presented certain papers relating to Education. In moving that they be laid upon the Table, the noble Lord said, that he was anxious, as so much discussion had recently taken place on the subject, to explain, though without going into detail either as to the degree of education or the plan that might be proposed—to state generally the outline of the views of her Majesty's Government on this question, because whatever objections might be made to their views and intentions—to whatever opposition they might be exposed—it was certainly desirable that the opposition should be grounded on what they really intended, and not on any fanciful suggestions of those who chose to say "such and such are the intentions of the Government," and then launch out into he most violent objections against that supposed plan. He was one of those who thought there still existed a lamentable want of education, especially among the poorer classes of the community; and he had thought it his duty to represent that conviction to her Majesty, and to call her Majesty's attention to that subject. The present state of education might be gathered from the various reports that had been made to this House, from the debates which had occurred both in this and the other House of Parliament, and from the publications of different societies who were engaged in the useful and benevolent task of promoting education in this country. It resulted from all these statements, however much they differed, that there was still a considerable portion of the people without any religious instruction whatever. It appeared from the reports of the chaplains of our gaols, that there were a great many persons who had not received even a portion of elementary instruction; and it further appeared, even from the statements that might be made by those who told them that nothing more was required to be done, that the education at present given was of a very defective nature, and, though had in quantity, was still more defective in quality. The statements with respect to the amount of education varied exceedingly. He believed it had been stated, upon the authority of Lord Brougham, founded on tables of returns presented to the House, that about 1,270,000 young persons were receiving education in England. It had been stated very lately at a public meeting, that there were no less than 1,500,000 persons who were receiving education in connection with the Established Church. In those statements, there was a very great discrepancy; and he did not think it right to lay any very great stress on any returns which he had been able to collect upon the subject. He would refer more especially to an attempt made by him immediately after the recess to procure returns from the Poor-law Commissioners, and they certainly did not produce such accurate results as to make them worthy the consideration either of the Government or of Parliament, as forming the proper foundation of any measure, or the trust-worthy guide to any line of conduct likely to be adopted on the subject. But judging only by the general evidence received even by the Committee that had sat upon the subject of the education of the poorer classes last year, and by these other reports to which he had adverted, it could not well be denied that there was still a very considerable want of instruction in that country. Whether he referred to those nations of the continent which had lately taken a part, by means of their governments, on the subject of education, or whether he referred to the United States of America, there was some reason to say, that greater and more organised efforts had been made upon that subject in other countries than in their own, of which we boasted. It was not his intention to adopt any of those plans, or to compare them with that which it might be deemed proper to adopt in Great Britain. There was an obvious distinction between what could be done in those countries and in ours. In other countries, the Government had from the beginning undertaken the task of educating the people, finding that it was in a very low state, and had established certain laws, to which all the people were obliged to conform, and to which every school and institution was subjected. So, likewise, in the United States of America, from the very commencement of emigration in the greater part of the States, no sooner was there a small village or a few inhabitants collected together, than the establishment of a school formed a part of their political and economical arrangement. It was obvious, that a Government attempting any system of education in our own country would find the ground in a very different state, because it had been occupied in great part by those societies and institutions which had voluntarily undertaken the task of educating the people. They would find it occupied to a certain extent by the Established Church, and in other parts by the Wesleyans and other Dissenting societies, who gave education according to their own religious principles. For these reasons, it would not be possible to establish any system of education which should at once supersede those recognised and established modes; and even were the new system allowed by Parliament generally to be a much better system of education than those at present existing, it could not be expected immediately to supplant and come in the place of those various schools at present in operation; in short, no general system could be introduced without doing violence to the habits and feelings of the people of this country. Such a plan was unsuited to these kingdoms, and was likely to be unsuccessful if attempted. There was another reason which he much regretted to dwell upon, and which made it improper to come to any agreement as to a general plan of education in this country. Those who, of late years, had undertaken the task of education, had acted either on behalf of the Established Church, or of the particular sects to which they belonged, or on behalf of a society of which he had for many years been a member—he meant the British and Foreign Schools Society, which did not profess to teach children the principles of any particular Christian sect. There was a broad distinction, then, as to the mode of conducting the schools, between the parties who establised schools in connexion with the Church, and the British and Foreign Schools Society. As he understood, the Church of England, not only the ecclesiastical, but also the lay members of the Church, contended that they could not unite in any plan of education not immediately under the superintendence of the parochial ministers, which did not make the catechism of the Church of England a necessary part of the instruction, and of which the schoolmaster was not himself a churchman. He would not at present give any opinion as to the propriety of insisting on such conditions. The British and Foreign Schools Society, on the contrary, though they desired the Bible to be read in all their schools, did not allow any catechism to be taught, nor did they countenance the establishment of any restriction as to the particular denomination of Christians to which the schoolmaster was to belong; and, therefore, the schoolmaster might be an Independent or a Baptist, provided he was duly qualified for his situation. Between these two principles of action there was so wide a difference, that after consulting several persons who might be taken as the representatives of the first-mentioned party, he certainly had come to the conclusion that it would be quite hopeless to endeavour to induce those who held such opinions to concur in any one united plan of education by which the views, intentions, and wishes of all might be consulted. He must say, at the same time, that he did not think such a plan ought to be liable to the difficulties here which had been found, and were still found, opposed to the system established by his noble Friend, the Member for Lancashire, in Ireland. In Ireland there was a very great and broad distinction between the one portion of the people and the other. They did not consent to read the Scriptures according to the same version; and those who belonged to one religion required a comment on the Bible, while the other party contended that no such comment ought to be used. Indeed, there existed such a wide difference between these parties, that it was undoubtedly extremely difficult to form any united system of education. At the same time, he thought that great success had attended the experiment. In England, on the contrary, the Roman Catholics did not form any very great portion of the population, and the only other sect which did not agree in the general reading of the Bible in schools receiving children of all denominations, was the sect of Unitarians. Therefore, as far as religious distinctions were concerned, there was not the same difficulty in this country as in Ireland in forming an united system of education. Nevertheless, they must not act upon what, taking an abstract view of the case, they would conclude would be the result. They must take the objections as they found them, and he feared, from what had been stated to him, that they were insuperable. He now came to a plan, which he had lately seen propounded at a public meeting in the metropolis, which implied that the whole of the education in this country must be confided to the clergy of the Established Church; and that no system of education ought to receive any assistance or countenance from the State, except that which was carried on under the immediate superintendence of the clergy of the Establishment, and in which the doctrines of the Church of England should be taught and enforced on all. He must say, that it did appear to him, that the propounding of such a plan at the present day, so late in the history of this country, was interposing a very serious obstacle to the general education of the people. It was, no doubt, the intention and the plan of the ecclesiastical leaders of the reformation in this country, that as the Roman Catholic religion had embraced the whole of the people, so the Protestant Established Church should likewise embrace the whole population. But that such a plan was not successful in effect was well known. He need not go into the causes of its failure, which he thought were founded on the doctrines of the reformation itself; but the result was well known, that, after a very long struggle, after the punishment and degradation of those who dissented from the doctrines of the Established Church, one of the first acts of the revolution of 1688 was to recognise—or, as Lord Mansfield had termed it, to establish—the Protestant Dissenters in this country: the Act of Toleration was passed. An attempt was afterwards made to confine the whole of the education of the country to the hands of the Church; but another great event occurred in our history—another era to which they all looked back with pride and satisfaction—the establishment of the house of Hanover on the throne of these realms;—an era, when the many restrictions were swept away and freedom of education established. From that time, therefore, he conceived the general recognized doctrine of the State to be, that education was free to all persons, whether members of the Church or of any other religious denomination. The admission of Protestants, Dissenters, and of Roman Catholics to civil and political rights was carried still further by the Acts of 1828 and 1829; and he thought, that it could no longer be said, with respect either to education or to the general distribution of political power in the country, that the principle of exclusion (the Church of England being alone favoured) was any longer the principle of the State. On the contrary, the principle was, that there should be general admission of all persons, without distinction of religion, to an equal participation of civil rights. In applying this principle to the subject of education, they must consider whether it were a subject entirely confined to a question of religion; because, if it were so, undoubtedly, as there existed an Established Church, any assistance given by the State ought to be applied to that establishment. But this was by no means the case. Religious instruction was, certainly, a main part of sound education; but there were other parts also, and looking on the whole together, they ought to consider, whether they could not impart the benefits of education as far as possible to the people, not excluding a very great portion of those who dissented from the doctrines of the Established Church. He must, therefore, conclude that this principle of exclusiveness which had been set up, this assumption that the State ought not to recognize or to encourage any education but that which was carried on by the clergy, was an assumption at variance with the general spirit of our laws, and with the existing feeling of society. With respect to this part of the subject, there was another point most worthy of consideration. It was now confessed on the part, not of the Church, for the Church had nothing to be ashamed of, but on the part of the friends of the Church, and those formerly connected with parties in power: it was admitted, that the religious instruction of the people had been constantly neglected by them, and they lamented that the means of the Church of England had not been extended from time to time in proportion to the growth of population. In fact, they had allowed this great flood of population to cover the surface of the land, without taking any pains to form those channels of education into which it might be divided. Had education, then, been altogether neglected? By no means. Not only had the clergy shown great anxiety on this subject, but the Protestant Dissenters throughout the land had been most laudably zealous in the promotion of the knowledge of Christianity, and in the instruction of those vast masses of the population which had been added to the people of this country, in remote districts, without which they would have been left in a state of most lamentable ignorance. After all this had been done by the Protestant Dissenters, after they had established, he supposed, about 10,000 places of worship in this country, no success could possibly attend any attempt the object of which might be to deprive them of any of the means of education which the State might be willing to grant; declaring to them that the State enclosed itself within the Church only, and did not look abroad towards any of those who dissented from the Establishment. Besides, he should say, that such a principle would be entirely novel on the part of persons of the highest authority in this country with respect to education. The first large society founded for the purpose of promoting education by the establishment of schools was the British and Foreign School Society. Among those who were the most forward in promoting the foundation of that society, was his late royal highness, the Duke of Kent, father of her Majesty; and at the head of a large list of subscribers was placed the name of George III. An annual subscription of 100l. was given to the society by that Sovereign, as well as by George IV., and by his late Majesty, and was continued down to the present day. He could hardly, therefore, reconcile the sanction given by those sovereigns with the doctrine now propounded,—that no encouragement ought to be given to any but the most exclusive system of education. For these reasons the Government had been unable either to adopt a general plan of education, on which could be founded new schools for education throughout the country, to which both clergymen and Dissenters might subscribe, and had also been unable to give their adhesion to the system lately propounded, that the Church, and the Church alone, should conduct the education of the country. For himself, far was he from blaming the efforts of the Church to extend the blessings of education. On the contrary, he rejoiced to see those efforts made. He perceived with pleasure that the National Society had lately sent out queries, and were busied in collecting information upon this subject, and that attempts had been made in various dioceses to extend and improve their institutions. He thought that these efforts were most praiseworthy, and he was not indisposed to flatter himself with the belief that the Government, by the agitation of this project, had led to the increased zeal and activity which had been exhibited by the society. At any rate, he rejoiced to see this zeal and activity. But the Government was not able to agree to either of the propositions to which he had adverted, as it appeared to them that it would be better to appoint somebody to which the general management of the plan should be intrusted. The hon. Member for Waterford had recommended the appointment of a central board of education. Now, if a board of education were appointed, composed of persons of different persuasions, in conformity with the plan of educating all religious denominations in the same schools, it would appear from what he had already stated that it would not be a board possessing the confidence of the Church. He thought it better, therefore, that the Government should form that body: call it a board, or a committee, or what they would, not from any one religious body or sect, or from members of various sects, but from the official servants of the Crown, who must always depend upon the confidence of that House, and who must look to them to decide whether or not the system which they recommended was such as should be supported. He saw that a noble Friend of his (Lord Ashley) objected to that plan, but as objections were raised to all the other plans which had been proposed, it appeared to him that nothing remained but to constitute a board composed of persons who, being already the official servants of the Crown, must always be responsible to Parliament. He had, therefore, by her Majesty's command, proposed that the President of the Council and other Privy Councillors, being not more than five persons, should form a board, who should consider in what manner the grants of money made by that House from time to time should be distributed. He had, therefore, addressed a letter to the Marquess of Lansdowne, the President of the Council, and he had agreed with the other official persons named, if the House of Commons should make a grant for that purpose, to conduct the measures necessary to carry the objects proposed by the Government into effect. Now, with respect to those measures, whether they were to be carried into effect by a grant of 20,000l. as was the case last year, or, as he should prefer, by an additional grant of 10,000l., making in the whole 30,000l. He was ready to state to the House what were the measures which the Government thought were in the first place most desirable. He would say, then, that the measure which was most desirable was the establishment of a good normal school. He said a good normal school, for whatever might be the religious differences of the Church and the British and Foreign School Society, yet there must be questions which were not at all touched by their differences, in relation to which he thought that persons must find the systems of both of them defective, and he thought it would also be found that there were modes of education, some of which were in operation in foreign establishments, and others in this kingdom, by which the general system of education in this country would be much improved. It would, therefore, be the endeavour of this body to apply the money granted by Parliament in the first place to the foundation of a normal school, and to make it as perfect as possible. He thought that the four objects to which attention should be directed were in the first place, religious instruction; in the second, general education; in the third, moral training; and in the fourth, habits of industry applied in learning some trade or profession. All these were matters upon which many suggestions had been made from time to time, upon which many plans had been formed, and upon which there was perhaps yet much to be done before a perfect system of education could be established. But this he could say, that the plan followed in very many schools proceeded on an entirely false assumption, when reading and writing, combined with some portion of religious instruction, was said to form education. He really thought that there was much of the shrewd sense which so eminently belonged to him in the observations made upon this subject by the late Mr. Cobbett, who, it was web known, was a determined enemy to all schemes for a general education. He said, "What is the use of teaching a ploughboy to read and write? If he wants to mount a carthorse, reading and writing will not give him a leg up. No; he knows better, without reading or writing either: he first leads the horse to a gate, and then he gets upon the gate, and then upon the carthorse. That is education, and this is the sort of education which the agricultural labourer wants." These observations of his were not without good sense, because it was not only reading and writing which were useful to persons in that station of life, but habits of industry. A child could not be regarded as educated, who at eight or nine years of age was able to read and write, which he might forget when he was fifteen or sixteen, if those habits were not formed which fitted him for his station, and enabled him to fulfil his duties both to God and man, as well as to acquire that skill which would insure him a competency through life. He thought, therefore, that in this respect a good normal school, founded on the most approved system, would be a great advantage to this country, even if it were carried on at an expense of 400l. or 500l. per annum. He believed it would be found so useful as a model, that many persons would, after having visited it, hasten to introduce into their own neighbourhoods the rules there established. He would not read any part of the letter which he had addressed to the President of the Council, but he would read that part of Lord Lansdowne's reply which related to this part of the plan of the Government. The noble Lord then proceeded to read an extract from the letter in question, which was in substance as follows:—

