The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 28, 1851.

Government would not expire till that time. He begged to '
Move as an amendment, to leave out all the words after the
word " Committee," fur the purpose of inserting these words
—" to consider, first, the subject of steam communications,
having for its object a line or lines connecting India, Eng-
land, aed Australia, and to report to the douse the most fit-
ting mode in which such communication may be effected,
with due care to economy, and with advantage to the public
interests; and afterwards, to inquire into the question of the
exiting steam communications between England and India,
and to report whether any improvements may be made in
the conduct of those communications, previous to the grant
of a further contract to any company proposing to carry on
that line."
Mr. AD DERLEY seconded the amendment.
Mr. GLADSTONE admitted the importance of the ques-
tion, but doubted the propriety of departing from the usual
course of tying up the hands of the Committee. The Com-
mittee when they met would be the best judges as to the
mode of prcredure, and he should suggest to the Noble
Lord whether he had not better withdraw the amendment.
Mr. SCOTT hoped that none of the contracts would be
excluded from the consideration of the Committee.
Mr. MACGREGOR regretted thet some measure had not
been introduced by the Government on the suhject. Af.er
what had occurred there was some chance of the American
Gov rnment taking up the question of steam communica-
tion with Australia, but he would rather see our own Go-
vernment taking up the matter.
Mr. HUME thought that more attention ought to be
given to what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Oxford. He would advise the Noble Lord
not to press his amendment.
Mr. ANDERSON said it was with reluctance he took
any part in the debate, as he had in some respects a personal
interest in the matter. As a director of the Peninsular and
Oriental Company he felt he should not be doing bis duty if
he allowed the statement of the Noble Lord who introduced
the question to pass uncontradicted. The Noble Lord had
read a letter from the Bengal Chamber of Commerce as to
the irregularity and accommodation of the company's
steamers. To that letter an answer had been sent contain-
ing a very satisfactory contradiction.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought they
were all agreed that a Committee should be appointed. He
could not admit that he was bound to enter into a contract
totally irrespective of the expense. His duty was to obtain
the best and cheapest communication. Since last year he
had called for tenders for a part of the service, but not one of
them was worth the acceptance of the Government. He
agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member fer Ox-
ford that there was no necessity for the amendment, as it
would be in the power of the Committee to take first what
portion of the question they pleased. It was impossible, he
thought, in considering this question, to separate one part
of the communication from another. The whole line must
be considered, and therefore the amendment would actually
paralyse the inquiry of the Committee, for it would exclude
that which was of great importance to the Australian colo-
nies—the consideration of establishing communication be-
tween them and India and China. He should therefore ad-
vise the Noble Lord to withdraw the motion, and should
suggest that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into
the subject of steam communication between India and
China, and also as to the best mode of facilitating steam
communication with the Australian colonies.
Viscount JOCELYN thought the suggestion would meet
his views. He agreed it would be unwise to fetter the Com-
mittee.
Mr. CARDWELL suggested whether it would not be
better to add words to the motion, so as to include all our
colonies and commercial stations at the Antipodes. He
thought if that Committee was appointed there should be an
order made against refusing to examine anybody. It would
be of moment to insert words which would include the Mau-
ritius, and all the other colonies approached by our eastern
states.
Mr HUME did not entirely approve of the latter sugges-

move that the House should then resolve itself into the pro-
posed Committee.
The motion was then amended by the substitution of the
word " to-morrow," instead of the word " now," as the pe-
riod for the proposed Committee.
Mr. MOFFAT seconded the motion. He could confirm
all that had fallen from the Hon. Gentleman as to the unfair
mode in which those duties were imposed in Spain. But
he complained more particularly of the ope•ation of the
system in the case of the trade between Newfoundland and
that country. By the alteration of the Spanish tariff. in
1849, the duty on silt fish imported into Spain had been
very considerably raised, and especially on salt fish imported
in British vessels. And let it be remembered that salt fish
was one of the main articles of our commerce with Spain,
There was a distinct infraction of our treaties with that
country, by the preference which she gave to French over
British vessels. French vessels could at present carry coals
from one Spanish port to another, while that privilege was
wholly denied to our vessels. In all the commercial treaties
between Great Britain and Spain, it had been expressly pro-
vided that we should enjoy equal privileges with the subjects
of any other country. That stipulation had, however, been
wholly disregarded. Ile believed there would be some
difficulty in the way of the adoption of that resolution. It
might be said that we were bound to treat Spain in con-
formity with what was known as " the most favoured
nation clause." But we had for centuries been entering
into treaties of commerce and of amity with &slain ;
and as these treaties had constantly been violated,
it became a questi n whether it would not be wise on
our parts to throw over all our treaties with that country,
and act towards her exactly as we might think fit and pro-
per at the moment. No nation in the world had shown the
same arrogant disregard of justice which Spain had shown,
and he thought they ought to fight such a nation with
weapons suitable to her own mode of warfare. If Spain
were resolved not to come to any fair understanding with
England, it might be alike the duty and the policy of
England to force her to it. He feared that we had but little
chance of obtaining justice from Spain with the present con-
dition of her Government by amicable means. But if that
Government were to find that we would not, import sugar
from the Havannah, or wines from Malaga, without the
payment of a much higher duty than that at present
exacted, we should, he believed, find them clamorous for an
equitable statement of the commercial policy of the two
countries.—(Hear.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that both his Hon. Friends
had very accurately stated the facts of the case. The question
might be divided into two distinct portions. Spain was at
present levying, and had for a long period levied, differential
duties of a very onerous description on goods exported from,
or imported into, her harbours in foreign or in Spanish ves-
sels. It should, however, be admitted, that in the year 1849
Spain had decreased the amount of those oifferential duties
on the greater portion of commodities. These duties had
amounted previously to that year to about 33 per cent., and
had then been reduced to about 20 per cent. The levying of
these differential duties was the first ground of complaint we
had against Spain. Our second ground of complaint was of
a totally different description. It was that Spain, in certain
respects, treated the shipowners of this country not only less
favourably than her own subjects, but less favourably than
the shipowners of other foreign nations, and more especially
those of France. His Hon. Friend ( Mr. Anderson) had truly
said that we had entered into repeated treaties with Spain,
which laid down in express language the obligation that
she should deal towards us on the terms of the most fa-
voured nation. Now we certainly had a right to complain
of the conduct of Spain in contravening that stipulation.
Under the second head of complaint to which he had
adverted, he believed that the most important item con-
sisted in the fact that higher harbour dues were levied in
the ports of Spain on British vessels than on French vessels.
Complaints had some time ago been made to the. Spanish
Government upon this subject, and that Government had
professed its willingness to set the matter right. But, in
point of fact, the only way in which that could be done con-
sistently with the law of this country would be by the Spa-
nish Government entering into a convention with us, upon
which an order in council might be issued empowering the
Lords of the Treasury to repay the duties on Spanish ves-
sels entering our harbours. The French Government pro-
fessed itself willing to adopt the proposed principle, but stated
that they did not wish to proceed by way of convention,
which might fetter their independent action. They said that
if we were to adopt the practice in question without any
convention, they would imitate our example. Now it ap-
peared to him that was an unfriendly mode of proceeding,
and a mere quibble and pretext to evade a compliance with
a just and reasonable demand. His Noble Friend the Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs had very recently renewed his re-
monstrances with the Spanish Government upon that sub-
ject, and he (Mr. Labouchere) had every reason to hope
that those remonstrances would prove effectual. But if that
hope should not be realised, it appeared to him that the best
course which her Majesty's Government could pursue would
be to come down to that House and ask for powers to effect
that arrangement for mutual concessions on the part of Spain
and of England, without the necessity of any previous con-
vention. With regard to the greater question, namely, the
manner in which Spain treated not only English vessels, but
also all other foreign vessels, he should observe that no one
could feel more strongly than he did the great injury which
it inflicted on the trade and commerce of this country. But
he felt convinced that any person who had listened to the
statement of his Honourable Friend who had introduced that
motion, must see that it was against Spain herself that that
restrictive policy operated most prejudicially. His Ho-
nourable Friend had told them that the Spanish mercantile
marine, which that policy had been meant to foster, was
reduced to a most helpless and inefficient condition - (Hear,
hear.) Now he should say, that that was no great encou•
ragement to this country to revert to anything like a restric-
tive system---(Hear, hear).-with a view of protecting our
shipping interest. He should also remind Hon. Gentlemen
that that burden on our commerce had been of long standing,
and had not dated from the repeal of our navigation-laws;
and neither had it been greatly aggravated by that measure.
It was quite true that by the repeal of the navigation laws
we had thrown open what had been cello 1 the general carry-
ing trade of the world to Spain as well as to other foreign
nations. But he believed that no one would contend that we
had any reason to look upon Spain as a formidable competitor
ie that trade. Oa the contrary, it was a remarkable fact that
no nation which had adopted the protective and restrictive sys-
tem of navigation was to be feared in that great branch of com-
merce. Which were the nations that enjoyed the largest share of
the carrying trade of the world, and that possessed the
greatest mercantile navies? Why, they were the United
States, the Baltic powers, and England-the countries, in
fact, that had shown the least disposition to dread the com-
petition of foreigners. But he did not on that account say
that it would not be most desirable for this country to obtain
a repeal of the differential duties to which his Hon. Friend
had called their attention. All he would say on that occasion
was that that question had not been lost sight of by his Noble
Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and by her Majesty's
Government. They were at the present moment in active
correspondence with the Spanish Government upon the sub-
ject. The diplomatic negotiations with respect to it had nst
yet been brought to a close ; and he trusted that the House
would not then interfere in the matter by coming to any
vote upon a point which, in his opinion. it would be better
to leave in the hands of her Majesty's Ministers. He be-
lieved that the debate which was then taking place, and
the expression of feeling in the British House of Commons
that the trade between Great Britain and Spain ought to be
conducted on a more just and liberal system, would not be
lost on the Spanish Government. It was not, therefore, with
any doubt of the importance of that subject, and still less
with any disposition not to promote the objects which the
Hon. Gentlemen had in view, that be ventured to express a
hope that the House would not think it necessary to come
to any formal vote upon that occasion. -(Hear, hear.)
Alderman THOMPSON said, it appeared to him that
that case might be met by a clause in the existing Navi-
gation Act. That Act gave her Majesty in Come it a retalia.
wry power against those foreign countries which did not re-
ciprocate our mode of dealing with the shipping interest. It
was well known that our policy bad not been reciprocated by
Spain, and that English vessels trading with Spain did nut
enjoy the same advantages which were enjoyed by Spanish
vessels trading with this country. If the Act were allowed

