had been
withdrawn without any explanation by the Noble Earl
opposite. The grounds of that Bill were assumed to be
the existence of a law in France—the law of 1808—
which in realty Was not now in force in that country.
To frame the Biel that had been withdrawn some treaty
must have existed with the French Government, and he
(the Marquis of Clanricarde) thought the House had a
right to know the cause of the withdrawal. He did not
under the circDmgtances, therefore, think that the Noble
Earl had
shown proper consideration either for their
Lordships Douse, for her Majesty, or for the Govern-
ment of that country with which he presumed it was
wished to maintain t cordial alliance and amity.
The Earl of MALMESBURY —I will answer the
question of the Noble Marquis at once. I have no com-
munication to lay y before your Lordships' House in the
shape of correspondence on the subject of his question.
But I am glad to be able to state to your Lordships,
that the French Goverment, which, from the moment
we came into office, have always acted in a frank and
friendly manner to her Majesty' Government, aware
that there Was an impression in this House, on the
night the Bill was introduced, not favourable to the
measure, no
sooner
perceived that that impression
was strongly
shown in this House against the projei
de lei which was proposed, than in all frankness and
friendliness they gave us an assurance that that law
should not be persevered in.—(Hear.) So much for
France.—(Hear.) But, my Lords, I cannot sit down
without expressing my feeling as to what the Noble
Marquis h 59 said in reference to the two nights' debate
with respect to the convention, and the Act of Parlia-
ment which was to give it life. And Ido not hesitate
to say, that her Majesty's Government, knowing the
facts—knowing that they are in a minority in the House
of Camracoe—wes trusted and believed, my Lords, that
on question
a - in which party spirit should not be intro-
duced, we !would have met with the full and entire as-
sistance of her Majesty's late Government in carrying
out an Act of Parliament which was prepared by them-
selves and not by us,—(Cheers)—which was drawn up
by their
Own officers under their own instructions, and
which Was in no way altered by me either in sense or in
text. I added two clauses certainly, my Lords; but one
of them was for positively defining the offences named
in the R
—UI to be those analogous to felony in
this country, and, therefore, was framed in a
spirit not by any means deserving of the reproof
which the Noble Marquis bestowed on me; while the
other was one which gave additional security to political
offenders by preventing a second trial for the same of-
fence, once they were rendered under the terms of the
convention.—This was done, my Lords, after the Act
had been drawn up by her Majesty's former Govern-
ment, and her Majesty's present Government had, there-
fore, every reason to expect and believe, as I have al-
ready stated, that the great party opposite would have
merged all political differences, and assisted us in pass-
ing an Act so necessary for this country—(Hear)—so
necessary, also, for France, and which it was due to
France should be passed, inasmuch as the existing con-
vention, as at present enforced, is unfair to that country.
--(Hear, hear,) Therefore, my Lords, when the Noble
Marquis, who has shown himself so anxious to maintain
friendly relations with France, lectures me on my want
c).' knowledge of French laws, Ido /say that he has no
right, I shall not say to turn round, but he should have
given me that information of which he said I was not
possessed, in order to carry out that convention by means
of that Act of Parliament. The Noble Marquis finds
fault with me, if I understand him, that I did not
know the force of the convention, and that I did not
pay sufficient deference to this House in withdrawing
the Bill. My Lords, it was in deference to this House
alone that I withdrew the Bill.—(Hear.) The highest
legal opinions in the House were expressed against it.