"That he hastened to express his readiness to comply with the request which had been made, and rejoiced that the office which he filled enabled him to promote so important an object, which it was impossible could be satisfactorily accomplished without the countenance and superintendence of her Majesty's Government. His opinion was, that training in industrial pursuits was one of the most important objects of the present system, and he was also strongly convinced that the teachers should be so qualified as to be able to give instructions on the principles of the Church of England, without excluding members of any other per. suasion, should they be unable, though willing, to receive similar instructions from their own ministers. The regulations should be distinctly promulgated and understood, in order that it should be seen what were the improved methods on which this system was based."

The noble Lord went on to say, that supposing such a sum as he had mentioned were voted by the House, and placed at the disposal of the board or committee, there were also other objects to which encouragements might be given in furtherance of the general improvement of the system of education. They might grant gratuities to teachers, for instance, and superintend the compilation of a superior class of school books, and they might, in various other methods, promote the great cause of education. He had stated what it was proposed to make the first step on this subject. Having, however, stated this, he felt called upon to state also, although he was net at present prepared to make any proposition on the subject, that he thought it advisable to introduce a bill by which education might be more generally extended. With regard to the objections which he had stated, he thought that whether they applied to general or local funds, the schools now established, whether under the church or under committees, should be supported out of those funds. He thought it possible that by these means he should ascertain what was the amount of education given in these schools, which he believed now were in a most defective state. He thought it also possible, with the cooperation of the parish, or the board of guardians of the union, to make some advances for the purpose of establishing infant schools. For his own part, he did not believe, that children from three to seven years of age could receive impressions different from those which might be entertained by the religious sect to which their parents belonged. He thought it possible, that instruction might be given to them from the Bible, without its being necessary to point out the differences occasioned by the theories of controversial divinity. He might, perhaps be counting on too much when he looked for this, but he really believed, that as infant schools were the most useful institutions of any, since they formed at present the foundation of the others, he really believed, that if these schools could be more generally established, it would be a material advantage, and would materially increase the means of education in this country. In fact, by the habits which the child would then form, by the inculcation of moral duties, and by the goodness and love towards one another which would be taught to children at those schools, material elements of improvement would be introduced into the other schools. Lord Bacon had said, "Custom is most perfect when it beginneth in young years; this we call education, which is, in effect, but an early custom." He certainly did conceive, and he was yet to be set right if he were wrong, that the most simple rules of religion and habits of morality might be taught to children, without raising those great points of theoretical difference by which this country had been so long agitated. However, he might be mistaken, and his noble Friend, who presided at the meeting the other day (Lord Ashley) might tell him, that there must be exclusiveness and intolerance even in these schools. He had now stated the general plan of the Government in connexion with this question, a plan not indeed, in his estimation, the best which could be proposed, but that which was the most practicable in the present state of the country. He thought, that, considering the way in which education was carried on in the other countries of Europe, and in which it was carried on on the other side of the Atlantic, the time was almost come when we ought to remain no longer with our arms folded. He thought, that a plan which would professedly combine all religious denominations would not be agreeable to the Church, and that a plan by which education would be confided to the Church would be regarded as exclusive, and therefore would be intolerable to others. He did, however, think, that it was necessary to try some plan of general education, and, that he was in a manner obliged to propose one. It was but yesterday, that he had pointed out to the House the expediency of allotting different punishments for different offences, and of appointing different modes of trial, and he now implored the House not to leave untilled this great field of instruction and education, and especially not to leave that class which formed, in fact, the seed of our criminal population, without the protecting shield which religious and moral culture would throw around them; so that afterwards, if they fell into the ways of vice and crime, and Members were called on to put in force against them the harsher provisions of the law, it might not be justly said, that by their neglect and their omission they came to its commission untaught, uninstructed, and without the knowledge of their duties either to God or man.

should not have trespassed upon the House, had it not been stated by the noble Lord in the course of his speech, that the system of national education in Ireland, which was brought forward by the noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire, had been attended with the most signal success. He thought, that he should be wanting in his duty to the House, and he should certainly be wanting in his duty to Ireland, if he did not in opposition to that assertion state one or two facts. He did not know whether the noble Lord had directed his attention to the report of the committee appointed to inquire into this subject. Perhaps the noble Lord had not had time, but if he had looked into the report, he would have found, that the national education system in Ireland, instead of meeting with the most signal success had proved an utter and complete failure. [No, no!] Hon. Gentlemen might cry "No, no!" but he would satisfy the most sceptical among them, that the fact was as he had represented it, at least if they gave credit to the reports of that House and of the other House of Parliament. It would not be denied, that one of the main objects of that system was to unite the instruction of children of both persuasions. Now, was the noble Lord aware how many Protestant children were educated at the national schools in the immense province of Munster? He would inform the noble Lord—just 146. So that out of millions of people, in a province where there were thousands of Protestants, he had contrived to get into those schools the magnificent number of 146 Protestant children. In the province of Leinster, there were 598 Protestant children in the national schools, and in Connaught there were but 277. The grand total, therefore, of Protestant children receiving education in the national schools was somewhere about 900, short of 1,000 certainly. Now, he would ask the noble Lord if it was fair to state, that the Government plan had been attended with signal success, the main feature of that plan being to unite Protestant and Catholic children when there was only the small number of 900 and odd in those three great provinces? It appeared, also, that the schools in those provinces, were for the most part under the direction of the Roman Catholic clergy. In the province of Ulster, where the national education system was supposed to flourish, some schools were exclusively composed of Protestants, and some of Roman Catholics. Now, he thought, that a failure upon the point which he had mentioned, as it appeared, that these schools were still separate schools: One very remarkable instance of this was exhibited in Drogheda. On one side of the street was a school under the direction of some nuns, and in this school there were no Protestants. On the other side of the street there was a school under the direction, he believed, of some Protestant Dissenters, and in this there was not a single Roman Catholic. Under these circumstances, he should have been wanting in his duty both to the House and the country, if he had permitted the statement of the noble Lord to pass uncontradicted, although in setting the noble Lord right he was actuated by feelings of the most perfect courtesy towards him, and he was sure, that the noble Lord could not have looked into the report, or had not time, otherwise the noble Lord would never have stated, that the Government plan of education had succeeded in Ireland. He was quite aware, that the plan originated in the most laudable motives, and that it was a most desirable plan, if it could be carried into effect. He repeated, that the plan was extremely desirable, but it could not be carried into effect. He would take the liberty of calling the attention of the House to the course pursued by a society on which much vituperation had been lavished of late, a society with which he had had the honour of being connected as secretary for many years—he meant the Kildare-place society. It was proved upon oath, that in 1824, at a time when the Roman Catholic clergy were making the greatest efforts to educate the children of their own persuasion, there was a majority of Roman Catholic children educated in the schools of the society. He could, however, state, that even at this time in upwards of 1,000 of the schools under the care of the Kildare-place society a majority of the children were Roman Catholics. Such might not, however, have been the case but for the system which was adopted, and were those schools conducted on a better principle more Protestants might be found in them. He begged pardon of the House for taking up its time, but after the statement which had been made by the noble Lord, he felt, that he should have been wanting in his duty had he not called the attention of hon. Gentlemen to the facts which he had mentioned.

