The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-02 00:00:00

INIPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)
The house met at five o'clock.
THE RIFF PIRATES.

The Earl of HARDWICKE asked a question of the
Government respecting the Riff pirates, as to whether
there could not be some means of putting down the
atrocities committed by these pirates. Ile thought
there should be a cruiser constantly on that coast for
the protection of our trade
The Earl of CLARENDON said this subject had
been for a long time under the consideration of the Go-
vernment, and they had applied to the Emperor of Mo-
rocco to put down those pirates, but that potentate
declared his inability to do so. There was, however, a
vessel sent out to Gibraltar by the Government for that
special purpose.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE (METROPOLIS) BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM said that he felt bound, at this
period of the session, to withdraw this bill, as it could
not now be done ju.,tice to.
After a few words from Lord CA.IIPBELL, the bill was
withdrawn. _ _

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS REPEAL BILL.
On the motion of Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY,
this bill was read a third time and passed.
INCLOSURE, Ste., OF LAND BILL
The report of amendments to this bill was received.
MEDICAL GRADUATES (UNIVERSITY OF
LONDON) BILL.
Lord MONTEAGLE moved that the house go into
committee on this bill.
The Duke of ARGYLL said he gave notice on a
previous day for the insertion in this bill of the Scotch
' Universities, and he now moved a clause to that effect.
The Marquis of LANSDOW-NE-suelectrted the clause.
Lord CAMPBELL could not understand what pos-
sible objections there could be to include in thin bill the
. graduates of the universities of Scotland, two of which,
Edinburgh and Glasgow, were the most renowned medi-
cal schools in the World. •
• Lord WYNFORD thought that every man who
claimed the right to practise should, at least, produce a
guarantee that he was a proper and safe practitioner.
The Earl of GALLOWAY thought it would be very
desirable to postpone the first clause of this bill until
next session, when the whole subject might be considered
• in all its branches, and a measure might be passed that
would embrace all that was found to be really desirable
on the subject.
The Earl of DERBY must say he was inclined to
agree with the noble earl on the cross benches, that it
was hardly fitting they should legislate at present upon
the subject, which appeared to be worthy of the con-
sideration of the Government, and-`should not have been
• introduced without obtaining their sanction. Now, he
understood this measure had been introduced in the first
"nstance by a private member of Parliament, who brought
orward a plan with regard to the University of London,
and it was then said that, if they conferred the privilege
on the University of London, they should likewise
confer it on the universities of Durham and Dublin,
and upon the Scotch universities. The question
now was, whether they were to pass a bill of an
exceptional character in favour of the University of
London alone, and he thought that if they were to
deal with the question, they should deal with it, as a
great question of medical reform, on some established
and known principle. The question involved conse-
quences so serious to the community at large that it
ought to be taken up by the Government and dealt with
as a measure of the Government. It ought not to be
dealt with by an individual member putting forward the
claims of a particular university, and then excluding or
including one or other universities, not according to a
definite or fixed principle, lots accorsling to the caprice
of the House of Commons or' their lordships' house, as
they happened to be worked upon by the case presented
to them. He would not take the sense of the house on
the question, but if the noble earl on the cross benches
divided against the further progress of the bill, be (the
Earl of Derby) should think it to be his duty to vote
with him.
. Lord MONTEAGLE considered that the bill had
been unquestionably taken up by the Government, every
Cabinet Minister and member of the Government having
voted for it.
Lord CAMPBELL would second the proposition of
any noble lord who should move that the bill be further
considered that day three months.
Lord WYNFORD had no particular hostility to the
bill, but wished the whole que-tion to be considered,
• and therefore begged to move that theygo into committee
that day three months.
Their lordships divided—
For going into committee l7
Against
Majority
The house accordingly went into committee, through
which, with some amendments, the bill was passed, and
their lordships resumed.
The Burials beyond the Metropolis Bill, and the Paro-
chial Schoolmasters (Scotland) Bill, were read a third
• time and passed.
- Lord BROUGHAM, after a discussion with Lord
Redesdale as to the effect of the standing order which
provides that no bill shall be read the second time after
the 25th July, withdrew his Education in Corporate
. Town Bill.
The Spirits (Ireland) Bill was read the third time ;
and on the question that it do pass,
Lord MONTEAGLE called attention to the fact that
:his measure converted, to all practical purposes, the
• sonstabulary force of Ireland into officers for the collec-
tion of revenue, contrary to the whole current of autho-
rity upon the subject, and in opposition to the principle
upon which the force was tassfituted: —Tee hill turned
