The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 12, 1859,

THIRD READINGS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Dundalk and Enniskillen Railway, Dublin and Wicklow
Railway, Glasgow Corp•ration Water, Leominster and
Kingston Railway, Great Northern Railway, King's
Lynn Waterworks and Market Improvement, and
Tavistock Market and Streets.
THE INDIAN ARMY.

Earl GRANVILLE gave notice that to-morrow he
should move for a copy of the report of the commission on
the organisation of the Indian army.
The Earl of DE RBY said there would be no objection
to the motion.

COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL.
This bill was read a first time.
CHANCERY ACCOMMODATION.

Lord REDESDALE moved that there be laid before
the house a plan of the ground proposed to be appropriated
by the Hon. Society of Lincoln's-inn, to the courts, and
other buildings for the transaction of the business of the
Court of Chancery under the provisions of the Court
of Chancery Accommodation Bill, now before
the house, and also plans and elevations of
the said courts and buildings. The noble lord was
of opinion that no sufficient grounds existed for fixing on
the spot named in the bill. He thought the house ought
not to pass the bill before some further information of a
more definite character was in possession of their lordships.
The noble lord, who spoke in a very indistinct tone, was
understood to say that a much more suitable site might be
obtained at a greatly reduced price in the neighbourhood of
Westminster.

Lord ST. LEONARDS had no objection to the motion
of the noble lord, but he was of opinion that the equity
courts of law should not be removed from Lincoln's-inn.
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated that the act of 1852
had greatly improved the practice of the Court of Chancery,
and it was for the purpose of giving full effect to the im-
provements contemplated by that act that he had proposed
the Bill which had been referred to for providing increased
accommodation for the Court of Chancery. With respect
to the motion for plans and elevations of the proposed build-
ings, he must remind their lordships that those plans were
as much the property of the Society of Lincoln's-inn as
any plan for the improvement of a gentleman's estate was
the property of that gentleman. These plans were private
property, and there was no application for public money to
effect the contemplated improvements. He had introduced
the bill, moreover, not as connected with the Government,
but on account of his office as the head of the Court of
Chancery, and of the absolute necessity for greater accom-
modation being given to the Courts. When the two addi-
tional Vice-Chancellors were created the Society of Lin-
coln's-inn, at its own expense, built two courts for their
temporary accommodation, but he believed that those
courts, if they were not very soon pulled down, would fall
of themselves. (A laugh.) the act of 1852 abolished Mas-
ters in Chancery, and a great proportion of the business was
now done by the judges in the Court of Chancery and by
their chief clerks in chambers. Rooms had been taken for
the chief clerks, but they were very inconvenient, and he
believed that the efficiency of that most important public
measure of 1852 had been very considerably impaired, owing
to the want of proper accommodation. It was absolutely
essential, in order to carry out the system provided by that
act, that the chief clerks should have chambers near their
courts, in order that they might have ready and constant
access to them. The Society of Lincoln's-inn proposed to
give a site and to erect proper courts and proper chambers,
provided they were guaranted 4 per cent. on their outlay
and on the loss of the rent which they would incur by pull-
ing down chambers. Tinder the act of 1952 the Lord
Chancellor had the power' of applying a portion of the
Suitors' Fee Fnnd for the purpose of providing courts and
offices, but he could only applythat fund from year to year,
and the Society of Lincoln's-inn desired to be secured for
their outlay by having a term of years granted, and that
was the only ground which rendered an application to Par-
liament necessary. He should have thought that a measure
of this urgency would have been acceded to immediately,
and so it would, he believed, but for a larger scheme having
been propounded, the object of which was to clear away
about seven acres of buildings between Carey-street and the
Strand, and to bring all the courts of law and equity toge-
ther upon that spot. That might or might not be a very de-
sirable object, but the means suggested for accomplishing
it seemed to be of sucha character that it would be his duty
to oppose it; because, as he understood, the Incorporated
Law Society proposed to take £BOO,OOO from the Suitors'
Fee Fund of the Court of Chancery, and to apply it to that
purpose. His noble friend at the head of the Government
ha&consented to grant a commissionto inquire into the ex-
pediency of concentrating those courts, and into the means
by which it could be effected, and he believed that the result
of the inquiry would be to show that the Suitors' Fee Fund
had to !bear charges to such an amount that there was no
surplui which could be appropriated to this purpose. But
supposing that such a plan should be deemed desirable and
that funds could be found for accomplishing it, how many
years, he asked, must elapse before it could possibly be car-
ried out, while the suitors in the Court of Chancery and the
public generally were suffering from the want of the accom-
modation which was so much required ? This limited
scheme which he had introduced would not interfere in the
slightest degree prejudicially with the larger plan, because
the courts to be erected in Lincoln- s-inn* under his bill
would only be about 200 yards from the site which was
suggested in the new plan.
Lord CAMPBE LL was glad to hear that the noble earl
at the head of the Government had granted a commission to
inquire into the expediency of concentrating all the courts,
for the subject was of the last importance to the judges,
jurors, the bar, and the public at large. He hoped that all
further discussion would be postponed until the commission
had made its report. (Hear, hear.)
Lord CRAN WORTH agreed that the working of the
Act of 1852 was much impeded by the present state of the
Courts ; and fcr that reason he highly approved of the mea-
sure which the Lord Chancellor had laid before Parliament.
But he saw no reasonable objections to the plans being pro-
duced for tho information of Parliament and the public.
After a few words from from ST. LEONARDS, the motion
was negatived.
TICKETS OF LEAVE.