could not quite approve of the course which his hon. and learned Friend had adopted, and he should not be tempted to follow his example, and to carry the discussion to Ireland. He should confine himself to the scheme which had been brought forward by his noble Friend, and to the proposals to which his noble Friend had called the attention of the House. But, in the first place, he could not help expressing his satisfaction at the manner in which the noble Lord (Lord John Russell) had developed the plan of the Government in reference to this most important subject. He could not but feel, that, with the exception of one passing allusion, his noble Friend had laid the scheme of the Government before the House with great temper and discretion, and with much ability. The noble Lord certainly lost his temper for a moment, when his (Sir R. Inglis's) lion. Friend on the third bench cheered an expression of the noble Lord having reference to the Church of England. ["No no!"] He might have been mistaken, but he thought the noble Lord lost his temper for a short time when his hon. Friend cheered the expression "exclusiveness and intolerance," used by the noble Lord in speaking of the schools in connexion with the Church of England. He could not but regret, that the noble Lord should think it unnecessary to separate children of different persuasions at an early age, and, that he was of opinion, that they might be united in one school without any danger of receiving impressions at variance with the religion of their parents. Such a scheme he, for one, could not approve of, and was surprised, after the quotation the noble Lord had made from Bacon, and which was entirely hostile to the noble Lord's views, that such a proposal should have been made. He must, however, say, that after all they had heard in that House, and after all the tracts which they had seen on the subject, and which, if not issued under the immediate authority of the Government, were at least issued by the authority of those whose views were supported by Ministers, it was highly satisfactory to him, that so little additional mischief was to be done. He was afraid he could never praise his noble Friend for anything he did in his public capacity, but he felt much satisfaction, that the noble Lord proposed to do so little mischief on this occasion. He could not praise his noble Friend for what he had done, but for what he had left undone. For, in the first place, the noble Lord had reprobated in the strongest terms the unnational and unprincipled system of education advocated by those who admire the foreign schemes of instruction; and, in the second place, he had abandoned formally what was called the joint and comprehensive system of education, as inapplicable to England; such a system was a fallacy and an impossibility, and it was satisfactory to him, that it had been abandoned by the Government. It was a fallacy in every sense of the word, it had never been attempted in England, and was utterly incompatible with the feelings and habits of the people. It was to the advocates of such a system that they owed the confusion which existed in regard to the terms "education" and "instruction." Now, he denied, that instruction was entitled to be called education. Instruction was of high value, but he believed, that knowledge unless sanctified by religion was an unmitigated evil, and it was because of that conviction, that he should always oppose the separation of education from instruction. Religion was the main object of education, and such being the case, the question was, who were the proper persons to be entrusted with the education of the people? He held, that the Church, by her position, was the source from which the people should derive instruction, and it was only when education flowed from the national Church, that the Legislature was justified in diverting any portion of the national funds to this object. He had felt it his duty to make these observations, but still, looking to the whole scheme of his noble Friend, he was bound to admit, that while the noble Lord had not done all the good which was in his power, the noble Lord had proposed to do less evil than he had expected. The noble Lord had also proposed the formation of a sort of board, through which the grant made for the purposes of education by that House was to filter, and that body was to be composed of Privy Councillors, at the head of which was to be the President of the Council. He hardly knew whether this was to be considered an improvement, but he did not think, that there could be any objection to the plan, and he should therefore content himself with the observations which he had made. He did not think, that he was called upon to make any further objections to the scheme of his noble Friend. The noble Lord had, however, stated, that it was his intention at some future time to introduce a bill on this subject, but he (Sir R. Inglis) hoped the time would be a long one, for he was convinced, that the longer the introduction of such a measure was postponed the less would be the necessity for forcing education on the country. Much had been done within the last ten years to promote the education of the people, and he confidently trusted to see in a few years the nation pursuing a scheme of education calculated to improve the morals of the people, and reaching to every class of the community.