tion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEqUER considered
the words which he had used were sufficiently large to in-
chide every route that might be adopted.—(Hear.)
Sir T. ACLAND wished to know whether the words were
large enough to include a matter in which the constituents
of the Hon. Member for Liverpool were deeply interested—
he meant the point of final departure. The Hon. Baronet
went into a detail of the mail arrangements between the
north-west of England and London and Southampton, and
contended that it was of great importance to all parties to
save seven or right hours in the transmission of letters.
Sir F. T. BARING said, that it would be throwing upon
the Committee a matter which would much delay their report.
A Commission had been already appointed, which would do
all that was necessary upon the subject.
Mr. ADDERLEY said they were by. no means agreed
as to the manner in which that inquiry was to be con-
ducted. They migh agree that it was important and useful
to the colonies generally to enter upon such an inquiry, and
to know how best the communication with the whole
of -the world should be carried on ; but whether
Australia' was to be included at the fag-end or appen-
dix of that inquiry was quite another matter. wpo
asked for that inquiry? Certainly not the colony. It was
the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite alone (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer), who wanted to get himself out of a diffi-
cult scrape.—(Order, Oh, oh.) The point upon which they
could not agree was that Australia should be put at the
fag-end of the inquiry, and he would therefore ask the
Noble Member for King's Lynn to give them the assurance
that it would be taken first and not last. He would suggest
to the Noble Lord the Member for Kildare (Lord Naas) not
to press his amendment.
Mr. DIVETT said it would be utterly impossible to do
justice to the Australian colonies on that matter without a
full and complete inquiry. He knew the Chancellor of the
Exchequer was most anxious to secure a proper communi-
cation between this country and the colonies, and would have
succeeded before now but for the opposition of the East
India Company. The route from Singapore to the S.van
River had been overlooked, but it possessed great advan-
tages, though not yet fully approved of by the people of Syd-
ney. He conceived the attack made by the Hon. Member
for North Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley) on the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir C. Wood)
was extremely unjust and uncalled for.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOCELYN said he could not give any assurance to
the Hon. Member for Staffordshire; but he thought the at-
tack made on the Chancellor of the Exchequer most uncalled
for. It was he (Lord Jocelyn) who had moved for the Com-
mittee, and he had no communication with the Right Hon.
Baronet until within the last two or three days. He was fully
convinced that Australia formed a most important portion of
the proposed inquiry, but yet he could not agree to the pro.
position of the Hon. Member,
Lord NAAS would not divide the House on his amend-
ment.
Mr. PRINSEP feared, if all the matters suggested were in-
quired into, the investigation would last a very long time.
Mr. AGLIONBY said all were equally interested in pro-
curing the best possible communication between this country
and India, and our most distant colonies. In conclusion he
proposed that the words " New Zealand" should be added to
the proposed amendment.
Lord JOCELYN said that place was included in the
Panama route.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished the words he proposed to be in-
serted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—He had
given no notice of that Committee,neither had he put Australia
at the fag-end of the inquiry. —(Elear, hear. ) Whatever
opinion he might entertain, the question did not rest with
him. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the Hon. Member for
Statibrdshire he had deue more injury to the communication
than any one else.
After a sh,,rt discussion Mr. Aglionby's words were in-
serted in the resolution, and the whole agreed to without a
division.
SPANISH DUTIES ON BRITISH SHIPPING.
Mr. ANDERSON then rose to move " That, with a view
to the just protection of British navigation and commerce, it
is expedient that under the provisions of the Act 12th and
13th Viet., c. 29, such additional duties should be levied in
the ports of the British empire upon goods imported or ex-
ported in Spanish ships, and on the tonnage of such ships, as
may serve to countervail the difiereatial duties on goods and
tonnage levied in the ports of Spain and her dependencies on
British ships."
Mr. HUME (interrupting the Hon. Member) said he
wished to save his Hon. Friends some trouble. If that was a
motion to take into consideration matters connected with
trade and commerce, was he not obliged to have the sanction

to remain inoperative in that instance, then he said tha
such an example might work very prejudicially; for what
security could they hive that other countries would not
imitate the conduct of Spain? They all knew that the
Dutch Government also imposed, in certain instances, diffe-
rential duties, to the disadvantage of the British shipowner.
In the island of Java British vessels landing cargoes were
suisjeeted to double the amount of duties imposed on Dutch
vessels. Remonstrances in such cases might be all very well ;
but when remonstrances were carried beyond a given point
they became totally worthless.
gr. HUME said it appeared that our trade with Spain
was in a very unsatisfactory state. No country in Europe
owed so much to us as Spain, and he saw with regret that she
had shown but little gratitude for the obligation. lie should
certainly like to see the correspondence which had passed
between her Majesty's Government and the Government of
Spain upon that subject. He believed that its pubhi
cation might have some influence in shaming Spain
into fair dealing with this country. He was no advocate of
retaliation ; and if Spain chose to pay '25 per cent. more for
articles of which she stood in need than was necessary, let
her do so. They had had one or two instances which
showed i he folly of retaliation, and he should be very sorry
jeepeetatfeerd;arHd,e
athhdanekheedultdheheHgone.d6ithemhbeaerr
for bringing the things red.
to see such b
from the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs
what steps had been taken in the matter, for he did not
e titled to some-
of Trade quite satisfactory. They wer e ho
think the statement of the Hon. President of te Board
thing more.
to a division, after
what had fallen from the President of
the
Mr. M. GIBSON urged the Hon. Member for Orkney
(Mr. Anderson) not to press his motion
retalaton, but he
The Hon. Alderman opposite counselled
ii
Board of Trade.
begged to a- k him whether, even if
bared after what exercising he thought retaliation,
for
would be good policy, the time had comeg it
towards Spain? This country had been pursuing a protective
policy for many years, and let it be remem
a struggle a free-trade policy was at
th carried. How
then could they expect other Powers at once to alter
leng
their views and adopt our commercial arrangements Our old navigation laws gave certain privileges to the golds
nd her colo-
of foreign nations which were imported in the ships of
those nations both with respect to this country
lonies. That privilege, however,actuallyil in 1828
from Spain for 20 years, and an order in Council
d to carry
declared that Spanish vessels should not be allow
s_ons
was a
withheld
on a direct trade bete/ten Spain and the British posses
abroad. What was the effect? A struggle with SPa."l9
which certainly was not calculated to make her less restric-
tive in her commercial arrangements or more liberal towards
this country; on the contrary, it appeared that it was only
since we had adopted a free-trade policy that she had made
any advance in the direction of free trade. It would be
most unfortunate if they were at that moment to counte-
nance the idea that any considerable party in the country
was inclined to carry out the policy his Hon. Friend recom-
mended. He might also mention, that, having been among
the Honourable Gentleman's constituents in Shetland during
the last autumn, he got certain information which led him
to doubt whether those constituents would approve of his
proposal; for if they found it difficult to find a market for
their fish now, in consequence of the duties imposed by Spain,
what would be their condition if they were deprived of ex-
porting it in Spanish ships?
Viscount PALMERSTON quite agreed that the question
brought forward by his Hon. Friend the Member for Orkney
was one of very considerable importance to a large portion of
the community. He also admitted that we had good cause
of complaint against the Spanish Government for the course
which they had pursued— a complaint, however. which ap-
plied more to a long course of prejudice with regard to
commercial matters, rather than to any recent disposition
on the part of Spain to pursue an unfriendly course against
the commerce of this country. In fact, as his Right Hon.
Friend the President of the Board of Trade had stated,
latterly the Spanish Government had rather relaxed than
increased the restrictions in its tariff. It was well known
that both Spain and Portugal were very far behind many
other countries of the world with regard to the principles of
commercial policy.—(Hear, hear.) But Spain had begun to
move.— (Hear, hear.) They could not, however, e,xpect her
to move much more quickly than the captain whom they
had heard described, who waited to see whether the wind
would blow steady for some days; and he only hoped they
would not delay following the example of Great Britain as
long as their captain who watched the weathercock in Ditlll3-

of a Minister?
The SPEAKER said, if the motion made was intended to
conclude with leave to bring in a Bill, then the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose might be right, but as it was, the Hen.
Member was in order.— (Hear.)
Mr. M. GIBSON said, if an increas 3 of taxation was pro-
posed, ought not such to have the sanction of the Minister?
The SPEAKER said it might be moved in a Committee of
the whole House; the object of the present motion, however,
was different.
Mr. ANDERSON then proceeded with his motion. It
might be necessary that he should, in the first place, ex-
plain the meaning of the term differential duties. They
meant duties not imposed for the purposes of revenue, but
to give one country a monopoly in the shipping trade over
every other. In that respect Spain bad a greater monopoly
than any other country in the world, and its conduct to-
wards our shipping bad become a great practical grievance.
The Honourable Memer then referred to and read some
extracts from the pbetition which he had presented, com-
plaining of the great extent of the impost levied in Spanish
ports upon British ships. He would then proceed to con-
trast the treatment which British ships received in Spanish
ports with that which Spanish ships received in British
ports. In one place the differential duties were one-third
more. In Cuba the import duties on British vessels were
from 21 to 30 per cent., while on Spanish vessels they only
ameunted to from 17 to 21 per cent., and the export duties
were on British ships 41/2 per cent., while on Spanish ships
they were only 21,4 per cent. Under that highly pro-
tective system the Spanish ships were notoriously among
the most deficient in the world. He had himself known an
instance in which a Spanish vessel and an English vessel
had entered the port of Ramsgate together; but as Spanish
vessels not only did not proceed to sea in unfavourable
weather, but were kept waiting for several days even in fine
weather, for the purpose of ascertaining that that weather was
fixed, the English vessel went to Bilboa, and on her return
found the Spanish vessel still in the harbour of Ramsgate.
He had himself employed a Spanish ship to carry salt fish
from the Shetland Islands to Bilboa, and she had been
three months on the voyage—just about the time that a good
English vessel would spend on the passage to Calcutta.—
(Hear, hear.) The shipowners of this country were com-
pelled to submit to these differential duties, although we had
admitted Spanish vessels into our ports on the same terms as
those of other nations. In the Navigation Act of last ses-
sion there were provisions calculated, in his opinion, to meet
that grievance. By the 10th and 11th clauses of thati Act it
was provided, that if British vessels were subjected in any
foreign country to prohibitions or restrictions, it should be
lawful for hPr Majesty, by an order in council, to impose in
return such restrictions as her Majesty might deem fit on the
ships of that foreign country entering our harbours; and
that, if any . partiality were shown in a foreign country
against oritish vessels, it should be lawful for her Majesty
by an order in council, to impose in British ports
countervailing disadvantages on the ships of that
country. We had several treaties with Spain, of which the
oldest, he believed, was that of the year 1653, providing that
our vessels should enjoy, in the Spanish ports as extensive
privileges, liberties, and immunities as the vessels of any
other country whatever. Now Spain had violated those
treaties. She had given to French vessels the privilege
sod
of
carrying on the coasting trade of Spain, while she had refu
The tariff of Spain had
the same privilege to our shipeing•
lately been changed, and the differential duties against our
- shipping had b en increased ; and the result of that had been
a great falling off in the amount of British tonnage, at the
Port of Alicante among others. He, as a British ship-
owner, wasp erfectly ready to run the risk of the conse-
quences of a repeal of our navigation laws, and he had
given his support to that measure in opposition to the
opinion of the great majority of the members of his
own, class. But while he was ready, as a British ship-
owner, to run the risk of competition with the foreigner,
he asked for fair play, and that he might be subjected to
no unjust obstruction. The Hon. Member concluded by so
amending his motion, that it proposed that the House
should
resolve itself into a Select Committee, for the purpe
considering the subject he had brought under their notice.
The SPEAKER paid that the 911. Mater could het