the constables into excisemen, who knew nothing of such
duties; and thus produced a divided duty which would
lea.d to great embarrassment, for if the county magis-
tracy required their serv.ces it might be found they
could not have them, as the men were employed
by the Excise department. The Government
might add to the revenue police without mate-
rial expense, and thus leave the constabulary
to fulfil its , proper duties. On these grounds he
shbuld propose the orritSeion of the clauses, three in
ndinher, Wlich authorised the employment of the police
in:exbise diities. The noble lord then moved his first I
' amendment; to the effect that sub-constables should be
• excluded from each employment, which he justified on
the ground .that.they could not-be supposed to possess
any very gteat expetience.
1-40 PA-NNING, in reply.. remarked with regard to
_ sub-constables that they could . not-act-in - revenue cases
unless they had a magistrate's warrant specifically ad-
dressed
to them. With regard to the general question,
he clont4ncted that the employment of the. police in sup-
prtissiog illicit-distillation would not impair their effi-
cieney, and he referred to the authority of several offi-
• sera in support of this view. The experiment, limited
. . as'iV was by the-terms of the bill, 'Could not be produc-
• Ulna of any mischief, and he hoped their lordships would
• net reject it.. - •
The Marquis ofiCLANRICAiRDE "contended that no
good reason had been shown for the diversion of the
constabulary-from their regular duties.
The amendment was then negatived, and their lord-
ships afterwards divided upon clause 13, which enables
the Lord-Lieutenant to employ the constabulary in the
suppression of illicit distillation.
The numbers were-
- '67 For the clause
Against it
Majority for --6
- The bill was then passed.
THE BOARD OF HEALTH.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY.—In moving for the
• papers and correspondenceof which 4 have given notice;
I must take the osportuuity of vindicating myself and
my honour against a charge which has been made by
another person in another place seriously affecting my
Personal honour and character for veracity. I feel, my
• lords,
.that it may be of little importance to the world at
• large what may be the character of so humble an in-
dividual as myself, but, as a member of your lordships'
' 'house, it is a matter of some importance that I should
-stand erect -before you, and either refute the charge
which has been made, or submit to the contumely which
its confirmation would inflict upon me. lam able, my
tr.eraclicottothe ►r
give the flattest possible contradiction to every
ge which has been made. It will be
within your recoilection that some time ago I made a
statement in which I mentioned that during the trans-
actions of the Board oi
which a-
w present,
Health a meeting was held at
certain noble lo
at which I myself
which
hi as
was present, and at
other commissioners- were
presentthat the noble lordch
roads that proposal fell. The noble lord a proposal, and that
stated that it fell in
consequence ogfilsleot
ndedbeing,, nseceonded. My assertion was
that the term co
occurred—that it never
was seconded—that the term
never was used—that the
propo- al was madelahnedartdhaattizent made yesterday met by myself. In
. opposition to this,
by the noble lord in these words :
'He had gone to the board on several occasions;ewent
to them, for example, on the 30th of January IAFCat the
- request of the Government in a special ease. -.2. He went to
- the Board of Health on this subject. This was on the 3' h
of January, 1851. The board read to him s. long letter of
seven pages, which they had prepared, and in wh;ch they
argued the point with the Treasury. Thereupon, as the
minutes recorded—' Lord Seymour moved th ,t a letter
should be sent instead of the proposed draught, stating that
the board are ready to act on the suggestions contained in
the Treasury letter. This motion not being seconded, Lord,
- Seymour stated that he wished that the Treasury should be
informed, when the board's letter is transmitted, that he
differs from it. Now, as to this atter, LorilShaftesbu Shaftesbury,
in his place elsewhere, had stated that the thing had not
happened as he (Lord Siyinour) had described it on a for-
mer occasion. Lord Shaftesbury, speaking on his honour,
spoke, it was to be remembered, upon the information
orur
thet o
hmoc.
of
the secretary—not hiving h-en himself prevent
easion—whereas he (Lord Seymour),having been present,
spoke from his own recollection."
ilark the words ! This is the way in which the noble lord
stokes down another man's honour, and endeavours to
erect, his own. He solemnly affirms, in opposition to
fimryatfoprinlaceer,
Istatement, that I was not present. In the
give my word of honour solemnly, and in
tbace most emphatic manner that a sentleman can do, and
trader the most solemn obligations. 'of an oath, that I was
- ',present. I girt!, my
who spoke word of.honour that I was the-per-
sonupon the subject, and that my colleagues.
said not a word. The noble lord has committed himself
. by specifying the date,
i is . have been a day on Which possible that there might
- specifies three times eruphat was not present; but he
January, 1851, he went to thatc board—that he made a
IIY
that upon the 30th of
• proposal—that I was not there
honour, when I assert that I was there
that I speaking on
there, have asserted
that which is untrue. Now, I state first, upon my word
of honour as a gentleman, that I was there, Hoar next

. 17