hoped he should not be considered as unreasonable or obtrusive, if from the deep interest he had taken from his first entry into Parliament, in this most important subject, he ventured, on such an occasion as the present, to trespass for a few moments on the indulgence of the House. [Hear.] From the first time in 1830, when he suggested in a memorial to the then Government a plan for a system of national education in Ireland; from the first bill in 1831, in which he attempted to embody that plan, and on which the present system was mainly founded, up to the report of the Committee on Irish Education of last Session, in which it was recommended to extend it, and the means and manner by which it might be so extended to the higher branches of education pointed out, thus forming a comprehensive whole, open to all classes and persuasions of the country, he had not ceased, not only to watch with anxiety the progress of this great question, but had cheerfully too contributed towards such end whatever humble means were in his power. Nor was this interest confined to the sister country; whatever natural preference he might feel in other matters, in this he could know of no distinction; he wished to see its blessings diffused far and wide through the land, without bar or ban, all entitled to it, and all enjoying it to the utmost, wherever men were called on to perform duties, or to obey laws, to maintain or deserve the advantages of a free and civilised community. With that view, he had ventured last Session, to propose to the House a motion, praying by address to the Crown, for the same arrangement if none other could be had, as that now proposed by the noble Lord—a Royal Board of Commissioners of Education, as in Ireland, until the temper of the times, and experience of benefit should admit a Parliamentary one—the wise, equitable, and efficient distribution of the fund granted by Parliament—a school for teachers, and the other accompaniments, such as inspectors, reports, &c., of a national organisation. That motion was lost, after a lengthened discussion, by a majority of two only, and from the greater diffusion of information in the interval, he had with increased hopes of success again placed it on the order book for discussion this Session. But he was glad to find, by the statement of the noble Lord, that this had now become unnecessary, the question was at last placed in the hands which should have originally guided it, and which were most bound by their position to carry it out to its accomplishment. He congratulated the friends of the cause, who had laboured long and patiently, with much to damp and little to cheer them in their exertions. He congratulated the country, which would soon, he hoped, see in its beneficial results, the best eulogy of the measure on this first forward step, however slight it might seem, in establishing, what any country but England at present enjoyed—a sound and comprehensive system of national education. [Cheers.] None but those, who had experienced the difficulties which opposed its progress, even to this stage of advancement, could properly estimate how much was likely to be gained if worked out in a large and honest spirit by the proposition of the noble Lord. But they who did—they who knew what it was to woo, and yet not win, the apathy of a reluctant and uninformed House of Commons, who had to appeal in vain, for aid to a press, which with few exceptions, turned away with disdain from such unprofitable speculations, who chronicled with the accuracy of a Bow-street calendar, every miserable squabble with which parties on that side of the House, or on this, lowered the functions of the legislator, and frittered away the time and interest of the public, but passed at the same time in utter silence, a question which every other nation but our own, regarded as the most weighty which could engage the attention of civilized men, which lay at the bottom of all order, of all liberty, without which these blessings could not be—without which there could be no legislation, no justice, no community amongst men—they who knew and saw and felt, and mourned over all this, they would appreciate, and not without reason, such a commencement, though still below their hopes, attained as it had been, by no adventitious assistance, but in despite of many and great obstacles, solely from its own merits—the internal power of the great question itself. He called the proposition of the noble Lord a forward step; it presented, it was true, nothing complete, nothing adequate, but it was the first which had yet been made in a right sense—it was one which must in the nature of things be followed by others—it was one which led gradually to completion—it was one which was the pledge and guarantee, sooner or later, no matter how much it might now be opposed, to a truly national system. He was not therefore surprised to find it had been well received as far as it went on this side of the House, nor less gratified by the faint and hesitating opposition it had met with on the other. [Hear, hear.] The hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Inglis) had expressed his gratitude for the small share of mischief, which the noble Lord was likely to perpetrate by the proposed measure; it was pleasing to hear such a gentle strain of censure from the representative of Oxford; but he must be permitted to wonder at the strange conversion of the hon. Baronet, the measure which he (Mr. Wyse) had proposed last year, and which was honoured with such opposition, was the same measure as that now proposed by the noble Lord. Circumstances and seasons, however, have their influence, and this year, I, the present proposer am not the same as the last. The noble Lord had not introduced this proposition a day sooner than it had become necessary. This was the only country which had never had a regularly organised system: the only country at this moment without one. The noble Lord had told the House, and truly told it, that the state of education in England and Wales was deplorable, most inadequate, and inefficient—weak in quantity, weaker in quality. This had been the cry, unceasing, and almost unanimous, session after session. It came from all quarters, and all parties. It had been proved by statistics, and confirmed by philosophy. The statistical societies of Manchester, and Birmingham, and London; committees of this and the other House; reports to government; reports to educational societies; the experience of individuals; the indignant denunciation of some; the reluctant. confession of others, all had risen in one prevailing voice, against the ignorance which hung over the land. It would be unreasonable on this occasion to recall any of the many details upon which those assertions had been grounded; they had been again and again pressed on the House; and he trusted they would again and again be so pressed, until it should be roused effectually to a much more comprehensive plan, and wipe away, once and for all, as really became an enlightened legislature, the foul stain, which sufferance, which connivance at such ran evil, necessarily inflicted on the English character. For the present, then, he should confine himself to results, and to those only of the broadest and most marked description. The Prussian calculations gave one-fifth, or at most one-sixth, as the proportion of children of an age to be educated, that is between the age of five and fourteen, the proportion actually under education in Prussia in the daily schools very nearly amounted to that in England, deducting the attendants on the Sunday schools, (an inferior substitute for the daily schools) and a proportion of those between two and five years of age, attending infant schools, the proportion did not exceed one-eleventh. The quality of the education was not more flattering to our national self love than the amount. Bad teachers, bad methods, a very limited circle of subjects, and those taught in the worst manner, from a wretched supply of ill written books in many cases, in the worst situations, and under the most unfavourable physical, and moral circumstances, such was the leading character of all inquiries lately made, either in or out of that House upon that subject. [Hear, hear.] Now what were the remedies which hitherto had been applied to these recognized evils, and how had they worked? The majority he believed had been for altogether standing still, as far at least as either the Government or the Legislature were in question. They talked about the danger of drying up the springs of benevolence, and actually imagined that the moment order or system were introduced, not only no new schools would arise, but the old would probably perish. The existing voluntary system had done little hitherto to ensure either the establishment or duration of schools. It was a tax on the benevolent, and often on the poor, in favour of the selfish and often of the rich. Others had moved a little in the way of assistance, but that assistance was very trifling indeed. They had in the abundance of their generosity gone so far as to vote 20,000l. a year, for the schools of a nation of sixteen million inhabitants, and in the abundance of their wisdom confided its distribution to the Treasury, that is to a body of all others, from the nature and multiplicity of its duties, and the qualifications of its members, the least likely to be well fitted for such a purpose. Was it at all astonishing that hitherto, these efforts had produced no other consequence, than the generally growing commotion of the necessity of a great deal more? Was it surprising that we had at last felt the necessity of taking the matter definitively and effectually into the Legislature's hands? The proposition of the noble Lord admitted the necessity of Government interference; it established a separate specific department under a regularly constituted system, with a minister at its head; it confided to it all the functions of a council of public instruction, inspection, reports, the application of funds, the education of teachers, the composition and publication of books to its care. It rescues education from the random mismanagement to which it hitherto had been subjected, and began the organisation of an intelligible and comprehensive system in its stead. There were two classes of opponents, he was aware, to this arrangement: those who entertained an apprehension of interference with religious opinion, and those who feared it would encroach on the rights of the subject. He confessed, he could not share in a belief of either danger. Honourable Members seemed to labour under the most unfounded illusions on both these heads. Neither in the present measure nor in that he had the honour to propose last year, were any such objects or even tendencies discoverable. He had never contemplated separating religious from intellectual instruction by his motion, much less interfering with conscientious opinions or practice in its administration. He had stated over and over again, in a manner he thought which ought to have secured him from all the misrepresentations with which he had been visited, that he (Mr. Wyse) would leave religious instruction to be conferred in the manner and by the men, whom each persuasion in each locality might consider best, without any interference on the part of Government, but that in addition to this—besides this, (and this was the real ground of objection) and not as a substitute for this—he would require such an amount of intellectual instruction to be given, or guaranteed to be given, in each school, as might really deserve the name of instruction before any claim could be allowed for a participation in the national grant. How was this to be secured? By not leaving, as hitherto, the distribution of the grant to two societies exclusively, but by allowing it to any school ready to comply with these conditions. For his own part, he candidly avowed, he greatly preferred united to separate education. He thought, when public funds were given, they should be given to all without distinction. He thought, without any, the least compromise of the conscientious religious opinions of either party, united education well calculated to promote habits of Christian brotherhood and national union, which, after all, ought to be one of the very first objects of all Christian and national education. Nor did he think it so difficult to achieve this most desirable object, as many hon. Members seemed to suppose. He could not comprehend why instruction should not be given in common upon subjects upon which all agreed; reserving those only on which they differed, such, for instance, as religion, for the separate instruction of their respective pastors. This was not mere theory; it was a practice in full and satisfactory operation in all parts of the continent and America. Now the different religious persuasions were intermingled. [hear!] The practice existed, as they had learnt, from a late interesting report, without any evil result in France, in every part of Germany, in Switzerland, in America, &c. He, (Mr. Wyse) had himself a recent opportunity of witnessing it in action in Rhenish Prussia. In that country, affected as it at present was by the religious dissensions, consequent on the contest between the king and the archbishop of Cologne, the same school continued to be frequented by pupils of both communions. He had not seen himself, nor had he heard after much inquiry from others, that there had been any interference on the part of Government, or the lay or ecclesiastical authorities, with the religious convictions of either party. On the contrary, every guarantee seemed to have been cordially given and strictly observed for mutual protection. The religious teachers were appointed by the authorities of each communion. No books were used for religious instruction, which had not received the sanction of the respective religious superiors. No scholar was compelled to attend religious service of a persuasion, to which he did not belong. There was no attempt to proselytise on the part of the teachers, and no exhibition of the polemical passion on the part of the pupils under their care. [Hear, hear.] A similar course, and with the same results had been pursued in Baden, in Hesse Darmstadt, in Frankfort, in Bavaria, in Saxony, &c. Nor had he seen or heard of any injurious results whatever in after life from this union of the different persuasions in childhood or youth—quite the reverse. A more industrious, orderly, moral, and religious population, it was difficult to meet, than what formed the great portion of the inhabitants of these very countries. He feared not to plane them in comparison with the most chosen districts of our own land. Our manufacturers already complained of their activity. The criminal returns of Prussia, gave only one juvenile thief in 2000 inhabitants—could we say the same? The crimes of violence were even less frequent; there were few such offences as unhappily marked the calendars of England and Ireland. We piqued ourselves on our exact observance of the sabbath and strict attention to religious duties. In no country seemed there to exist a greater attachment, not only to the principles but the observances of their respective religious creeds than in Rhenish Prussia. In no country were the churches of each communion better attended, or more real piety exhibited in the hours of service, or the performance of religious ordinances than in Rhenish Prussia. He could not therefore understand why we should be so tremblingly alive to this arrangement. He was therefore entitled to believe, that there was nothing injurious in the system itself, and that any such real or supposed injury must be ascribed solely to circumstances of time and place. It was not because it was not good, but because our political and religious passions would not suffer it to work to good, that this system should be objected to. He thought, however, that these circumstances though much to be regretted, should not be disregarded, and neither now, nor when he had introduced the same measure in the House, had he insisted upon the united system as indispensable. On the contrary he had followed strictly the judicious conduct pursued in this particular by foreign countries. He had proposed to leave the matter for the present open to the choice of the locality, they might establish separate or united schools as they deemed most fit, guaranteeing in addition such an amount and description of education, as might deserve the name and justify the application of the public money. It was not the best: but this best would be more likely to be adopted, if not forced, or on compulsion. So much for the religious difficulty:—he now turned to the other—the danger apprehended from a Government Board, to the civil rights of the subject. He thought the dread entertained on this head was still more groundless. A distinction should be made between the power and functions of such bodies in despotic and in constitutional countries. Under a despotic government, like every other institution, they were necessarily the instruments of the despotism; under a constitutional government, on the contrary, they were the means which the people used for carrying more easily into effect the wishes of the people. Such bodies were necessary to work out the details of government, in each of its departments:—governwent was impossible without them. At the same time, he did not say it was impossible they might be abused. Every one function of the executive however exercised might be abused. All that could be done to prevent or remedy such abuse was, to provide and maintain efficient checks against it. Such checks in the present instance he was convinced existed. He could not conceive any government Board, could long or flagrantly abuse its trust in a country like this, with a Legislature constantly ready (and never more ready than in the present balanced state of parties), to call it to account, with a public press vigilant beyond example and a public opinion speaking fearlessly through that press, whenever circumstances required it. But however this might be, it was not from this House such objections were to be expected. They had already not only assented to the principle, but actually carried it into operation. They had already granted every year for these five years past—public funds on certain conditions to schools; thus recognising the right and duty of Parliament to intervene in the encouragement of education; and had confided the distribution of these funds to the Treasury, thus constituting a government Board for the exercise of these very functions. The only question, then, seemed at present to be, whether the Board just proposed, was as fitted for such purposes as the Board already employed; the Board of the Treasury. For his part he could not for an instant hesitate between them. The Treasury he had always considered, and he had taken every opportunity of expressing this opinion, was of all other bodies, the most unfitted, for a Board of education. It was a province, to administer which, with any pretensions to utility, required some study, some experience, no small degree of leisure, very various endowments; were these conditions to be expected, did they actually exist in the Board of the Treasury? Giving them every merit the Members might choose to claim for the discharge of their public duties, he could not admit, that they possessed the knowledge, time, or peculiar talents, required, for men who were to be intrusted with the education of the country. Schools for teachers were to be established, books were to be composed, inspectors appointed, reports examined, and a variety of other duties fulfilled, to which without any disparagement they could hardly be considered competent. Facts justified these conclusions. Whilst the application of the annual grant remained in their hands, it did not appear from the returns he (Mr Wyse) had moved for last year, that they had once appointed an inspector. They had intrusted the inspection to the two societies; but he had distinctly shown from the evidence of the secretaries of each society, that the societies themselves had never had a regular body of inspectors. A minute of the Treasury had indeed subsequently endeavoured to remedy this great omission, but it did not appear with very remarkable success; up to this hour, no inspection existed on the part of the Government, that is, the first of all securities, for the proper application of these education funds had not yet been established. As to the other duties, they seem never to have been thought of. Ten thousand pounds allocated for the building of a normal school, remained unemployed. The composition of books had not even been contemplated—no report beyond the mere number of scholars, and other more material circumstances; had ever been laid upon the Table of the House. The board now proposed to be substituted, had at least this advantage, that it would not, like the Treasury, be engaged with any other object besides education, and with any other object more than education, but with education and education alone; it would have for its president a obleman who had deeply interested himself in its progress for many years, of extensive experience, high in official station, high in the estimation of the public; its other members it was to be hoped, would be chosen with due regard to competency, character, and as much as might be in harmony with the feelings of the several classes and sects of the community. The being chosen from the list of Privy Councillors, did not necessarily limit the choice to Government officials. He confessed, he should prefer to see them, if possible, removed far beyond the circle of political influences, not liable to their passions and changes; permanent officers, unexposed to all the consequences, the risks, fears, temptations, and compliances of Ministerial contingencies. In no one department was system, uniformity, and continuity, more essential, than in that of Education. It could not be expected, that the public would give its confidence to any system which to-morrow might become not only of a different, but of a totally opposite complexion. He had no doubt that such a body, if properly formed and intrusted with sufficient powers, would enter on its duties with far more vigour, sagacity, and utility, than any which hitherto had preceded it. The very first result of its existence, he trusted would be the establishment not of one, but of many efficient schools for teachers. The event was now recognised from one end of the empire to the other [Hear, hear.]. Good teachers, and good schools. We had hitherto been taking count, not of good schools, but of good school-houses [Hear, hear.]. He was not prepared to say, whether the plan submitted by the noble Lord, was the best, or if the best in theory, the most easy to be reduced to practice. A different course had been pursued, indeed had been found necessary to pursue in Prussia. That however depended upon circumstances. Establishments in which pupils were to be boarded and lodged, were obviously to be regulated on different principles from those destined for day scholars only. One thing, however, he considered an essential condition to the efficiency of such institutions. The honours and emoluments to which they were to lead, must be of such a nature, and so secured, as to render it worth the while of a pupil to expend time, labour, and money in preparation. Unless the pupil were required to pursue a really solid course of studies, and for such time as might be found necessary, he must say he could anticipate very little advantage from such an establishment. This could not be expected, unless the position and profession of the teacher were raised. Higher salaries, and better secured than what now was usual, should be given; promotion should be held out for superior merit; superannuations should be assured for long and faithful services [Hear, hear]. The teacher should be elevated in his own esteem, and in that of the public. But he had detained the House too long; he felt, he had no excuse to offer but the great importance of the subject and the gratification he felt at this first effort towards something approaching system and organisation. He should, of course, have much preferred a bill constituting a Parliamentary commission or Board, with a minister of instruction at its head, with minutely defined but comprehensive powers, extended to every branch of education. He should like to have seen the whole plan quite as fully developed as in the codes of other countries, none other could merit the name of a really national system, the government with their board on one side, the people with their local committees on the other, each a check, but each also an aid combining with and assisting the other, the board empowered to apply the parliamentary grants, for the building and outfitting the people empowered to assess, for the support of teachers—the whole under the solemn sanction of the law, and secured from all wishes of change, by the national will expressed through the Legislature. But this for the present he believed unattainable. All that could now be done was to take a royal commission or Board, as had been the case in Ireland, and to wait till a Parliamentary one, by Bill, could be looked for with some chance of success, from the Houses of Parliament. If we could not have the best, let us at least take the best which our fears, our prejudices, our passions, our discords, religious and political, would at present suffer. Time and experience might do more to dissipate these obstacles than the strongest argument; the most profound wisdom, the most glowing eloquence under present circumstances. Let men see, feel, and quietly convince themselves of their errors. Such was the feeling, and such was the course, in consequence of such feeling, that he (Mr. Wyse) had felt himself compelled to submit to his motion of last year. The noble Lord did not think the country then urged even for this amelioration, he had since, inquired more deeply and had found reason to alter this opinion. He was glad of it, he hoped it would be only a commencement, and that next year he would find reasons equally strong to go much further. Crime had not diminished, and means of punishment had been found ineffective; our prisons corrupted as much almost as they reformed; our transportation law, and practice (to judge from a late most able Report) was, so far from being the remedy of crime, a series of crimes and iniquity in itself. In such a state of things, we were imperatively called on to go deeper than we had ever yet done, and instead of laboriously devising expedients to punish guilt, but, at the same time, allowing all its producing causes to continue in their full vigour, we were required to attack and conquer, and extirpate the cause, whilst it was weak and thus render crime rare, and punishment comparatively useless. This, he was thoroughly convinced could only be effectually achieved through a general and sound system of education. If we could secure the man, we must begin with the child. We must not argue, as was too frequently the case, from what we now saw around us, of the effects, generally speaking, of education. No; the present generation, with their follies, defects, and vices, was the creation, not of present education, (defective as it might be), but of an education still more defective than the present. We were reaping the bitter and bad harvest of the ignorance and negligence of our predecessors. How much more earnest then, ought we to be, we, who more accurately and sensibly estimated these evils, and had the means, ample, and certain of preventing them, in our hands—to protect our posterity from their infliction. He again expressed his wish, that the noble Lord could have made his measure more comprehensive, but regarding it as the first stone of a national system, the full completion of which he yet hoped to see; looking upon it as the first evidence given by Ministers in that House of a disposition to take up a question second to none in importance—a question which had engaged his attention for a long period, and which he had never ceased urging on successive Governments, and Parliaments, for eight successive years, he could not refuse (though much below his conception of what a truly national system should be), the small tribute of his approbation, to the proposition of the noble Lord.