gate harbour while the English captain went to Bilboa and
back.—(ll,:ar, hear, and a laugh.) He believed that about
20,000 of the most active, strong. and useful parts of the po-
pulation in Spain were employed as customhouse officers,
and as many more as smugglers in defeating their labours;
the whole 40,000 being thus engaged in preventing the revenue
from coming into the treasury. He could assure the House that
this was not the only impression on his own mind, but was
f•>rcibly felt latterly by the Government of Portugal; for
whea the Spanish Government were recently about to alter
their tariff the Government of Portugal were apprehensive
that they would lose a very con iderable portion of the re-
venue which they derived from goods which came through
Portugal paying duty, and thence were smuggled into Spain
duty free, which was thought a more profitable method of
supplying the Spanish consumer than paying high duties at
the Spanish custom-house. The Spanish Government, how-
ever, still persevered, and he trusted the result might be not
only to lower the Spanish tariff, but to induce Portugal, by
way of retaliation, to lower her tariff also. At all events, the
Z'panish Government was looking in the right direction, if it
had not made much progress. He assured the House that
the Government ha't been, and was still, engaged in urging
the Spanish Government upon those particular points to
which his Lion. Friend had directed their attention. It
would not be expected that he should cmiply entirely with
the request of the Hon. Member for Montrose, by detailing
all the argument used by the Government, and all the re-
plies of the Spanish Government in return. The former
might, perhaps, be useful as a lesson in political government,
but the latter, he: feared, would not be found very instructive.
Seriously speaking, be assured the House that the Govern-
ment were urging this in the manLer and to the extent
which they thought most likely to accomplish the purpose
in view, and he should very much regret to see his Hon ur-
able Friend press his motion to a division, because he thought
such a resolution on the part of the House would be prejudi-
cial to the interests he had in view. There were two main
and distinct questions involved—one, the 20 per cent. dis-
criminating duty levied upon this country in common
with all other nations, and in regard to which we
stood upon the footing of the most favoured—or rather
the most unfavourel nations (Hear, hear, and
laughter)—and with respect to which we must deal
with the Spanish Government on general principles; the
other, a point of less importance, though certainly a greater
grievance, namely, the preference given to French vessels
over British in Spanish ports. With regard to that, the only
question was the method of doing it, and where both parties
were agreed upon a common object, they could not long
differ as to the particular mode by which they should carry
their mutual design into execution. He, therefore, begged
his Hon. Friend to be content with the effect which, no
doubt, this discussion must have upon the Spanish Govern-
ment in convincing them, on the one hand, that the
British Parliament felt these grievances, and, on the other,
that they were disposed to meet Spain on the most liberal
and enlarged principles in regard to commercial arrange-
ments.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BANKES said the Noble Lord had, as usual, made a
very amusing speech ; but the greater part of it had been
very wide of the very narrow question before them, which
was whether the proviso contained in the Act for the repeal
of the navigation-laws, was not intended to meet a case like
this? Surely, if they had a right to exercise it against any
nation, they might justly put it in force against Spain, from
which, as the Noble Lord had told them, they had suffered
a long series of injuries. It would not be difficult to name
some of recent occurrence, such as the dismissal of our Am-
bassador and the repudiation of the debt—the former the
greatest disgrace which had been inflicted on this nation.
He was by no means satisfied with the assurance of the
Noble Viscount that he had the matter under consideration,
especially as he had not condescended to give them so much
as an outline of the negotiations.—(Hear, hear.) He would
certainly resist the withdrawal of the moti^n. He did not be-
lieve in the effect of a discussion in that House upon the
Spanish Government. He doubted whether they ever read
our newspapers. Give them an order in Council, and then,
and only then, they would understand what was meant. For
these reasons he would give his hearty support to the

ham at the same time stated that there had been a great in-
crease in the number of petitions, and that they had increased
from 1,487 in 1823 to 2,817 in 1832. In looking at the late
returns from 1841 to 1851, he found that in the year ending
November, 1813, the number of petitions was 2,715, being
nearly the same number as there were in 1832. But in 1819
they had increased to 3,984, and in 1850 to 3,721; showing
a great increase over former years. On looking at the other
return—ho did not wish to go into detail—he found the
total of the matters which had been brought into the Court
of Chancery under various heads, which were known to every
lawyer, to be—
In 1842 ... 7,325
1813 ••• ... 6,873
1844 ... ..• ... 7,635
giving an average of 7,278. He found further that the re-
turns for three years subsequent were-
-1848 ... ... • . ... 8,33
1849 ... 8,697
1850 ... 8,356
giving an average of 8,461, which proved the increase of
business in the Court of Chancery as regarded the two pe-
riods. Upon looking through these returns in detail he
perceived that the Court of Chancery in 1818 seemed fully
adequate to the functions it was called upon to perform;
that the Lord Chancellor, the Master of the Rolls, and the
three Vice-Chancellors, were quite adequate to the business,
and that the number of cases in arrear on the last day of the
last terra of that period was not more than would probably
be disposed of in the course of the next ensuing term—cer-
tainly not more than had existed forseveral years previously.
But, upon looking through the returns for the year 1849-50,
one might observe how essential it was that the Lord Chan-
cellor should not alone have an adequate number of judges
to assist him, but that he and they should be in the full
and entire possession of their health, strength, and intel-
lect. Ile (Lord J. Russell) found by these returns that, in
the Easter term as 1849, and in the other term which fol-
lowed it, during which the Lord Chancellor had not been
able to attend his court from illness, a considerable arrear
had arisen, and that the number of cases to be heard
was very much greater than in the preceding terms. He
(Lord J. Russell) would, however, now refer only to the
quantity of business before the judges of the Court of
Chancery on the first day of Michaelmas Term,lBso, and the
first day of Hilary Term in 1851. At that time there were
only two Vice-Chancellors, the Act for the appointment of
two additional Vice-Chancellers having made no provision
for the appointment of a third. He found in these two
terms that the cases set down before the judges of the
Chancery courts, viz. :—motions, pleas, demurrers, &c.—
were—
Lord Chancellor ...
Master of the Ro'ls...
Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce ...
Vice-Chancellor Lord Cranworth

.. ... 219
90
290
173

While

motion.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL thought the House much indebted to
the Hon. Gentleman for bringing the subject before them,
and giving them an opportunity of showing that the House
of Commons was not asleep. The motion, however, if car-
ried, would take out of the hands of the Noble Lord the
negotiations in which he had told them he was now en-
gaged ; and the question, therefore, was simply this, whe-
ther they believed they were more likely to carry their
object by strengthening the hands of the Noble Lord in
using the powers with which they had entrusted him ; or
step in, and take the duty on themselves. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Dorsetahire had referred to the conduct of Spain in
sending away our Minister and refusing to pay her debt;
but he hoped they would abstain from mixing up ancient
grudges with a question the importance of which they
all felt so anxiously. It certainly would be most unfortu-
nate if the Spanish Government should see that, on such
a question, they had not given a unanimous, but a divided
vote.— (Hear, hear.) Let it rather go forth that the Go-
vernment was determinel, and the House of Commons

unanimous.
Mr. WAWN supported the motion. The question was
whether the British shipowner was to be left to suffer an in-
tolerable grievance. He taxed the Right Hon. Member for
Manchester with indifference to the interests of the ship-
owner, who could not enter any port he pleased, like the
Right Hon. Member in his yacht.
Mr. RICARDO could not imagine how any one could
have contemplated the possibility of changing the whole
commercial policy of the country by means of the clause in
question. The Hon. Member for Dorsetshire advocated re-
taliation; but if we took that step would it stop there?
Would they not retaliate upon us? He could not under-
stand how the Honourable Member for Orkney proposed
to increase the trade of his constituents by laying a tax