Viscount DUNGANNON moved for returns of the num.
ber of convicts to whom tickets of leave had been granted
during the years 1857 and 1858, specifying the number
given each year ; also the number who, during that period,
have been remanded to prison in consequence of the com-
mission of any subsequent offence, with a view of submit-
ting the whole subject to the consideration of their lordships
at an early period of the next session.
TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) BILL.
The order for the second reading of this bill was dis-
charged.
THE IRISH MAILS.

Lord MONTEAGLE, in pursuance of notice, asked the
First Lord of the Treasury in what mode, and under what
authority, it was proposed to give effect to the contract re-
specting the acceleration of Irish mails, now on the table
of the house ? The noble lord complained that the Go-
vernment made contracts without their being previously
brought under the consideration of Parliament. This con-
tract amounted to £lOO,OOO. Parliament knew nothing
of the transaction. The following year Parliament had
to make provision for payment, and if they objected
they were told it was too late, as the contractors had
acted on th© faith of the Government having pledged
itself to them. Practically, these contracts were removed
from the supervision of Parliament, and they were impor-
tant, not only on account of the consequences to which they
led, but on account of the enormous amount of public money
—nearly a million—thus annually expended. In this case
there was a peculiarity which involved a breach of the
law. He charged this contract with illegality. Formerly
the contracts were made by the Post-office, and paid out of
the gross receipts of that department ; but, to bring the ex-
penditure under the cognisance of Parliament, it was pro-
vided that they should be made through the Admiralty. In
this instance the contract was made directly with the Post-
master-General, and not through the Admiralty ; and,
therefore, his noble friend (Lord Colchester) was encum-
bered with the responsibility to perform an illegal act. He
trusted most sincerely that the House of Commons would
exercise its just principles, and not with the less vigour and
decision because they would interpose between the Govern-
ment and the violation of the law. One day the Govern-
ment replied to an application from certain parties that the
principle of a contract of this kind was, that it should be
open to public competition, and the next day they made a
contract without any competition and without the approval
of Parliament. He appealed to the noble earl at the head
of the Government with respect. to a declaration that he
made. The noble lard was reported to have stated to an ap-
plication made to him, that the contract was not complete,
but that is was still matter for negotiation. He added that
a reservation had been made by the Government for the
purpose of inquiring into the solvency of the company, the
benefits likely to be conferred by adopting the route in
question, and whether the service was likely to be per-
formed in a satisfactory manner. There could be no
doubt the noble earl's attention had been directed to all
the difficulties of the question. It was said that
contracts of this kind were favourable to the prosperity
of the shipping interest. But a worse blow could not be
struck at the prosperity of the shipping interest than by
Government adopting the artifice—he might almost call it
the trick—of making contracts of this kind, which were not
open to the whole of the shipping interest without excep-
tion, and which were liable to imputations of favouritism.
The Earl of DERBY said he understood the noble lord to
object to the contract on the double grounds—first, that Par-
liament had not been informed beforehand of the inten-
tion to enter into the contract, and its nature and objects ;
and further, that the contract itself was a violation of the
existing act of Parliament. In order to substantiate the
latter part of the case, the noble lord used a word which did
not appear in the contract, and which involved the whole
question whether there had been a violation of the law.
Under the provisions of the Act 17 and 18 Vic., it was pro
vided that all the gross revenues of the various public de-
partments should be paid in, and that an estimate should be
taken of the sums required or collecting and managing the
revenue. Now he would admit that this particular charge
was covered by the terms of the act. But the noble lord said
the contract was, that it should be paid out of the " gross"
revenues of the Post-office. He did not know where the
noble lord found this word, fur it did not form part of the
contract. The payment was not to be made out of the
" gross" revenues, but out of the revenues of the Post-office.
Besides, no contract whatever could be valid which violated
an express provision of an act of Parliament. The circum-
stances under which the contract had been entered into
were these. Two years ago an act of Parliament was ob-
tained which authorised the London and North-Western
Railway Company, the Chester and Holyhead Railway
Company, and the Dublin Steam Packet Company to cm.-
tract with the Government for the conveyance dale mails
to Ireland ; and in pursuance of the provisions of that act,
by which Parliament sanctioned the entering into a contract
for the payment of a certain sum for a certain service, her
Majesty's late Government, in September, 1857, entered
into a contract verbatim et literatim with that emw on the
table of the house, and signed by Mr. James Wilson, the
then Secretary to the Treasury, (Hear, hear.) A Treasury
minute was subsequently issued authorising the Postmaster-
General to carry that contract into effect. It was therefore
In pursuance of that act ipt rulinztent, and in pu544409