wished to ask the noble Lord whether it were the intention of Government to continue the grant of 20,000l. hitherto made annually, for the building of school-houses. Not being in the House when the noble Lord commenced his statement, he had not the advantage of hearing all the remarks which the noble Lord made with respect to some observations which fell from him (Lord Ashley) at a public meeting over which he had recently presided. He would only now remark, that whenever the proper time arrived, he should be prepared to reiterate every one of those observations, and to support that plan of education which he thought the wisest and best. If he abstained from saying anything upon the present occasion, (deeming it to be an inconvenient one), he hoped he should not be considered as bound to an approval of the noble Lord's scheme, which, with its privy councillors, its books, its normal schools, and teachers, appeared to him to be full of the most alarming mischiefs.

in reply to the noble Lord's question, stated, that it certainly was not the intention of Government to propose another grant of 20,000l. for the erection of school-houses. It would be a matter of consideration whether there should this year be any grant for that purpose or not.

wished to know, whether the proposed board of education was to be composed entirely of persons unpaid, and at the same time holding other offices. He understood the noble Lord to state, that it was to be composed of privy councillors; but he did not distinctly understand, whether they were to be persons actually holding other offices. There was one other point also, a point of much greater consequence—a point of the most vital importance—upon which he wished to be more clearly informed. The noble Lord had given no intimation whatever as to the rules by which the proposed board was to be guided in the distribution of religious instruction. Indeed, for anything that the noble Lord had stated, it was possible to suppose, that schools might spring up under this plan in which no form of religion whatever should be taught. Such a supposition became the more feasible when the plan was found to receive such unqualified support from the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Wyse), who was known to be an active member of a society recently established in this country, entitled, "The Central Society of Education," the general object of which was supposed to be to attain, whether by direct or circuitous means, the universal establishment of schools, in which the business of religious instruction should be kept wholly apart from the business of general instruction. He should also be glad, if the noble Lord would inform him whether, as related to the schools proposed to be established, the board would be free to make grants of money from whatever sums the House might determine to appropriate to the purpose of education?

said, that the board would be constituted entirely of persons holding other offices and receiving no salary. It would, no doubt, be competent to the Government to change the members of the board; but, in that case, though persons holding no other office might be placed upon it, no salary would be paid. With regard to the other question asked by the hon. Gentleman, he did not anticipate that the board would have any funds from which to make any allowance to schools. If there should be any vote of money to the British and Foreign School Society, they might make an appropriation of that sum; but he did not think that any vote of the present year would place a fund at their disposal.

observed, that at present a sum of money was annually voted to aid the building of school-houses. He wished to know whether the new board of education would be free to make grants of money, in aid either of schools or school-houses, in which schools or school-houses any form of religion, or no form of religion, might be taught.

repeated, that he did not anticipate that any sum which might be voted this year would be applied either in aid of schools or school-houses. The only available sum would be part of the grant voted in former years in aid of schools under the guidance of the British and Foreign School Society. If it were intended to appropriate any of the public money to any other class of schools, he should think it necessary to make a statement to that effect in bringing in the bill.

expressed his general concurrence in the plan of education proposed by the noble Lord, He regretted but one thing—that the amount of the proposed grant was so miserably small. A grant of 30,000l. a-year to meet the deficiency of education in this great and populous country was absolutely ridiculous. He hoped that the noble Lord would be prepared to propose a vote of at least 200,000l. for this purpose.

expressed a hope that the noble Lord would lay upon the Table the definite rules which were to govern the board in the distribution of the funds to be applied to the purposes of education.

alluding to the normal schools which it was proposed to establish for the education of teachers, begged to know what guarantee was given for the nature of the religious instruction to be given in those schools?

in reply to the observation of the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Goulburn), stated, that he wished to have as early an opportunity as possible of stating to the House, the general view which the Government took of the subject, because much misconception at present prevailed upon that point. The House would not be called upon to consent to any vote of money without being informed of the exact course which Government intended to pursue. The noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool (Viscount Sandon), had asked him how the doctrines of the Church of England were to be guaranteed in the normal schools? That undoubtedly was one of the points upon which the board, when formed, would have to deliberate. He supposed that there must be a clergyman of the Church of England to teach the doctrines of that Church.