upon it.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HILDYARD said if the clause that had been intro
duced into the Bill for the repeal of the navigation-laws
was not sufficient for its purpose, he should be glad to know
how it was that the Bill had passed. It could only be
upon the House having reposed faith in the promises
of the Government, that if foreign nations did not
reciprocate they would carry out the clause.
He would give them the statistics of their trade with Spain
in the years immediately preceding and following the repeal
of the navigation-laws. It appeared that in the year ending
the sth of January, 1850, the number of vessels entered in-
wards from Spaia was 117, with a tonnage of 17,842 tons.
In the year succeeding the repeal- the number was 150. and
the tonnage was 23.742 tons. He asked, was the clause
adopted in good faith or not? That was a question they
should insist on having answered.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. MITCHELL said his constituents were very deeply
interested in this question, and they found their trade very
much injured by these Spanish ships. He entirely concurred
in the opinion of the Hon. Member for Liverpool, that the
question should be left in the hands •f the Noble Lsrd the
Foreign Secretary.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said the motion did not call upon the
Hon. Gentleman who had last spoken to violate his consis-
tency—it merely asked him to strengthen the Government
in carrying out the provisions of a measure which he had
been instrumental in passing. Notwithstanding the asser-
tion of the Hon. Member for Montrose, he believed that in
the repeal of the navigation-laws the Americans had obtained
by far the best of the bargain.
Lord J. RUSSELL would not at that moment enter upon
the general question of the navigation-laws, but wished to
say a few words as to the circumstances in which they were
placed with regard to Spain. When the question of the
navigation-laws was discussed he thought it would be found
that the result was more favourable than the lion. Gentleman
imagined for the adoption of a more liberal commercial
policy. He admi ted that there were a few exceptions. but
they were not nations of great maritime importance. What-
ever advantages America had derived from that change, they
had derived greater advantages still. He was not sorry that
the United States had derived these advantages, and hoped
both countries would find beneficial results in the repeal of
these laws. The Hon. Member for Wbitehaven said they
must no longer listen to trifling negotiations; but if that
were to be so the proper course would he to call for all the
dispatches and treaties with Spain, and thus anticipate the
pending negotiations. They might have all the papers before
them, and form their own opinion upon a review of the whole
question; but to come to a conclusion without knowing
what representations had been made, what answers had
eibaprsaijymtotml
Lords,
tlndhoolaatgrdemosi
twelve
.i , , v e
been given, or what was the state of the engagements be-
tween the two countries, was a step which it would be most
imprudent to take. It was one which could hardly be taken
with any consistency, as the House might expose itself to
this, that the Crown would be unable to comply with its re-
solution.
Mr. ANDER' ON replied, observing that he was content
to leave the question in the hands of the Noble Lord (Lord
Palmerston), and would withdraw his motion.
Mr. BANKES and other Hon. Members objected to the
withdrawal of his motion, and
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
•• •
Agrainst it ... • --
Majority against the motion
COURT OF CHANCERY.
Lord J. RUSSELL then rose to move for leave to bring
in a Bill for the better administration of justice in the Court
of Chancery. The subject was one of the greatest import-
ance, and if this proposal concerned merely the administra-
tion of justice, he should be disposed to ask those who were
more familiar with the proceedings in courts of justice to un-
dertake the task he now proposed to perform ; bat, feeling
that the office of Lord Chancellor and all connected with his
high functions, deeply affected the whole of the Government
and the Legislature of that country, he had undertaken the
task, thinking it beater that the whole views of the Govern-
ment should be stated, than that those views should be con.
fined to the present distribution of offices in the courts
oo
industry
found
so justice.
lathatba on
rt
diho leul
hn rewsdtauLaerbi
atsnnor that
diierhfnnadostuaagghsutttiti
netia
senhiodsrnghefeunaeabt
itthttelci
hhilpatocoehtaeeounfr
ftueoHrgeqtrlotniodmurniotuomi question
perform
eweaeeteet
di
proanito n before
he should first state the changes that had been made since
the year 1812, when the Bill for the appointment of a
Vice-Chancellor
rlnesseodn:
iginrwttdpEhtlaerwtoBoni
rehßdseafldmeeoeslwandekdicrejnytuiowsutowdtnisdiweease
sagriei 1
nne-se
itdci subse-
quently
unoetigrntacevhndt
eehcd Vice-
Chancellor. brought
with
0.
si
Committeeut impossiblellgrto
arrear of 276 causes, which would
years to dispose of, not taking into account the other cases
that would be accumulating. It was, therefore, decided
that a new judge should be appointed, under the title of Vice-
Chancellor, to perform a part of the duties of the Lord Chan-
cellor. It was said at the time by no less a man than Sir
S imuel Romilly that the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor
was not necessary, and that the business then before the
Court of Chancery was not greater in amount than it was in
the time of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke. Lord Cottenham,
however, in 1836, when making his statement in favour of
the Chancery Bill, said Sir Samuel Romilly was mistaken in
that, for the business was greater than in the time of Lord
Hardwicke. He thought, however, that there was a great
foundation for the statement made by Sir Samuel Rornilly,
for he found in the report cited by Lord Cottenham, that
while in 1761 to 1765 the cases averaged 411, they had in-
creased from 1831 to 1835 to 1,283, or more than three times
the number; and he stated at the same time that from 1810
to 1812 there were not more than 540. It was clear, therefore,
that there had been an enormous increase consequent upon
the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor, and that at the time
of the appointment a great number of cases were waiting to
be heard in the Court of Chancery. But he imagined the
fact to have been that delays prevailed at that time in the
Court of Chancery, and the indifference of the judges alone
was the cause that various matters mthaattte:,awyhinicjhusctoicueldwhaasvdeocnoemtoe
before the Court, if there was a prospect of an early settle-
ment,,
nheensuitors.t.,numbervl erfe e withheld,luiseeaw found that ; from
11882120
tro. o 1812 the e averagev e
ra
ge
number was 840 ; from 1833 to 1835 the average number
was 1,301. It was thus evident that the appointment of a
Vice-Chancellor had led to a great increase of business, and
causes that would probably. never appear in the Court of Chan-
cery were brought there in consequence of the additional
judge. He thought it was nearly the same thing whether
theae c i nd
eu
dm
ob
we rt o ogf ct causese
abrrreoauig.,loitr,
iinto t
ht
eh
re
the courtcauses cou I
Idv
enr
eo tn bo et
brought in through despair of their being able to get
them heard. In either case the evil was the same, and
amounted to a denial ofjustico to the !suitor. Lord Cotten-

.. 53
... 98
.. -45

Giving a total of ... 772
on the first day of Hilary Term, 1851, they were—
Lord Chancellor ... 106
Master of the Rolls
Vice-Chancellor Knight Brace ... 532
Vice-Chancellor Lord Cranworth ... 242