It would have been presumptuous in me to contradict
those opinions. I saw the impression that had been
made on your Lordships' minds, and out of deference to
the House I withdrew the measure.—(Hear.) I do not
deserve therefore to be accused of want of respect to
your Lordships; but least of all do I deserve the obloquy
which the Noble Marquis has sought to cast on me,
not for signing a convention which I did not make—a
convention which was drawn up in fact by the Noble
Earl opposite, and the Noble Viscount his predecessor
in office—a convention which I tried to earry out by an
Act of Parliament, described by the Noble Marquis as
trenching on the liberty of the subject, when I only
added clauses that strengthened that liberty.—(Hear,
hear.) It Wll3 not just or fair, therefore, of the
Noble Marquis to say that I paid any disrespect to
this House in withdrawing the Bill, or that I neglected
to secure the liberty of the subject by consenting
to narrow his constitutional rights in this instance
—(Hear.) Bu; at the same time, my Lords, I am bound
to say, that I have not altered my opinion as to the im-
mense importance of some convention on the subject
before the douse. The French Government have de-
termined to renounce the present convention as unfair
and useless to them; and if that comes to pass you will
not be able to claim our criminals in France any more
than France will be able to claim her criminals in Eng-
land. The criminals of both countries who can contrive
to escape will consequently find impunity; and England
as well as France will once again become a mutual and
a safe asylum for themalefactors of each nation.—(Hear.)
Earl GRANVILLE admitted that he was a party to
the convention; but he protested against the conclusion
of the Noble Earl that the opposition to the Bill was a
party movement. It was, however, quite clear that the
Government could not go on with the present convention.
The highest legal authorities had objected to the Bill,
and therefore the opposition to it.
Lord CAMPBELL, who could scarcely be hear for
hoarseness, and Whose repeated attempts to clear his
voice by preliminary coughing excited great laughter,
was understood to
say, that he never had been more as-
tonished in
all his political experience than be was at
the statement of
the Noble Earl the Foreign Secretory.
He (Lord Campbell) deprecated all party feeling in his
opposition to the Bill; but, with the most sincere desire
to assist the Government in the matter, he had felt
that, as the Bill stood, it was impossible it could be
carried into effect by Act of Parliament.
The Marquis of NORMANBY merely wished to con-
firm what had been stated by his Noble Friend opposite
as to the just grounds which France had to complain of
the existing State of the law in this country on the sub-
ject. His intimate acquaintance with France during the
last few years enabled him to testify that great service
had been done by the practical operation of the existing
treaty to the interests of this country. Under it great
service had been done especially to the commercial in-
terests of this country, in enabling parties to obtain pos-
session of the persons of those who otherwise, from the
neighbouring country being so contiguous, would have
profited by the
opportunity thereby afforded them to
set the law of this country at defiance, and enjoy impu-
nity. He was convinced if the French Government took
the course which the Noble Lord opposite had hinted
at, the
commercial interests of this country
would anita. He was, therefore, anxious that
his Noble Friend opposite would turn his at-
tention to remedy the practical difficulties which ap-
peared to ; .mpede the execution of this measure
(Hear, hear.%
He could not sit down without confirming
the testimony which his Noble Friend had borne to the
prompt manner in which the French Government had
always met appeals made to them for any assistance re-
quisite in cases contemplated by the treaty.
Lord BROUGHAM regretted that 80010 arrangement
which might be carried into execution had not been
come to between the two countries; as he could not ex-
pect the French Government to give us the full benefit
of the existing treaty whilst we gave them no advantage
in return, in consequence of the different state of our
laws from those of France.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE repudiated the
party purposes which the Noble Earl had attributed to
the Noble Lords on that (the Opposition) side of the
11 ,use, in not eu the Bill. If the Noble Earl
pporting
really wished him to make a charge against him (the
Earl of Malmesbury) ho would make one, and it was
this that the Noble Earl had thought himself competent
within six weeks or two months to produce a model Bill
on a subject which the Noble Viscount who had been so
long at the head of Foreign Affairs (Lord Palmerston)
and the Noble Earl (Earl Granville) when he was at the
Foreign-office, had had so long under consideration.
The conversation then dropped.
Viscount HEREFORD presented a petition from
Brecon, complaining of the operation of the 14th and
15th of Victoria, c. 16 (the Highways Act), and its
being excessively expensive, and at the same time rates
falling most unequally. The Noble Lord expressed a
hope that the Government would soon introduce a ge-
neral Bill on the subject, which would remove the ob-
jections to the present Act, and remedy the evils COM-
plilined of,