thought it of the greatest importance, before the House was called upon to give any vote on this subject, that these points should be settled—that the House should be placed in possession of distinct information as to the principles upon which this board of education would be guided. For observe, if the House made the vote merely upon an understanding that hereafter the board should decide in what way the system of education to be adopted should be made to accord with the principles of the Church of England, they would be leaving to the board the widest possible discretion. No doubt, the proper time for discussing this point would be when the proposal was made for the grant of money. It would then be perfectly open to the House, if it thought the discretionary power extended to the board too great, to take the course which he, under such circumstances, should decidedly take, of objecting to the grant altogether. He had not expected that the noble Lord would upon that occasion have entered into any exposition of the views which the Government entertained upon this subject, because the noble Lord's notice indicated nothing more than the presentation of papers. The noble Lord's statement, therefore, had taken him by surprise. He had listened to it with the utmost attention, and confessed that he feared the plan it unfolded must be open to much greater objection than would appear from any thing contained in the statement itself, but which was to be inferred from the ready assent given to it by several hon. Gentlemen who entertained views upon the subject of education generally, from which he totally dissented. The noble Lord proposed to establish a board composed exclusively of persons holding other official situations. He should entertain doubts as to the policy of giving to a board so composed of official men, and therefore necessarily party men, any general superintendence or controlling power over a matter of so much importance as a system of general education. The hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Wyse), in giving his assent to the proposed plan, said it was entirely satisfactory to him. Another hon. Gentleman speaking from the same quarter of the House, also declared that he was perfectly satisfied with it; nay, even went so far as to suggest a grant of 200,000l. a-year, to be placed under the control of this board. He would only observe that the grant of such a sum would at once have the effect of giving to the board a controlling power over the system of education to be adopted throughout the country. The noble Lord in the first part of his speech, combated a number of objections, which he had never heard made. The noble Lord appeared to be labouring under an apprehension which, as far as he was concerned, was entirely without foundation. The noble Lord told the House that at the period of the Revolution, and upon the accession of the house of Hanover, the liberty of education had been disputed by a party in the State; and the noble Lord seemed to imply that there was a design on the part of some party in the State at present disposed to interfere with the freedom of education. The noble Lord appeared to labour under an apprehension that there were persons who intended to propose that the Established Church should have some power over the education of the people, and that the people, though dissenting from the Established Church, should be compelled to receive instructions in its doctrines. He could only say for himself, that he should offer the most strenuous opposition in his power to any plan that would violate the perfect liberty of education. At the meeting at which he attended, it was for this that they contended—that they (the members of the Established Church) should enjoy the same benefit of liberty of education which they were content that others should enjoy. This they claimed to themselves the perfect right to do—to form societies and to establish schools in connection with the Church, and to insist upon it as an essential condition of the education to be given in those schools, that the children instructed in them should be brought up in the principles of the Established Church. I hope (continued the right hon. Baronet) the noble Lord does not dissent from this proposition. We claim for ourselves that right which the Roman Catholics exercise, which the Dissenters of every class exercise, and which it is perfectly just that they should exercise, namely, that education being free, and liberty of instruction having been established, we, the members of the Church of England, should enjoy that liberty for ourselves which we readily concede to others. At the meeting at which I attended these were the principles which were contended for. The noble Lord appeared to apprehend that the House of Commons was inclined to restrict the vote for education exclusively to instruction in the principles of the Church. Now, I apprehend, that when the noble Lord, in the course of last year, proposed a grant of 20,000l. to be distributed by the Treasury, it was perfectly well known to the House of Commons that instruction in the principles of the Church of England was not an indispensable condition in the distribution of that grant. I believe that that was fully understood by the House; and after the assent which was given to that grant, and the little opposition it received, I must say, that those apprehensions which the noble Lord seemed to intimate to-night, and which, judging from the harmony that has prevailed among the Gentlemen opposite, have given such universal satisfaction to his supporters, do appear to me to be rather groundless. For, in the grant of last year, the House of Commons had assented to this principle—namely, that they were prepared, upon certain conditions, to grant public money for the construction of school-houses, in which school-houses an exclusive education in the doctrines of the Church of England should not necessarily prevail. What, then, is it which has raised these apprehensions in the noble Lord's mind. It must be an apprehension, either that there is an intention on the part of some to refuse a grant this year on a similar principle; or, what is still more improbable, a determination on the part of others to compel the education to be in accordance with the principles of the Established Church. Whether there be any such intentions I know not, but I confess I never heard that any such were entertained before in this House. Now, I wish to ask the noble Lord, whether this board, composed of privy councillors and other persons, is to discharge these functions, which the Treasury has hitherto performed with respect to the appropriation of these funds? I believe hitherto the principle of the grant has been this—that you wanted to encourage that which, after all, it is of the utmost importance to encourage, namely, voluntary, local exertions for the purposes and promotion of education. That was the pervading principle of the grant. You said, "We will not take upon ourselves exclusively the charge of the education of the poor; but we will encourage those who have a local interest in the prosperity and peace of the country, in the protection of property, and in the moral improvement of their fellow creatures; we will encourage them by making advances from time to time to those who exert them- selves, proportioning the amount of those advances to the sums raised by them." I hope you do not mean to deprive these persons of the benefit of that principle; but if you adhere to it, do you mean that the Treasury shall still have the distribution of any portion of those funds or that the new board is to discharge the duties which are at present performed by the Treasury? The noble Lord, in answer to the question put to him, said—supposing no vote should be made for the British and Foreign Education Society; but he said nothing of the National Education Society—[Lord John Russell it was forgotten.] I am very glad to find, that it was an unintentional omission on the part of the noble Lord. I do hope that if there is to be a public vote of money, the National Education Society will not be excluded from the benefit of it. The question, then, which I wish to ask the noble Lord upon that head is, whether the Treasury is to exercise any control over the appropriation of the fund, or whether that appropriation is to be placed in the hands of the new board? With respect to the normal schools—my noble Friend has asked a question upon that head which I consider to be of the utmost importance. The noble Lord certainly said, that there were instructors to be brought up in these schools who were to be exclusively instructed in the principles of the Established Church previously to their going forth to the different schools in the country; it is therefore of the utmost importance to ascertain precisely what is the principle upon which the system of education is to be conducted. Of course I infer from the noble Lord's speech that other instructors of youth, professing other doctrines than those of the Established Church, are to be educated in the same normal schools; it becomes also important, therefore, to know upon what principle their education is to be conducted; and generally as a religious education is to be given in these normal schools, it is likewise important to know upon what principle it is to be conducted where it is evident the instructors may profess different doctrines. The noble Lord anticipates very great advantage from instructing children in certain mechanical arts in these schools. I am afraid, that disappointment will be the result of any such experiment. A proficiency in any trade can, I think, be only acquired by the closest application to that trade. This must give the learner an immense advantage over those instructed in schools, and in fact the only way in which an expert workman can be trained, is to bring him up in the profession which he is afterwards to pursue. I did not exactly understand the noble Lord with respect to that part of his plan which refers to parochial assessments. I apprehend the noble Lord will find some difficulty in introducing that principle. I cannot conceive how he will obtain its adoption. The first question in the parish will be who is the master, and what is his religious profession. The noble Lord very justly said, that there is such a difference of opinion throughout the country upon this subject at present that he thought it was better that the Government should not interfere. Now, so strong is my impression that the same principle must be applied to parishes as to the government and the state, that I think the noble Lord must not attempt to introduce the principle of compulsory assessment into parishes. Where the dissenters form a great minority, and the rest of the inhabitants of the parish are members of the Established Church, I cannot believe, that the system of compulsory assessment will give satisfaction to the dissenters, or that they will submit, in cases where the members of the Church preponderate in the vestry, to a tax imposed by them for the support of these schools. I hope the noble Lord will also pause before he gives any control over the education of the people to the Poor-law guardians. It appears to me that the duties which devolve upon the guardians of the poor are sufficiently onerous. I trust the attention of the guardians will be continually given to the schools; but I hope the noble Lord will take care, first, how he over-burthens them with functions; and, secondly, how he gives to them functions to perform other than those connected with the discharge of their duties as Poor-law guardians; and, lastly, I hope the noble Lord will take care that he does not expose them or the law to unpopularity on account of any unnecessary interference with education. I believe the noble Lord disclaims all direct interference on the part of the Government with the established schools, or that the Government should have any direct superintending power over them. But, while it is satisfactory to hear that disclaimer on the part of the government, I fully reserve to myself not only the right of negativing any grant that may be proposed, but also the power of giving the most mature consideration to that part of the noble Lord's plan which vests in the Government the power of superintending, however indirectly, the general education of the people. I, for one, am deeply convinced of the absolute necessity, and of the moral obligation, of providing for the education of the people. But I am, at the same time, perfectly convinced that that can only be effectually done in this country, where so much religious dissent prevails, and that it is infinitely more likely to be done without disturbing the good understanding and the existing harmony between the professors of different faiths, by leaving it to the voluntary exertions of the parties themselves and by permitting each to educate his children, as he at present is at liberty to do, in the principles of that faith in which they were born. I cannot help expressing my confident belief, that the Church of England is now awakened to the absolute necessity—not by force, not by compulsion, not by interfering in the slightest degree with the principles of perfect religious freedom, but awakened to the absolute necessity of assuming that position which she ought to assume, in constant and cordial co-operation with the landed proprietors, and other influential classes of this country, and, that the only satisfactory way of having a system of education—which ought to be founded upon the basis of religion—in this country is, for each party to act for themselves—imposing no restriction upon others—but, above all, that the members of the Establishment, whether lay or clerical, shall not be ashamed of insisting, that, in their education, the doctrines and principles of the faith which they profess shall be an indispensable condition to any voluntary system of education introduced among them.

in respect to the question which the right hon. Baronet has asked—namely, whether the sum which may be voted by this House for building school-houses for the National Education Society are to be under the control of the Treasury or of this new board?—my answer is, that while we are placing other subjects of the same nature under the control of the board, the disposal of this grant would likewise come under its direction. The right hon. Baronet seems to think, that this is a point of some importance; but I do not think it is, because the Treasury, after all, consisting as it does of none but official persons, their disposal of the grant must be with the consent of the board of Education. At present the appropriation of the grant was very much in the hands of those two societies, which pointed out the mode by which it could be most advantageously employed. The mode in which it was disposed of hereafter would necessarily be according to that which the National Education society, and the British and Foreign School Society, pointed out as the manner in which the greatest possible instruction could be given. With respect to the plan itself, I must say, I did think it necessary to make some general statement, even although there were several matters upon which no definite resolution had been arrived at, because I certainly saw, that if the discussions which were going on upon this subject, throughout the country, were allowed to continue without any sort of explanation on the part of the Government, there would soon have been established in the minds of the people some proposition concerning it; and if that proposition were the most objectionable that could be made, it would soon have been given out as the proposition of the Government. In such an event it is well known how very difficult, in the end, it would have been, to contradict that proposition. We know how very easy, and how very common it is in these days to give out, that certain things are about to be done, and that afterwards when it is found, that nothing of the kind was ever even in contemplation, how ready persons were to exclaim,—"Aye, it was our opposition—it was our objections that prevented it!" Such was my reason for having entered thus early into a statement of the plan which the Government intended to submit to the House. It certainly must be some time before any vote can be proposed to this House upon the subject; and, undoubtedly, the right hon. Baronet, as well as every other Member, is fully at liberty to declare his dissent, if he think proper, to any proposition contained in the estimates. The right hon. Baronet has used the expression, and I think a just expression, that the Church is awakened on this subject. I rejoice, that there is now so much zeal shown upon the subject of education. I may doubt, perhaps, whether so much zeal would have been shown if there had not been in some other quarters—I do not say the Government, but amongst other portions of the community—a disposition evinced to forward this subject of education. I must certainly be permitted to doubt, whether, if there had been no such changes as we have seen of late years, there would have been any further exertion on the subject of education than we saw during the very long period of years, when those who assumed to themselves to be exclusively the friends of the Church bad the almost unopposed management of public affairs. While seeing with very great pleasure the exertions that have been recently made, and learning with equal pleasure, that there is an awakening upon this subject on the part of those who certainly have been slumbering a long time, still I do entertain—groundless as the right hon. Baronet may think them—some apprehensions with regard to the manner in which this newly-awakened zeal would be exercised, if there were no suspicions timely aroused as to the possibility of its being abused and perverted to ends very mischievous; because I, in common with others, have seen theories propounded, and have seen doctrines advanced in respect to the state of the Church, which I certainly think, if pushed out to their full consequences, would in the end establish that which the right hon. Baronet says he should oppose, namely, a system by which the whole education of the people would be placed in the hands of the Church, and by which none but members of that Church would have the right of partaking of that education. I do not indeed believe, that even if it had not been the fact, that a great portion of the people were alive upon the subject of education, founded upon the principles of religious freedom, any such consequences were likely to have happened; but I do think if public attention had not been called to it, there might have been reason to apprehend some very considerable innovation upon a subject which seemed to have been settled both by law and by the general grants of this House, which have taken place of late years. I certainly do entertain in some degree these apprehensions; and therefore I stated them. But I trust, that the general feeling of the House, whether the plan of the Government be approved of or not, will be decidedly in Favour of freedom of education.

begged leave to call the attention of the House to the state of religion and education in the remote parts of the country. He hoped that some alteration would take place on that subject, and that the most necessitous parts of the country would not be the most neglected. Papers to lie on the table, and be printed.