legal gentlemen, but should also express the sense of the
legislative body, composed as he had said it was. But a
great advantage was hoped from the supervision of
the language of Bills. He, however, did not, for Hs
own part, perceive that the greatest lawyers with the
largest views were always more competent to carry out
these views in a Bill than those learned persons who spe-
cially devoted their time to the framing of laws, and who
were practically engaged in the construction of? the Acts
that passed both Houses. So that, probably, it would be
found that the Minister of Justice would himself, instead of
framing and amending Bills, revert to such men as Mr.
Gregson, who had assisted him (Lord John Russell) in
the Reform Bills, or Mr. Colson who assisted his Right
Honourable Friend the Home Secretary, as at present, for
their valuable services in the matter. He should be
afraid, therefore, if this plan were adopted they would be
parting with that which had, he thought. been a great ad-
vantage to the country, an advantage which it had possessed
ever since the Revolution, of having belonging to the Execu-
tive Government, and at the same time presiding in the
House of Lords, a man of the most eminent legal abilities,
chosen from among those who had achieved the greatest suc-
cess at the bar. He thought that the Executive Govern-
ment would sink the weight of their authority by such an
arrangement, whilst their judicial machinery would not re-
ceive any equivalent gain. He could not, therefore, advise
the House to adopt this plan, though so ably recommended,
of a division into three of the office of Lord Chancellor.
There was another plan which had been much considered,
which did not go the length of that which he had been con-
sidering, but was at the same time a very considerable
alteration—he meant the plan of giving a per-
manent judge to the Court of Chancery, of sepa-
rating the Lord Chancellor altogether from any duties
in the Court of Caaneery, but preserving him with the
office and name of Lord Chancellor rather as the appellate
judge in the Howe of Lords. He owned he thought that
plan had very great advantages over the one he had just
noticed. It preserved to the Executive Government a per-
son of great authority and weight in legal matters ; but he
must say that on consulting the debate which took place
upon the subject, and observing the clear and able statement
of Lord Lyndhurst, and referring to the authories which
that Noble and Learned Lord quoted—Sir Samuel Romillv,
Lord Redesdale, and others—on consulting also with those
whom be thought had the best opinions upon the subject
he found that there had been a very general, if not nearly a
unanimous opinion in the profession of the law,
that a judge who sat merely in the Court of Appeal in the
House of Lords would not have the weight and authority,
and would not be so capable of acting as a judge, as one
who sat in the daily practice of a court where matters were
continually occurring to call for the exercise of his office.
That opinion he found stated over and over again in the
discussions which took place in 1836. And, notwithstand-
ing the arguments of Lord Cottenham on the plan then
proposed, the House of Lords decided by 94 to 29 against
it. There had been other schemes proposed upon
this subject, and none, perhaps, more deserving of attention,
on account of the authority, and the learning, and the
eminence of the person from whom it emanated, than that
of Sir Edward Sugden. Now, Sir Edward Sugden's plan
contemplated an immediate court of appeal, which was to
Total . . ... ... .... 1,016 be formed of separate judges, who were to be chiefly, he
The accumulation of business in the latter period was very
believed, the Vice-Chancellors. The objection made to that
much owing, no doubt, to certain Acts of Parliament re- plan, and it seemed to him (Lord J. Russell) to be an objec-
cently passed, among others the Winding-up Acts ; and no lion which was fatal to it, was, that by depriving the several
doubt much of it was therefore temporary, and of a nature that Courts of Chancery of their chiefs, in order to form this
the judicial strength of the Court, increased by the appoint- court of appeal, they paralysed the action of those courts,
ment of another Vice-Chancellor, the Bill for which was and that the time which these judges ought to be able to
before the House, would reduce. It was not, consequently, give in their respective courts to the cases brought before
to that subject that he wished to point attention • but he them there, would be thus consumed in the appeal court.—
considered it to be very desirable that the House should' see (Hear, hear.) At the same time there was a statement of
generally the state and progress of the judicial business of Sir Edward Sugden made before the Committee upon Judicial
the Court of Chancery, and judge by the agency of facts of Salaries, which was well worthy of attention, because he
the very great importance that attached to any change in himself was stating his own experience as Lord Chancellor
the constitution of that court. The progress of society in
of Ireland—and he (Lord J. Russell), believed that no man
these days, and the complicated state of the property of the
had ever presided in the Court of Chancery in Ireland with
country, had led more and more to the concentration within greater reputation and authority than that Hon. and Learned
the circle of that court of a vast deal of property ; making it, Ge' ntleman.—(Hear.) If any man had a right to be con-
therefore, a matter of the greatest importance to the nation fident in his own opinion, and to feel that by his learn-
at large that there should be justice in that court.—( Hear
hear.) He next came to the nature of the office of Lord ing and acuteness of mind he was likely to be right in his
Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor, who was tit the head of decision, Sir Edward Sugden was that man.—(Hear,
[The Noble Lord here read an extract from the evidencehear.)
of
that great court, had other most important functions to
Sir E. Sugden before the Committee on judicial salaries, in
erform also. In the first place he was at the
head which that Learned Gentleman stated that he considered the
of the Court of Chancery, and, though he
office of a single judge the most painful that a man could
seldom now a days heard original motions, the
daily business of the court was transacted by fill ; qualifying that opinion, however, with respect to those
who did not hold the situation of appellate judge—and the
him, and he heard appeals brought from the other judges in
Chancery before him. The Lord Chancellor was likewise the Vice-Chancellors were in that position—who must have the
feeling that if they were in error their decisions might be re •
judge who presided in the House of Lords while that House
heard and corrected by a court of appeal.] He (Lord John
remained the great court of appeals in this kingdom. He Russell) found also in other quarters that there was an opi-
had, besides, various administrative functions; he was a nion, which had gained great strength of late, that it was
member of the Cabinet for the time being, and as such he desirable when parties came to the Lord Chancellor's Court,
was consulted by the Government of the day on all poli- that they should have the decision of more than one judge.
tical questions which came before the Government, more es- Now, he thought that this view would ibe still further
pecially those relating to the constitution, to amendments of strengthened if the House agreed with him that it was desi-
the existing law, and to the enforcement of that law whea rable not to make an alteration in that practice by which an
it became a question in what manner it should be carried eminent man at the bar or on the bench was taken at once
into execution. He was also the adviser of the royal family into the Court of Chancery to preside there as a judge.
in all difficulties respecting their interest which might tarise, Of course it would be very unjust, and the occasion of a
and in consequence of all these functions he was placed in a great loss to the Government and the public in general if the
very high position. Under these circumstances he (Lord J.
always practised in the Court of Chancery should obtain the
rule were absolutely laid down that none but a man who had
Russell) thought it right to state to the House his view of the
advantages and disadvantages of this union of functions in office of Lord Chancellor ; and that those eminent men who,
that high position before he proceeded further. In the first at the common law bar and in the courts had distinguished
place, he thought it a great advantage that the Government themselves, and risen to the greatest' repute in their pro-
of
f
the country could have the aid and the authority of aession, should be excluded from the highest eminence to
person who had risen by his :talents at the bar to a place which a lawyer could attain.—(Hear.)
uhf
the greater for a
cause, as well as from the high position he had acquired, single judge to take npon himself the responsible duties of
must have great weight with the country. This he considered this court. Now, Sir (proceeded the Noble Lord) the Bill
as one of the greatest advantages possible to the executive which I have to propose to the House goes, first, upon the
Government. It was, however, a still greater advantage if foundation that it is desirable to have more than one judge
that were possible, that the Lord Chancellor should preside sitting in the Lord Chancellor's Court. It goes upon this ,
in the Heim of Lords, and be there the ultimate judge of other foundation, that the wear and tear being such as Sir E.
Sugden describes, and the political fuoand the
appeal, because because thereby the House of Lords had the security
that their decisions were presided ever by a man of whose tion not only to political questions, but actions, al the forms of
capacity and authority there could be no manner of doubt.— law, being so desirable, it is likewise desirable that the Lord
Chancellor should have a greater portion of time than he
(Hear ) There was, however, a still further advantage in
now possesses to devote to the consideration of these subjects.
this constitution of the office of Lord Chancellor. It was
—(Hear, hear.) It has been my fortune to be connected in the
an office always reckoned the great prize of the legal pro-
administration of the Government with my Noble and
fission ; and, therefore, while the Lord Chancellor sat at the Learned Friend Lord Cottenham. And I believe no man
head of the Court of Chancery, and at the head of the House
of Lords, to deliver, in the name of that House, its judg- ever imparted more satisfaction, by the attention which he
to the cases in the Court of Chancery, and the clear
ments to the country, it was felt that this high eminence gaveudgment which he brought to bear upon all questions which
might be reached by men of talent from the humblest sta- j
tion, by men who bad devoted their early lives to the col- came b-fore him than my Noble and Learned Friend.
But I must say that that great attention which was
tivation of the law, and who might truly say that they had
earned by their talents that eminent station.—( Hear, hear.) shown, not only by his judgments in the court, but by
It was, therefore, one of many instances in this country his study of the cases in his own house—for I have found
whereby the most aristocratic body in the state was con- him late at night in his study consulting precedents, and
I know that he very often sat up until two or three in
must
netted with those, who, by no original advantage of birth or
attention,
fortune, bet solely by their own merit and abilities, had the morning— I say that that great
which, with all his learning and familiarty with the law,
attained the highest station. These were the advantages.
he gave to these subjects, did tender him less able to
Ile should next state some of the disadvantages of the pre-
devote the time which others would desire to political ques-
sent constitution of the office. The chief disadvantage was
tions and to questions of administration.—(llear, hear) I
that the functions of the Lord Chancellor as judge were of
think, therefore, that it is desirable on this ground that the
so weighty a character—the attendance in the Court of
Lord Chancellor should be enabled to have relief from at-
Chancery to deliver judgments, for instance, was of such
tendance in the Court of Chancery, and that he should be
high importance, and involved such great labour of mind and
able—not to enter into that work which I have mentioned
body, that its junction with the requisite attendance on the
of criticising minute details and the precise language of
House of Lords, and with the solution of the great questions
Bills—but too give sufficient time for the consideration of all
of State which came before the Cabinet for discussion, all measures which affect the administration of the law, or
formed a mass of business so important and so weighty that
it seemed hardly possible for any one man to o be found ads- which may tend to alter in any respect any of the institu-
tions of the country. Now what I venture to propose is, that
quote to the duty. It was evidently another disadvantage
there shall be established a court which shall be called the
also, that while the Executive Government for the time
Supreme Court in Chancery, or the Lord Chancellor's Court,
being had the advice and assistance of the Lord Chancellor,
whichever may be decided upon; and that in that court shall
it was requcisoiitnecihdeedshwouitlhd
generalewenh
te
Cabinet
political
sit the Lord Chancellor, the Master of the Rolls, and one of
tbeheiarsin, aannd whose
that,o 8 h
the judges of the courts of law, to be summoned from time
sentiments
was changed, the country and the Court of Chancery lost all
to time for that purpose. lam informed that, in the present
the advantages of the accumulated experience of this high
state of the business before the common law courts—at least
officer. These considerations had been placed before the
it is the opinion of the present Lord Chancellor—it would
country, and weighed by eminent men of various minds
not be difficult for those courts to give the assistance of one
and dispositions; and the result was that various plans
of the judges for the performance of this duty. I propose,
bad been i roposed from time to time in order to secure
therefore, that there shall be three judges—the Lord Chan-
the great advantage which he had already mentioned, and
cellor, the Master of the Rolls, and one of the judges of the
to obviate the disadvantages by a change in the ma-
common law courts; that any two of them shall have the
chinery of the Court of Chancery, of the House of Lords,
or of the Administration. The first plan he should men.. power of hearing causes in the Court of Chancery ; and that,
in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, the two others shall
tion for the purpose was propounded with all that ability
have all the powers and authority in the Court of Chancery
and all that clearness of statement for which he was
which the Lord Chancellor himself possesses. It is also part
so famous, by Lord Langdale. In that plan a perma-
of the measure which I shall have the honour to propose,
nent judge was proposed ter the Court of Chancery, who
that appeals in bankruptcy, and all other statutory juris-
should not be changed with the Administration of the day.
It was proposed, likewise, that a Lord President should sit diction now exercised by the Lord Chancellor, shall be ex-
in the House of Lords as a permanent judge; and, further, ercised by this Supreme Court; and that the Lord Chan-
that there should be a third officer, with the title of Lord
cellor alone shall not exercise the authority which he now i
Keeper of the Great Seal, or Minister of Justice, who should
exercises in the Court of Chancery, but shall always exer-
cise it as a member of the Court. By this provision the
belong to the Administration of the day, and whose whole
duty should be directed to the framing and advising such Lord Chancellor would be enabled—indeed, would be re-
changes in the law as the Government or individuals should
quired to attend to the business of the Court of Chancery.
le weuld sit tere as a jude. m atter,
see fit, from time to time, to propose to Parliament. It ap-
a and other matters which would com All the
e beinterlocutor fore the Coury t, would
peered to him (Lord John Russell), however, that however
be heard by him, and at the same time he would not be so
plausible such a proposition might be—however:it might
entirely absorbed by those duties as not to have time for the
agree with theoretical views of a separation of the judicial
other high and important functions which he has to fulfil.
from the political functions of the Lord Chancellor, he could
not think that such a plan would be found beneficial. In In the same way questions of lunacy shall be heard by this
the first place, he did not think that the objection to the Supreme Court, and an arrangement shall be made with the
mixture ofju,
judicial and political functions in the Lord Chan- judges of the law courts for dispensing with the attendance
cellor was well-founded in all cases—but more especially of one of their body for the purpose of attending to this
as regarded the impartial administration of justice to suitors court. With regard to the salaries in future to be paid, it
in the Court of Chancery. To say nothing of Lord Mans- will be recollected that the Committee upon Judicial Salaries
field and Lord Ellenberough, he (Lord John Russell) proposed last year that if no division of the office of Lord
thought it would be found that this might be of some Chancellor was effected, the salary should be reduced to
weight in the case of a criminal judge ; but with regard 8,000/. a year. It is our opinion that that reduction is a
to a judge who presided in a court for the settlement greater reduction than ought to be made in so high an office,
of questions solely relating to property, he could not think and we think especially, that the pension to be paid on the
it at all likely that any political case would occur to bind, retirement from office of the Lord Chancellor should not
in the slightest degree, the decision of the Lord Chancellor. be diminished, because when the situation itself must de-
-(Hear, hear.) In the course of the debates which had Pene upon the changes in political life, it is desirable that
taken place on the subject, it had been maintained, he be- there should be a retiring allowance sufficient to induce men
lieved by Lord Haddington, that, notwithstanding the repu- who would otherwise hold permanent situations, to accept
tation of Lord Chancellor Jeffrey as a politician, his decisions of an office of so much importance to the country. What I
on property were equitable, and frequently looked back to propose, therefore, is, that the salary should be 10,0001. a
oa that ground. But without referring to such an extreme year, and that the retiring allowance should remain as at
case he (Lord J. Russell) thought he might say that since present, 5,0001. a year. There is another change which I
the Revolution—a period during which many decided poli- should, perhaps, have some difficulty is mentioning, be-
ticians had sat in the Court of Chancery, none of them cause it would certainly seem as if, being First Lord of the
more so, perhaps, than Lord Hardwicke—not one case had Treasury, I had an interest in the proposal I am about to
been decided with reference to political parties.—( Hear make. There is a great deal of ecclesisastical patronage
hear.) Therefore, if there was no reason why a political vested in the Lord Chancellor. Originally, I believe, it
Chancellor should not decide cases of property justly, and if was vested in him by the arrangement under which the
from the Revolution to the present time no practical evil had Persons who then assisted him in the Lord Chancellor's
arisen on that ground, he was bound to say, upon a full con- office were clerks in holy orders, and benefices were given
sideratien of the question, that, however plausible, he could them as a mode of rewarding them for the performance of
not agree with it. But to come to the practical evil of the their duties in the Court of Chancery. In fact, this pa-
plan. 'The Lord Chancellor, appointed to the permanent tronage belongs to the time when the Lord Chancellor was
office of Judge of the Court of Chancery, would no doubt dis- usually an ecclesiastic, and held ecclesiastical livings. It is
charge his duty like all the other judges —with zeal and now disposed of, not by reference to the Crown—not by
ability; the presiding judge in the House of Lords would taking the Queen's pleasure, as is the case with the political
doubtless do the same; but when the House came to con- offices of the State, but by the Lord Chancellor's own discre-
sider that which was so useful and advantageous in the pre- tion. A Commission, which reported last year, recommended
sent constitution of the office of Lord Chagncellor—namely, that the whole of these benefices should be sold for the pur-
that a person of authority and;weight was always ready to p
Go pos
verne of
mentincreasing te meang
s of
at spiritual instruction ; but the
assist the Government, and to take part in all- debates on , upon thakin throposal into consideration,e
constitutional and legal questions in the House of Lords— were decidedly averse to it— (Cheers)--thinking, in the first
then the plan entirely failed. In the first
place, to obtain a
Place,that it was not advisable to part with a great public
looking at all the
first-rate man at the bar in that capacity, trust. and sell it to whoever might offer the best price for it
chances of the change, the House would be obli ' —(Hear, hear)—and thinking, in the second place, that such
ged to give a
higher salary and a higher retiring allowance than was at a separation of a great part of the Church from connexion
present given to any member of the Government; and he with the State was in itself not at all desirable. What I pro-
(Lord John Russell) could not but foresee that the House, pose therefore is, that this patronage should in future be
though it might grant them at first, 'would soon begin to vested in the Crown, and that the Minister of the Crown
complain and to inquire why such an officer should have a should take the pleasure of the Soverign with reference to its
higher salary and retiring allowance than any other political distribution, in the same way as with the ecclesiastical titles
person. He did not, therefore, think this part of the plan . which are vested in the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) I have now
could be maintained. In respect of the other offices, ' stated the general provisions of the Bill which I shall have
that of Lord Chancellor and Lord President in the House the honour to propose; but I should mislead the House if I
of Lords, he should say nothing ; but it would be gave it to suppose that I was now carrying into effect all the
found, however, that the judgeships of the common law proposals which the Government and the Lord Chascellor
courts would be more sought after than that of will have to make for the improvement of the administration
the Keeper of the Seals or Minister of Justice. The of justice. In her Majesty's Speech at the commencement of
country would, therefore, be liable to have an inferior man this session, it is said :
in this situation, who, when he advised the Government, " The administration of justice in the several departments
would be liable to have his advice overthrown by the dicta of law and equity will no doubt receive the serious attention
of more eminent men in the other high situations. If that of Parliament; and I feel confident that the measures which
was the case he (Lord J. Russell) did not see why such large may be submitted, with a view of improving that administra-
provision should be made for such officer, or why of judicature in the the Home lion, will be discussed with that mature deliberation which
of the day should not be competent then as now important changes in the highest courts
J
to perform all the duties of Lord Keeper or Minister of kingdom imperatively demand."
Justice. With regard to one of the duties of the proposed Now, Sir, one of the changes which has been male, as any
Minister of Justice, he (Lord J. Russell) should say from one who consulted the newspapers of the day will
have teen,
his own experience that no such high officer was required— is „eduction and an abolition of many of the fees which
he meant, teat of superintending Bills to be brought into are now paid on proceedings in the Court of Chancery.—
Parliameet, and seeing that no errors crept into their legise ( Hear, bear.) lam persuaded that there is nothing more
Wien, either as regarded truth or language. But the keel- desirable than that the suitor should be enabled to obtain
Wien of this country was fettled by both Houses one of justice without those very great expenses, which must deter
which was elected by the popular vote; and, therefore, all many from entering the courts.—(Hear, hear.) I have
Bills that passed through them should not only satisfy heard it said by some, that it is desirable the avenues cf jua-
,..