of the contract so sanctioned by the late Treasury Board,
that his noble friend the present Postmaster-General had
put his name to the contract which was now the subject of
such strong comment by his noble friend opposite. (Hear,
hear.) These were the real facts of the case. Parliament
had authorised the Postmaster-General to contract with
the railway companies for a certain service at a certain
payment; and he (the Earl of Derby) should like to know
out of what fund his nolie friend was to make that pay-
ment, except from the revenues of the Post-office ? He had
no other funds at his disrosal than those which were derived
from the revenues of tie Post-office. If his noble friend
(Lord Monteagle) meant to say that the expression " the
revenues of the Post-ofice" was not the most correct one
that could be used, he night possibly be right in that ; but
he could assure his nolle friend that there was no intention
on the part of her Maj✓sty's Government to deviate from
the course laid down by the law in this matter, nor to con-
ceal any part of the arrangement from the knowledge of
Parliament. The arrangement was made by the Post-office,
but the sum in question could only be paid in pursuance of
an estimate which comd be submitted to Parliament by the
Treasury. Parliament had in this case sanctioned the enter •
ing into the contract, and that contract had been signed by
the present Government, as a similar one had been signed
by the late Government; but the execution of it must de-
pend on Parliamentary voting, by way of estimate, the sum
of money necessary to carry it into effect. That contract
was not to come into operation until June, 1860 ; and his
noble friend was now, in 1859, complaining that the Go-
vernment had laid on the table the whole particulars of an
agreement which was entered into under the authority of
an act of Parliament, and for the execution of which it
would not be necessary to take one shilling of money until
an estimate for the requisite sum was passed by the House
of Commons in 1860. (Hear, hear.) That was a plain state-
ment of the case, and he did not think his noble friend had
any right to complain that there was in the arrangement
any violation, in letter or spirit, of the act to which refe-
rence had been made, either on the part of the late Govern-
ment or the present, or. that any attempt had been made by
either to saddle a public department with a responsibility
which rested with Parliament itself.
The Duke of ARGYLL said, if the words in the contract
ran counter to the law it must be by a mistake,' and there
could be no intention on the part of the Government to ex-
pend the sum in question without submitting an estimate to
Parliament. He confessed, when he was at the head of
the Post-office, he felt the whole position of affairs as re-
garded the packet-service most unsatisfactory. (Hear.)
It was true those matters came before Parliament, but it
was not until the faith of Parliament had been pledged ;
and it was then extremely difficult for Parliament to exer-
cise any practical influence upon them. With regard to
this particular service, he always:theught that Irish mem-
bers had a very strong claim on the support of Parliament ;
but generally he could say the packet-service was not alto-
gether entered into with reference to the business and con-
venience of the Post-office. He felt, in the present state of
the public expenditure, that it was most important not
merely that the sanction of Parliament should have been
givenbeforehand in this matter, but that in future the par-
ticular arrangement proposed by every Government should
receive the sanction of the House of Commons, and that
without that sanction the contract should not be signed.
That was the only security they could have against undue
influence being brought to bear on the Government, or
against the public suspicion of such influence.
The Earl of HARDWICKE submitted that it would be
desirable to place those contracts for the Post-office service
in the hands of a responsible officer of the department ca-
pable of forming a just opinion of the sum of money to be
expended on them, and who should bear the whole respon-
sibility of them.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that what the
public complained of was the growing practice on the part of
Government of entering into expensive contracts without
the knowledge or sanction of Parliament. Such a system
was calculated to lead to gigantic jobs, or at least to the
suspicion of them, and ought to be at once abandoned.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought, on the con-
trary, that the making of contracts should be intrusted to
the Ministers for the time being. In America the system
recommended by the last speaker gave rise to the grossest
corruption. He hoped, however, that the Government,
contracts would be looked sharply into, for he believed they
were generally extravagant.
Lord COLCHESTER stated that the heads of the Irish
contracts were drawn up while the late Government were
in office, and the Postmaster-General was authorized to
complete the agreement. There was no necessity for asking
for any money for the current year, but no intention was
entertained of withdrawing from the notice of Parliament
any sums to be paid under this contract.
Lord MONT EAGLE repeated his assertion that the
contract was illegal, and he trusted that the Government
would amend it. He believed that the error arose from
copying an old form of contract, and ho was sure that in the
next session there would be a committee to inquire into
postal contracts and all such matters.
The conversation on this subject then dropped.
The following bills passed through committee.:—The
Affidavits by Commission, &c., Bill ; the Indemnity Bill ;
the Nottingham Charities Bill, and the St. James Baldersby
Marriages Validity Bill.
The following bills were each read a third time and
passed : The Savings Banks (Ireland) Act Bill and the
Recreation Grounds Bill.