, pursuant to notice, moved for the appointment of a Select Committee to take into their consideration the several plans for the Improvement of the Metropolis, concerning which reports were made to this House in the years 1836, 1837, and 1838; together with any other plans for the same object which they might deem deserving of consideration, and to report their opinion as to the expediency of adopting any of the said improvements; and also as to the best means of carrying the same into effect.

said, that it had been insinuated that the re-appointment of this Committee was for the purpose of ascertaining what their construction was of the Act of Parliament relating to the improvements of the avenues leading to the new Royal Exchange. To this he strongly objected. The law officers of the crown were the proper persons to construe an act of Parliament for the guidance of the Government. If, therefore, the re-appointment of the Committee was not necessary for the purpose of carrying out the general improvement of the metropolis, he hoped the House would not consent to the motion.

said, if the meaning of his hon. Friend was, that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had suggested the present motion, he begged distinctly to disavow it. If it had been his object to revive the Committee, he would have been himself the person to make the proposition to the House. The motion was made without any knowledge on his part. He knew nothing about it until he saw the notice on the paper. At the same time, he should be guilty of concealing half the case if he did not state to the House, that if the hon. Baronet (Sir Matthew Wood) had not proposed to renew this Committee, he, for one, should have done so, with the direct object his hon. Friend (Sir Robert Inglis) had men- tioned, and upon which he had declared it to be his intention to oppose the motion. He would not now go into a consideration of the case of the Royal Exchange. He had taken the earliest opportunity of laying on the table of the House, a copy of the correspondence which had occurred on the subject; and there was no part of the question which he should not be prepared to explain, if, after hon. Members had read the papers, they should entertain any doubt respecting any portion of it. But what he was anxious about at the present moment was, to guard himself, in the judgment of the House, from the supposition that he had prompted the hon. Alderman to take a step which he was himself unwilling to take, for the purpose of obtaining, under the cloak of this motion, an interpretation of an Act of Parliament. The papers respecting the transaction relating to the Royal Exchange having been so short a time before the House, it would be premature for him to enter upon the subject. But if the Committee should be re-appointed, he would submit to the House, whether it would not be proper to refer the Commissioners to the Committee, not with a view to obtain from them a construction of an Act of Parliament, but to ascertain whether a due consideration of those papers did not show, that the Treasury had acted upon the distinct understanding that the report of that Committee, as communicated to the Treasury, through the House, would be adopted.

said, if the expense of improving the avenues to the Royal Exchange was to be defrayed by a tax, why was not that tax openly proposed in the House, rather than sought for by means of a Committee?

saw no objection to the re-appointment of the Committee, nor did he know of any objection to refer the papers relating to the Royal Exchange to them. At all events, considering that several gentlemen had gratuitously devoted their time to the devising of plans for the improvement of the metropolis, he thought there could be no objection to further consideration being given to those plans, especially as they would not be in the slightest degree committing themselves as to the question whether there should be any tax or not imposed on account of those plans. It was possible, that the hon. and worthy Alderman might propose some other tax, besides a tax on coals. Probably he had some scheme in reserve. The only object which the Committee would have to consider was, the means of improving the metropolis, and of facilitating the communication between the different parts of it. The latter was a point which we had always been much more apt to neglect than the other great cities of Europe. He hoped, therefore, the House would not throw any obstruction in the way of further considering these plans.

rose to move, in pursuance of notice, that a Committee be appointed to inquire into the mode of administering justice in Scotland. In bringing under the consideration of the House this very important subject, he should endeavour to do so in a manner that would divest it of anything that could possibly admit of its being construed into a political question. The judges of the Scottish courts were pretty nearly equally divided in political opinions. He desired no other Committee but such as would give a pure and disinterested decision upon the questions which would be brought before them. He understood that an opinion prevailed, that questions of this kind ought not to be submitted to the consideration of a committee, but that it should be left to the government to point out and prescribe such rules as were sufficient, and effect the changes necessary in the jurisprudence of the country. In the year 1834, an hon. Member obtained a committee to take into consideration the amount of salary to be paid to the judges in the courts of Scotland, and also to inquire into the nature of the duties of those judges. Here, then, was a precedent for his present motion. He meant to bring under the consideration of the House the present state of the court of session, of the jury trial by that court, of the trial before the court of appeal, the mode of trial before the justiciary and general courts, and the node of proceeding in the criminal and civil courts, and also in the court of teinds. But before he drew the attention of the House to the first point that he had mentioned, he wished to observe that there wag, no doubt, over all the land an anxious desire for an alteration and for an improvement in the administration of justice; it appeared that small debt courts were to be improved, and they were also led to understand that local courts were to be introduced. In the City of London there were many small courts, which did great credit to the persons presiding in them, and the administration of justice therein was so acceptable that he hoped to see their principle extended. He would on the first point then, refer the House to a speech of Lord Grenville, delivered in 1807 in the other House of Parliament, of course, on the Scotch Judicature Bill, in which his Lordship pointed out the evils of the then system.^* He knew that it would be contended that since 1807 a great alteration had taken place, and that it would be said, that many improvements had been since made in the court, but this he denied. There had, indeed, been many alterations and some improvements, but lieges in general who were plundered of their money, and whose time was wasted in 1807, were now quite as much plundered, and had their time now wasted. He would challenge the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite to deny this, and if he did he called upon him to venture before a committee. Lord Grenville went on to complain that the Table of the House of Lords was loaded with appeals, the greater part of which were from the court of session in Scotland, and it was now equally well known that there were now annually before the House of Lords more cases of appeal from Scotland than from all the rest of the two other countries. To what was this owing? It was because they had no such thing as a responsible court in Scotland. No judge was responsible for any opinion he might give, and, consequently, he was not forced to apply the law under such responsibility to the cases brought before him. Nay, the opinions of the judges often differed, and sometimes out of the thirteen judges there were six one way and seven the other. This was strictly the fact, and no man who went before the supreme court would doubt the truth of what he was saying. And in his opinion the Government would never be able to effect a perfect system till they undertook to introduce a code of laws for all the three countries, which would unite the best part of the laws of each. To one other point of Lord Grenville's speech he wished to call the especial attention of the House. His Lordship

^* See Hansard's Debates Vol. viii. p. 788.