tice should be closed upon them, because, otherwise, of jus-
tice were made too cheap, litigation would be increased.
Now, if it be desirable to discourage litiga ion, this is not
the way in which it ought to be discouraged.—(Hear.)
If a person comes with a frivolous complaint, or brings a fri-
volous action against another, let him by all means pay the
penalty of such a proceeding, by the costs which would be
awarded against him. That is a fair way of discouraging
litigation; but to say that a man shall pay a particular
amount of money before ho can obtain justice on a fair com-
plaint, that I hold to be inconsistent with all the prin-
ciples which ought to regulate the administration ( f
justice. And when you say that it would discourage litiga-
tion, I really think that even in that point of view the
greatest error would be committed, because it evidently
depends upon the fortune of the person upon whom this pe-
nalty is inflicted. Take a man of 20,000/. or 30,0001. a year,
who to indulge his spite, or to revenge himself upon some
per on who is his enemy, would have no hesitation in spend-
ing 1,0001. in a court of justice in order to obtain that end.
But take a poor man, who has had real wrong done him, he
would not be able to spend even 1001. to obtain redress. So
that whilst the rich man would be at liberty to indulge a
vexatious spirit of litigation, the poor =an would be actually
debarred from obtaining the redress which he deserved the
making justice cheap, therefore, so far as it can be done, I
hold to be one of the duties of the State, and I think we
cannot in this respect err in abolishing or reducing as many
fees as it may be found possible to abolish or reduce. But
there are other measures in regard to which we have issued
two Commissions—one to inquire into the proceedings in the
common law courts ; the other to consider all the proceedings
in the Court of Chancery. Without mentioning any particular
measures which are under their deliberation, I may state that

which we should in future resent. He thanked the House fc

the patience with which they had heard him, but he put it,
to the House, whether in an assembly of English gentlemen,
the course r ursued towards him was a becoming one.—(llear.y,
Mr. M'CULLAGH thought that at that late hour those
who objected to the introduction of the Bill were not oat of
order.

Mr. ANSTEY hoped that Hon. Gentlemen would give
consideration to this matter, so as to allow the Bill to be
read a second time, and go to a Select Committee. He ap•
proved of the object of the Nil ; but he thought it quite im•
possible the Right Hon. Gentleman could put fifty statutes,
as he had said, in one.

Lord PALMERSTON said the time of the House was
sometimes wasted by difference of opinion, but it was rather
hard that they should be kept out of their beds when they
were all agreed.— (Hear, and laughter.) The Noble Lord, in
his happy vein of humour, then proceeded to criticise the
course taken by the various Members on the subject, and
concluded by proposing that they should all agree to postpone
the Bill.

Mr. REYNOLDS and other Hon. Members approved of
the proposition, and the Bill was accordingly pcstponwl.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Two o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the Howe of Commons )

THURSDAY, MARCH 27.

DIFFERENTIAL DUTIES (SPAIN).
Motion made, and Question put," That this House will,
To-morrow, resolve itself into a Committee, to consider the
following Resolution: That, with a view to the just protec.
tion of British Navigation and Commerce, it is expedient
that, under the provisions of the Act 12 and 13 Vic. c. 29,
such additional Duties should be levied in the ports of the
British Empire upon goods imported or exported in Spanish
ships, and on the tonnage of such ships, as may serve to
countervail the differential Duties on goods and tonnage
levied in the ports of Spain and her dependencies on British
ships." The House divided :
MINORITY—AYES, 53.
Arkwright, George Gallwey, Sir W. P. Sanders, George
Baird James Gaskell, J. M. Scully, Francis
Bankes, George Grace, 0. D. Spooner, Richard
Barrow, W. H. Gwyn, Howe! Stanford, J. F.
Beresford, William Higgins, George Stanley, Edward
Blakemore, R. Hodgson, W. N. Stanley, E. H.
Boldero, H. George Hotham, Lord Stephenson, Robert
Booker, T. W. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Stuart, John
Booth, Sir R. G. Lennox, Lord A. Sullivan, Michael
Cayley, Edward S. Macaghten, Sir E. Thompson,:AldermA
Child, Smith Maher, N. Tyler, Sir G.
Clive, IL B. Moffatt, George Tyrell, Sir J.'
Cobbold, J. C. Mullings, J. R. Walpole, Spencer
Conolly, ThomaS O'Brien, Sir Lucius Wawn, J. T.
Dodd, G. O'Flahcrty, Anthony Willoughby, Sir a.
Duke, Sir James Pakington, Sir J.
Ferrer, James Frinsep, H. T. TSLLUS.
Forbes, William Renton, J. C. Newdegate, C. N.
Frewen, C. H. Reynolds, John Hildyard. R. C.

I am persuaded the result of these Commissions will be very
much to prevent the continual transfers frlm one court to
another; to prevent those tedious proceedings which have
hitherto greatly embarrassed our courts of justice. I
believe they are devoting their attention to get
rid, as far as possible, of those technicalities
which do not belong to the real circumstances and
merits of a case. I believe that if we proceed in this course
very great good may be effected; and lam sure there ii no
subject which more deserves the attention of Parliament.
This I can assure the House, that however difficult these
questions may be, the Government will continue to pay the
most earnest attention to them, convinced not only that it
is their duty to pay such attention, but that if there is any
right which the people of this conntry possess, it is the right
to have justice not only impartially and fairly administered,
as I believe it is, but administered at as little cost to the
suitor as his state can sustain.—(Hear, hear.) With those
opinions, and without asking the House to pledge itself to
the details of a measure on this great subject, I conclude by
moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the better administra-
tion of justice in the Court of Chancery.
Mr. STUART said he only rose to say that the Noble
Lord, in speaking of the office of Lord Chancellor, and the ad-
ministration of justice in the Court of Chancery, had ex-
pressed himself so admirably with respect to the general ob-
jects of the Bill, that although he entirely disapproved of the
latter portion of the measure, he could not refrain from express-
ing his admiration of the views which he had expressed. The
Noble Lord's proposal assigned to the Lord Chancellor cer-
tain judges for his associates, though it might be that he
would prefer the assistance of others. In his opinion there
was no occasion for this arrangement, because at the pre-
sent moment the Lord Chancellor had the power of calling
any of the common law judges to his aid, an invitation that
was never refused. Then the removal of the Master of the
Rolls from his court would have the effect of closing it on
every day that the Lord Chancellor sat.—(Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—That was by the direction of the
Lord Chancellor.
Mr. STUART—He regarded it as an improper arrange-
ment. The Noble Lord had made up his mind not to sepa-
rate the political and judicial functions of the Chancellor, and
upon that point he agreed with the Noble Lord, that no man
filling that office would be biassed in giving a decision on
property by political motives. He thought the Chancellor
would give a better opinion singly than assisted by assessors.
The single judgments of Lord Cottenham were better than
those which he gave in conjunction with his assessors. He
had a great objection to have the ecclesiastical patronage at-
tached to the office transferred to the Treasury. He would
prefer that it should be vested in the keeper of the King's
conscience.
Mr. R. PALMER felt satisfied that this Bill would not be
satisfactory to the profession or to suitors. It was proposed
to relieve the Lord Chancellor from the details of the busi-
ness of the court, and give him the benefit of the services of
the Master of the Rolls, and of another judge. He would
ask what was to become of the Rolls Court? It was, in fact,
tantamount to its abolition.
Mr. S. WORTLEY had heard with pleasure the constitu-
tional principles developed by the Noble Lord. There were
one or two points only upon which he would venture to offer
an opinion. He thought the business of the equity courts,
which was increasing, should have an increased judicial
staff. The business of the common law courts was decreas-
ing, yet they had fifteen judges, while the equity courts had
only five judges. The plan was, however, mainly deficient,
in not providing for an efficient court of appeal in the House
of Lords.
Mr. HEADLAM thought that there should not be a per-
manent judge at the heaa of the Court of Chancery, as it
would place too much power in the hands of one individual.
Lord J. RUSSELL thanked Hon. Members who had made
so many suggestions in a friendly spirit. There were some
offices connected with the Lord Chancellor that it was neces-
sary to maintain. There were others that might be aboli-hed,
and at present the Lord Chancellor was paying every atten-
tion to this subject.
Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY said, that what the public
desired was some mode of decreasing the expense of conduct-
ing a suit in Chancery.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that was an object of
the greatest possible importance, and he hoped that further
opportunities would occur for discussing this subject.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
APPRENTICES AND SERVANTS BILL.
On the consideration of the Apprentices and Servants Bill

Abdy, T. N.
Aglionby, H.
. _.

Alcoek, Thomas
Anderson, Arthur
Anson, Colonel
Ansley, Thomas
Baines, M. T.

Baring, Sir F.
Bass, M. T.

Bell, Jacob
Bellew, B. M.
Berkeley, Admiral
Bernard, Viscount
Blair, Stephen
Bright, John
Buxton, Sir E.
Calvert, Frederic
Carter, John B.
Clay, James
Clay, Sir W.
Cockburn, Sir A.
Colebrooke, Sir T.
Craig, Sir W. G.
Cubitt, William
Denison, (Edmund
Duncuft, John
Dundas, Admiral
Dundas, Sir David
Ellis, John
Elliot, J. E.

Fagan, William
Ferguson, Sir R.
Fitzpatrick, J. W.
Forster, Matthew

MAJORITY-NOES, 98.

Fox, W. J. Paget, Lord C.
Freestun, Colonel Palmerston, Vb.
French, F. Parker, John
Graham, Sir James Patten, J. W.
Grey, Sir G. Peel, Frederick
Guest, Sir John Pilkington, Jewell
Harris, Richard Power, Dr.
Butte, Alexander Power, Nicholas
Hatchell, John Ricardo, J. L.
Hawes, Benjamin Rich, Henry
Hayes, Sir E. Romilly, Sir John
Rapier, W. G. Russell, Lord John
Headlam, ThomaS Russell, F. C.
Heald, James Saiwey, Colonel
Heathcoat, John Seymour, Lord
Henry, Alexander Smith, J. B.
Herbert, Sydney Somerville, Sir W.
Hepworth, Lawrence Strickland, Sir G.
Hill, Lord M. Tancred, H. W.
Hobhouse, T. B. Thompson, Colonel
Hume, Joseph Thornely, Thomas
Kershaw, James Verney, Sir H.
Labonchere, Henry Villiers, Charles
Lewis, G. C. Walmslep, Sir J.
Loveden, Pryso Watkins, Colonel
M`Gregor, John Wilcox, Brodie
M'Taggart, Sir J. Williams, John
Matheson, Colonel Wilson, James
Milton, Viscount Weod, Sir Charlet
Mitchell, T. A. Wood, W. P.
Morison, Sir W.
Morris, David
Mowatt, Francis
Hunts, G. F.

TELLERS.
Brotherton, J.
Gibson, T. M.

APPOINTMENT OF A VICE-CHANCELLOR BILL,
As amended, considered ; Amendment proposed in Clause C,
line 3, to leave out the words " of the same," and insert the
words " not exceeding in," instead thereof:—Question put.
" That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the'
Clause." The House divided :
MAJORITY—AYES, 49.
Aglionby, H. A. Grenfell, Charles W. Ponsonby, C. F.
Anstey, T. C. Grey, Sir G. Romilly, Colonel
Baines, M. T. Hatchell, John Hominy, Sir John
Bernal, Ralph Hawes, Benj. Russell, Lord J.
Brotherton, Joseph Mayes, Sir E. Russell, F. C. H.
Calvert, Frederic Headlam, T. E. Somerville, SirlW.
Carter, J. B. Hobhouse, T. B. Thompson, Colonel
Cockburn, Sir A. Labouchere, Henry Thornely, T.
Cowper, W. F. Lewis, G. C. Vesey,;Thomint
Craig, Sir W. G. Magan, W. H. Walpole, S. a
Dundas, Admiral Mahon, O'Gorman Wilson, James
Dundas, Sir 1). O'Connell, M. J. Wood, W. P.
Dunne, Colonel Paget, Lord C. Wortley, J. S.
Ebrington, Viscount Palmer, Roundell
Elliot, J. E. Palmerston, Viscount =LIMA.
Ferguson, Sir R. Parker, John Hill, Lord Id arm
Fitzwilliam, G. W. Fatten, W. Hayter, W. G.
French, F. Pilkingten, James

MINORITY—NOES, 32.
Arkwright, George Hodgson, W. N. Sadleir, John
Bankes, George Joiliffe, Sir W. H. Salwey, Colonel
Beresford, William Keating, Robert Sanders, George
Blair, Stephen Keogh, William Scully, Francis
Blake, M. J. Kershaw, James Smollett, A.
Burghley, Lord Knox, W. S. Spooner, Richard
Duncan, John M'Cullagh, W. Sullivan, Michael
Edwards, henry Mullings, J. R. Williams, John
Grogan, E. Neeld, Joseph
Gwyn. Howel Nugent, Sir Percy
Henley, J. W. Reynold., Jonh
Higgins, George Roche, E. B

as amended,
Sir \V. JOLLIFFE moved the addition of a clause, to the
effect that, where any young person, under the age of 18,
shall be taken from the workhouse, and apprenticed or hired,
a written notice of such hiring shall be sent to the guar-
dians, to be registered, and the guardians shall cause the
said ycuog person to be visited frequently.
Mr. BAINES said he would not oppose the clause, and it
was-accordingly agreed to; and the Bill was ordered to be
read a third time on Monday next.
APPOINTMENT OF A VICE-CHANCELLOR BILL.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL having proposed the third
reading of this Bill.
Sir H. W'ILLOUGHBY rose to bring forward the amend-
ment of which he had given notice for the reduction of the
retiring pension of the Vice-Chancellors. The point he
wished to present to the House was this, that the retiring
pension of the Vice-Chancellor under this Bill should be
3,0001. instead of 3,5001. So far as diplomatic services were
concerned, the pension did not exceed 1,780/. To take the
civil service, in all the other departments of the State, there
was nothing like it, and in the military service he believed
there was no pension that exceeded 3,000/. Up to 182 a the
retiring pension in the judicial service was 2,000/. a year;
and, in that year, the retiring pension of the puisna judges
was increased to 3,5001. a year. He concluded by moving,
as an amendment, to Clause 5, after the word " annuity," the
insertion of the words, "not exceeding 3,000?"
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there was no one
who accepted the office of Vice-Chancellor, without incur-
ring a considerable diminution of income. The retiring
allowance was a considerable inducement to men of ability
to accept of the office, and if they decreased that allow-
ance they must of necessity increase the salary. He earnestly
besought the House not to adopt the amendment of the Hon.
Baronet.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment ... 32
Against it ... ... 49
Majority ... ... —l7
The Bill, as amended, was then considered.
ENFRANCHISEMENT OF COPY HOLDS BILL.
Mr. AGLIONBY moved the secood reading of this Bill.
He believed that there was no objection to the principle of
the Bill, seeing that it had already twice received the sanc-
tion of the House; there were, however, objections to the
details, and, in order to meet these, he proposed, if the
House agreed to the second reading, to refer the Bill to a
Select Committee.
Mr. MU LLINGS did not oppose the principle of the Bill,
but because it was one that involved such minute, and, at
the same time, such important details, that he thought it
should be brought forward under the sanction of the Go-
vernment.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered tl be
referred to a Select Committee.
CIVIL BILLS (IRELAND) BILL.

TELLIB.S.
Willoughby, Sir li.
Sibthorp. Colonel

MR. PETu AND LORD WARD.
47, Russell-square, 17th March, 1851.
TO THE EDITOR oT THE MORNING POST.

Sir,—l have read Lord Ward's letter to you in your paper
of this morning.
My only object in making the statement which I did at
the meeting of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhamptoa
Railway Company was to rebut the unjust aspersions of Lord
Ward ; and if, in doing so, the declarations which I was
the-i c mpelled to make, and am now forced to reiterate, are
disagreeable to Lord Ward, it is by no fault of mine that
they are so.
Bat even now Lord Ward does not deny " the statement
which I made at the meeting," to the effect that he, being
chairman of the company, did, pending negotiations with the
London and 1\ orth-Western and Midland ampauies, de-
mand, through the party deputed to act on behalf of those
companies, 5,000 preference shares at par, those shares being
at that time at a very considerable premium. He merely
re-asserts a former denial of a particular expression attri-
buted to his solicitor, namely, that " His Lordship required
three things to be done before he would undertake to assent
to the agreement." On returning to the report to which
Lord Ward now refers me, I find that the denial was given
simply in these words, " I never said that ;" and in like man-
ner, in his Lordship's letter of yesterday, he confines hie
denial to the use of the words, "as a preliminary to, or con-
dition of, his subscribing the proposed arrangement."
This, I repeat, is no denial of my statement. Whether
Lord Ward used the words `‘ as a preliminary to, or condition
of," is obviously beside the question. It might be quite
unnecessary to say whst was necessarily implied, but Lord
Ward cannot be permitted by this special pleading to
avoid the statement which I made circumstantially and is
full detail, not of having used any particular form of ex-
pression, but of having demanded and insisted upon the 5,000
shares as a sine qua non (for that was the expression in
which Lord Ward's ultimate determination was, in the
hearing of more than one, conveyed) to his adhesion to the
proposed arrangement. If Lord Ward did not intend the
terms which be proposed to be a condition of his acquies.
ence, and a part of the treaty, why was the demand of those
terms made directly to the companies with whom, as he
knew, that treaty had been all but concluded? the only
question, then, remaining open being this—Whether his
Lordship would or would not adopt it?
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
S. MORTON PETO.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND moved the
second reading of this Bill.—(" Oh, oh," from a number of
Irish Members, who had taken their seats on the Opposition
benches.) If there was the slightest objection on the part
of Hon. Members opposite to proceed with the Bill, he would
postpone it to another day.
Mr. F. FRENCH hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would
persist in carrying a measure so urgently required, and of so
beneficial a character.—(oh, oh.)
The ATT PRNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND, seeing the
opposition, would withdraw it, and move the second reading
this day.
Mr. REYNOLDS opposed a Bill of this kind containing
160 clauses, being considered at this time of night, or rather
of morning. It made an entire alteration of the practice in
Ireland. It was understood that the principle was to be
discussed on the second reading; but instead of that, the
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in the most private and
confidential wanner, asked them to take it on his credit.—
(Laughter.) That appeared to be a practice of his—(Hear,
hear)—but he could not agree to it. rle asked the Right
Hon. Gentleman to explain the clauses, and if he refused to
do so, on the plea that it would be considered in Committee,
he (Mr. Reynolds) would ask whether it was in a select or a
full Committee of the House, as that was not the case at this
advanced hour of the morning, he would move, as an amend-
ment, that this House do adjourn.—(No, no.)
The amendment not having been seconded,
The O'GORMAN MAHON said he would have seconded
the motion if he had not thought the Bill deserved the sup-
port of the Hon. Member for Dublin, above all others. He
would not support any factious motion made by those who
assumed to be the representatives of Ireland, because at this
moment they chose to band themselves against the only
party who ever did justice to his country.—(Adjourn.) He
had supported the cause of Ireland at a time when many of
these Members had not a seat in that House—(Question)—
but he would not be a party to any factious opposition, and
he should, therefore, give;his vote in favour of the second read-
ing of the Bill.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE defended the course pursued by
the Goverment. The question had been urged upon them
by many Honourable Members representing Ireland, and
there was not the slightest intention to make it a party
question.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. KEOGH though the course taken on that side had
been misunderstood. There was no objection to the .prin •
ciple of the Bill, but they thought a Bill of this importance
and magnitude, brought before the House after long delibe-
rati n, ought to have been explained by the law officers of
the Crown. He was anxious to explain why the Irish Mem-
bers took this course; they thought that legal Bills affecting
Ireland ought not to be left to the English Attorney-Gene-
nil,-
or the law officers of the Crown in England, but that
they should be explained by the Irish law officers of the
Crown.—( Hear, hear.) They thought, and he had no
doubt that the English public thought so too, that the offi-
cers of the Crown in England had quite business enough of
their own.—(Hear, bear.) He should support the principle
of the Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IREL AND explained
that on the introduction of the Bill he had stated' that it was
a consolidation of numerous s atutes in Ireland, and intended
to form a "manual" of reference. He must now say that
there was not an Irish Membere
was perfectly aware of the
in this House who was not in-
formed on the subject.
habitual objection made to the introduction of Bills at that
hour of the morning ;
second reading of and all he at present wished was the
the Bill, and then to refer it to a Select
L Committee. Hon. Gentlemen, however, were anxious to
express their opinions on the Bill, not so much, he regretted
to say, for that purpose as for the more congenial one of
• giving their opinions, and indulging in abuse of him, abuse

MR. PETO AND LORD WARD.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING POST.
Blivart's Hotel, March 26, 1851.

Sir,—Mr. Peto, in a letter published in your columns to-
day, repeats the charge made by him against me at the Ox-
foril, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway meeting, on
28th of last February, of having demanded 5,000 Preference
Shares as a" preliminary to considering the arrangement
proposed with the London and North-Western and Midland
Companies," and adds, " that it is due to himself to declare
that I did not at that meeting deny having done so." If
he will turn to the report of that meeting, he will see that
when he ventured to make the assertion that I had asked for
than, as one of the conditions to assenting to the proposed
a-rangemeuts between the other companies, or in other
words, when he ventured to impute motives to me in having
asked for them, I met him—Mr. Peto—face to face, with a
distinet denial of having done so, as a " preliminary to," Of
"condition of," my subscribing the proposed arrangement.
I enter into these details to recal to Mr. Peto'a recollectioa
the facts as they took place, rs I am unwilling to see in his
letter of this morning a studied insult to mys9ll; or to believe
that he would convey such to me threugh the column& of the
public press.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,
W ARD.

THE GREAT ANTI-PAPAL LEAGUE....The ori-
nators of the Great Anti-Papal League, to which we alluded
a few days ago, as being in the course of formatiou, met again
yesterday in Osborne's Hotel, in the Adel hi. There was a
very large attendance of distinguished laymen, clergymen of
the Church of England, and Dissenting ministers of various
Evangelical denominations. Among those present were, the
Earl of Winchilsea, Lord Ashley, Sir Culling Eardley, Sir
Harry Verney, Bart.. M.P., Mr. Childers,
tre, M.P., Mr. Tollemache, r., hI.P., Mr. Plump-
MC. Bevan, Esq.t_the
City banker; Admiral Rope, Hon. Captain Maude, the Hoe.
and Rev. Montague Villiers, Rev. D. Wilson, Rev.
W. W. Champneys, Rev. E. Andel, Rev. Henry Venn,
Rev. Dr. Steane, Rev. Dr. Bunting, Rev. Dr. Cox, Rev. Dr.
Hoby, Rev, Dr. Morison,
Rev. Dr. Tidman, Rev. Thomas
Binney, tee. Lord AsbleY
presided, and the meeting re-
mained in deliberation for three hours. The proceedings
were characterised throughout by the greatest earnestness of
spirit and unanimity. As the meeting was only prelimina,
but this we can say.with confidence, t at out of the meeting
we are tot at liberty to refer in detailh to what transpiV. ;
of yesterday will arise one of the most powerful religious con-
which we have any example in this or in any
and that, when the measures to be adopted to
federations of
other country.
t the Popish foe are fully developed, the Church of
stand aghast at the bare idea of the amount of
resistance which is about to be offered to her aggressions—.
Advertiser.
(ADVERTISEMENT.]— A remarkable Cure in Hobart
t°Ronnlfreolill
Tolen by Holloway's Pills and Ointment.—Major Welch, of
Wellington-bridge, Hobart Town, writes that Holloway's
Pills and Ointment enjoy high reputation in Van Diemen's
Land ; he speaks of one man who for years had been under the
treatment of the medical practitioners, and was discharged
from the hospital as incurable, and had become so miserable
emaciated and weak that he could only move about with the
assistance of persons supporting him. In this condition is
commenced using these medicines, which have so completely
renovated his health that he is now become a stout, healthy.
looking man, and his cure he solely attributes to the use of
Holloway's Pills and Ointment. Sold by all druggists, and at
Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London.

The Rev. T. it Davies, incumbent of the Church of
the Holy Trinity, Nottingham, has been appointed to the vs-
cant aka of Archdeacon of Melbourne. South

DAILY WEATHER TABLE.

State of the Wind and Weather at each of the following
places at Nine o'clock yesterday morning.—The stations
are arranged in order of latitude.

KING6TOW'N Dur,r.n.• ) —Wiucl W.N.W., gentle breeze—rain.
PLYMOUTH —Wind N.W., gentle breeze—rain.
Posasmourn—Wind S.W., gentle breeze—overcast.
XHIGIITON—Wind W., strong breeze—overcast.
640UTIIA)11'1)SN— Wind S.W., strong breeze—rain.
E—Wi d S.W., Ohio breeze—overcast.
TuNnnlDGE—Wind W., gentle breeze--partially cloudy.
Besrx GSTOK ind S. W., strong breeze—overcast.
GRE6NWICII—Wind S.W.,strot:g breeze—partially cloudy.
Cow u }ESTER— W ind S.W., strong breeze—partially cloudy.
Cammt.lDGE—Wind S.W., strong breeze— partially cloudy.
BIRMINGHAM Wind S. W., calm—overcast.
PETERBOROUGH—Wind S.W., stingbreeze—partially

cloudy.
TARMOUTII-Wind S.W., strong breeze-overcast.
CREWE-Wind W., fresh breeze-cloudy.
CONWAY-Wind W., gentle breeze-partially cloudy.
HOLYHEAD-Wind W., strong breeze-rain.
lavattroor.,-Wind N.W., gentle breeze-partially cloudy.
LEEDS-Wind W., hard wind- overcast.
LANCASTER-Wind S. W., strong breeze-partially cloudy.
WHITBY-Wind W.S.W., strong breeze-overcast.
DARLINGTON-Wind W., strong breeze-cloudless.
SHAP-Wind W., gentle breeze-partially cloudy.
CanusLE-Wind W., gentle breeze-cloudless.
BEArrook-Wind S.W., gentle breeze-overcast.
ii3Bßsvrcut-Wind W., strong breeze-partially cloudy.
The returns from the following places indicate the state of
the wind and weather on Wednesday morning at nine
o'clock :-
Co ILK -Wind S.W, light breeze-light clouds.
LLNIERICK-Wind W., gentle breeze-heavy showers.
CARLOW-Wind N.E., hard wind-cloudy.
KINGSTOWN (Dtmus) -Wind N.W., gentlebreeze-overcast.
blui.usoart-Wind N.W., gentle breeze-principally cloudy.
Poona:-Wind S. W.. strong breeze-scud, rain.
PIZTEBBOROUGH-Wind S.W., strong breeze-rain.
,Cltwg-Wind W., strong breeze-rain.
L'lvßPbot,-Wind N.W., strong breeze-rain.
LzinA-Wind S.E., calm-rain.
Yosß-Wind S. E., gentle breeze-rain.
LANCASTV4t--Wind W., strong breeze-heavy rain.
_ Dititusri, is-Wind E. gentle breeze-rain.
V ind E.,, gentle breeze -rain.
WitrrxravV- Wind W., strong breeze-overcast.
,
CARLISLE - Ind 3, gentle breeze-rain.
-Wind Isr
BEATTO" "--.CV,, strong breeze-heavy rain.

4f4,0'
4.1 •
Ndif fa
14/'' • •
a era :f •