complained of the use of written evidence and pleadings, to the exclusion of all other, and he declared that at that given period it was almost impossible to persevere with written and printed pleadings. But this had been continued notwithstanding, and one of the best authorities had stated that "evidence taken in writing was not evidence at all; that it was words only, and not evidence;" and unless the witnesses were present before the judge, unless the court could form an opinion of the countenance and the manner, it was not possible to form a correct estimate of the value of his testimony. They, in Scotland, knew nothing of vivâ voce evidence; everything was done by commission; the commission was issued, the witnesses were examined, the testimony was written down and it was sent to the judges, and it was entirely at their discretion whether it was read or not. He said, that it was so; for it was impossible for any one to read the whole of the quantity of trash which was written down for evidence; in short, no good would be effected till the witness was brought face to face with the counsel. He would be glad to know of the learned Gentleman opposite (the Attorney-general) why the bar of Scotland was not as competent as the English counsel to examine a witness. He believed, that there was no reason for the continuance of the present Session, except the continuance of a prejudice, that where there was a great number of judges there was a great quantity of justice. He believed, however, that the direct contrary of this was the fact—that it was rather, the fewer the judges, the greater the justice. Lord Grenville also said, that the system was the more imperfect from the want of a clear distinction between the law and the fact. What would learned Gentlemen in England think if the judges were judges of the law, of the Fact, and of equity? He hoped, that the hon. Member the newly appointed judge in that House, or, as he did not see the other judge present, he trusted the hon. and learned Member for Dublin would say whether a judge could properly determine the law, the fact, and the equity. This evil was increased in Lord Grenville's time by the large number of judges—fifteen; for there were fifteen judges then, but there was a devil's dozen now. Nothing, said Lord Grenville, was more conducive to the due administration of justice than the clear distinction of law, and of fact; that the facts of a case should be brought to an issue of fact, and that the law as applicable to those facts, should be clearly distinguished; that thus confusion would be avoided, and the law and the facts of each case being clearly pointed out, justice would be administered with clearness and precision; but then "no care was taken to separate the facts from the law." He asserted, that such was precisely the state of things now; there was no difference between the period when Lord Grenville, in 1807, delivered his beautiful and true speech, and the present time; the state of things was now precisely as it was then. He felt much difficulty in proceeding to the next observation, with regard to the mode in which the court of session was at present constituted. There was no man in the House more unwilling than himself to say anything to hurt the feelings of any individual, but he could not avoid doing so, if it were necessary, in the discharge of his duty as a Member for a place in Scotland; the condition of many of the members of the supreme court was such as to render them in some measure unfitted; the extreme age at which some of them had arrived, the infirmities with which it had seemed fit in the wisdom of the Almighty to afflict others, reduced the number of the judges in that court from a state of efficiency to one which was very far from being effectual. There was not one individual presiding in that court who did not deserve the public sympathy for his high attainments and for his great public virtue; there was not one of whom one disrespectful word could he spoken, and he would not, in the slightest degree, act otherwise than respectfully to them, nor would he allude to them otherwise than in the discharge of his duty. But it was his business not to conceal from the House, that the heads of the supreme court were, from circumstances, some of them of a late date in a state not fit to be the heads of courts. An infirmity of a heavy nature afflicted one, whilst another was also visited with severe illness, although he sincerely hoped, that it would only be of a temporary nature. What, however, had this judge done? He had appointed a person to officiate in his absence than whom no better man could exist; but he had, he believed attained the age of 90, or thereabouts. [An hon. Member: He was 80 last birthday.] He might be mistaken as to the exact age, but even if he were eighty was that a time of life for a man to be appointed as the substitute for a judge? The judges altogether were of extreme age—their age varied from, as he believed, ninety or not much less, down to sixty-five or sixty-six years. There were no young men on the bench in Scotland, and, therefore, it was, that he said, that if they had fewer judges, they would have a better system, and that they ought to have more efficient men. More upon that point, he would not state, except to remark, that it was not from great attention, or great labour, that these learned men became so little efficient. The supreme court only sat 104 days in a year, and the volume he held in his hand contained evidence, that they did not sit on each of those days more than one hour and a half or two hours. He would put it, therefore, to the learned Gentleman (the Attorney-general) whether this was such an attendance as ought to be expected. He believed, that the judges in England sat for ten months in the year, and why should they not sit the same time in Scotland? They had in Scotland at least as wholesome a climate,—the air was even more bracing, and there could be no harm if the judges in Scotland also sat for the ten months. He held in his hand two returns, both for the year 1836, which would exemplify this—one was from the courts of common law at Westminster, and the other from the court of sessions in Scotland, which, for the same period, allowed of a striking contrast. In the courts at Westminster there were 95,964 causes set down, of which 43,321 were in the Court of Queen's Bench alone, and the number of litigated causes were 16,000. He then came to the return for the courts in the other part of the kingdom, and he found that there were in the year 1836, before the five lords ordinary 1,707 causes of reclaimed notices in the inner house 456, and of proceedings chiefly formal only 1,734, making a total of 3,960 for thirteen judges. There was the difference between ten months and three months' work. He came to the next branch of his subject, and the House would be astonished to find, that such was the wisdom of the thirty-two sheriffs, such was their sense of justice, and such was their respect for the proceedings of that House, that in spite of the clauses in the act which had passed that house relative to the acts of sederunt, it was now quite possible for no less than forty-three papers to be presented in one cause. He had last year procured returns which made an exposure which would not otherwise be believed. Those returns had been reduced to figures, so as to give a numerical result, and the facts which they demonstrated were most extraordinary. He took the amended return of the sheriffs of Renfrew, and he found that the average endurance of an action (all short actions—those terminated within a year being excluded) was 1,193 days, or a cause was, on an average, three years and ninety-eight days before the Court; and this after an Act had been passed which declared it expedient to accelerate the administration of justice. The average number of times on which each sheriff gave judgment was four; and the average time during which the causes were lying waiting for judgment, was 277 days and a fraction. In answer to this he might very likely be told, that a royal commission had been issued; that there were among the Members, as he admitted, several excellent persons, and among them the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, whose ability he freely acknowledged, and that this commission was doing the same duties as he proposed for the consideration of the Committee; but in answer to this he would read to the House—and if they granted him a committee he would prove—what was the opinion of one of the present judges with respect to this law commission:—" As there are no reporters present," said this judge, "I may quietly tell you that you need be under no apprehension on account of the law commissioners, or think that they will injure the Court of Session. A set of old advocates and writers are too shrewd and sensible to break their own heads." [Name, name!] He thought that he had a better hold over the House by not naming the author; but give him a committee, and he would name him at once. Was he not there to gain his cause if he could? He was not going about the bush, but he was setting about his business fairly and honourably. Now as to the jury trials, he had no returns of what the commissioners had done; and when he wanted to know even what witnesses had been examined, he got a reply, perhaps sufficiently explicit and sufficiently courteous, that "when the report was produced, he would know who the wit- nesses were." As to the Court of Teinds, it never got through its business; but this was no fault of the presiding officers. In many parishes there were two great questions unsettled, and he believed, that in some parishes there were three questions still open; but this delay arose entirely out of the forms of the Court, which were extremely improper. He came next to a subject which would be one of great delicacy if they did not all know the unimpeachable character of his hon. Friend opposite (the Lord Advocate). He came to the question of the criminal judicature which he believed was in a more objectionable state than any other. There would not be any blame, however, attributable to the present Lord Advocate, for he believed that no Lord Advocate would have time to look into this subject fully. He knew the great energies of the present Lord Advocate and of his predecessor, Lord' Jeffery. He knew the duties they performed, and he believed it was not possible for the power of nature to permit them to go through more fatigue; and if the improvement were to be effected at all, it must be done by some one not connected with the administration of justice. He knew the duties of the office of Lord Advocate, and he believed that they had been honestly, zealously, and faithfully performed by the present Lord Advocate and his predecessor, but it was quite impossible that either could effect an amendment. Let the House consider how the Lord Advocate was appointed. He was some distinguished Advocate who had risen, like the Chief Justice in England, to the very top of his profession, but without devoting any of his attention to this branch of the system, for the Scottish system of circuits did not admit of the attendance of the highest Members of the profession—in fact, the circuits were attended by mere youths and tyros, and this was owing to the deficiencies in Scotland of jury trials. He alleged nothing personal against the administration of justice, but he only contended that the system which was acted upon was one which was injurious in the highest degree to the rights and privileges of the people. The powers intrusted to junior branches of the profession far exceeded that to which their experience or their situation entitled them. It was the system, however, he repeated, which he considered to be improper, and not the persons who were engaged in carrying it out; it was of the law which was executed, and not of the judges by whom it was put in force that he complained. He had himself gone a circuit, with a view to ascertain the extent of the mischief which existed, and it appeared to him that it was most indecent that it should be in the power of Gentlemen so young as those who acted for the Lord Advocate to say who was to be tried and who to be discharged, and therefore he said it was absolutely necessary, with a view to the general revision of the system, that a committee should be appointed to look into the jurisdiction and powers of the criminal courts. With regard to the sheriffs' courts, which were the next to which he would refer, he did not mean to enter largely into the question affecting them, because he had endeavoured to obtain a committee upon the subject last Session, but, in consequence of the hon. Gentleman opposite voting against him, his object had been defeated; but, he must say, that he thought it of essential consequence that that part of the jurisprudence should be inquired into, and he thought that the other House of Parliament ought not to be permitted by its interference to reject the most useful part of a measure which was proposed to them, without any reason being assigned, for he had no hesitation in saying that he had watched the proceedings of the bill before the two houses of Parliament last Session, in its progress through the House of Lords, and no reason whatever had been assigned by the noble Lord who suggested the expulsion of four clauses contained in it for so doing, and those clauses were of exceeding importance. In pointing out to the House the effect of the existing system, he could not do so better than by stating that the fact was, that the people appeared to have been made for the laws and lawyers, and not the laws and lawyers for the people. It amounted to that. The system authorizing Acts of sederunt was in itself one of extreme injustice. As the law stood, it was in the power of the Lords of Session to refuse to promulgate the acts of sederunt, and they had even said, that there was no necessity for them to be posted against the walls of the courthouse, although by these very acts the people were taxed to the amount of two millions. There were no means by which this amount might be reduced or taxed—no means by which the people of Scotland might complain against any items; but it was determined on within closed doors, and those whose purses were to be sweated were not made acquainted with the contents of the bills until they were actually called upon to pay; nay, even the sale of the acts at the shop of the printer, by whom they were prepared for circulation, had been refused, on the ground that they were private. Jeremy Bentham, in his observations upon the state of the Scottish people, said, that they were so completely fettered by the legal profession, that no good could come of it, that improvements were then in the course of being made, but that whatever alteration might be granted, the lawyers would contrive, by some means or other to keep the people back, and this prediction it was obvious had been but too truly verified. He begged to ask the learned Attorney-General, why the people of Scotland generally would not be allowed to have a general jury system? Why were they not as well able to judge of cases as the particular inhabitants of the city of Edinburgh? When Lord Brougham, in 1834, abandoned those clauses of the Local Courts Bill, which would have given the courts jurisdiction in cases of debts amounting to 20l., he said, that his reason for doing so was, that, if it were carried, it would "sweep clean Westminster Hall;" and he supposed the same description of reason would prevail in Scotland under similar circumstances. There could be no doubt, that the most ample justice was done in the local courts as they were now constituted, and the appeal given from them to the chief sheriff was a perfect absurdity, and he thought this would be obvious on his mentioning facts. The number of cases of small debts disposed of before the sheriff substitute in one year, in Perthshire, was 3,887, while the appeals to the chief sheriff were 118 only in number. In the same county of Perthshire also, while 528 civil causes had been disposed of, 213 criminal trials had taken place, so that 213 persons were allowed to be tried before juries without one of them being allowed to obtain civil justice by the same means. The total number of cases in fact laid before the one sheriff substitute was between six and seven thousand, while the appeals to the thirty sinecure sheriffs were 3,600 only in number. The effect of the mode, too, in which the busi, ness was arranged, was to cause immense delay, and it was impossible for a case to come before the Court of Session until it had been going on and pending for between two and three years; but he thought the House must agree with him that the system which he had endeavoured to describe was in its nature far inferior to that which he advocated as being the most advantageous—the jury system. He had now endeavoured to state to the House his reasons for asking them to grant a Committee, with a view to an inquiry into the general state of the administration of justice in Scotland. He was quite prepared to say, that over the breadth of the country no confidence existed in the courts to which suitors were now obliged to go, and no man expected the measure of justice he was entitled to receive, either in due time, or in a just and equitable manner. The expenses were enormous; the delay was similarly injurious; and both these matters, so properly complained of, arose out of the present inconvenient method of proceeding, and of the enormous extent of writing and printing employed. He defied hon. Gentlemen opposite to show him where the law required either this delay or this expense. It was nowhere required, but the system was one which had merely grown up, and had been supported by the remnant of the Scottish Parliament, now called the Court of Session. He did not blame the present men for their having originated the system, but he did blame them for their maintenance and support of its unjust effects. The evil might be easily remedied if this House would permit an inquiry to be made, and he must say, that he thought that object could be in no way better fulfilled than by adopting the course which he suggested. Before he sat down, he must add, that he thought that the appointment of the commission which had sat was most unsuitable, because it was composed wholly of those gentlemen who, if they had no interest in the subject, must at least be supposed to have strong prejudices. He asked the House, however, why they should have the present system continued, under the advice of men whose prejudices or whose interests were concerned in supporting a monopoly which was most obnoxious? Would the House, when they desired to break up the East-Indian monopoly, have employed the monopolists themselves to advise upon the propriety of the step, or would they, when they desired to put an end to slavery, have asked the advice of those who were interested in its continuance? No, they would not, and why, then, had an opposite course been pursued here, and why had persons whose interest it was to support the existing system been employed to report upon the necessity of its alteration? He had before stated his belief upon the same subject upon the same grounds, but the application which he had made was refused. He was convinced, however, that if a mixed Committee were granted, the result of their deliberations would be of a character very different from that of the commission which had already sat, and the suggestions and recommendations which they would make he was persuaded would be altogether opposed to those which had hitherto been acted upon. In conclusion, the hon. Member moved that a Select Committee should be appointed to inquire into the mode of administering justice in Scotland.

said, that the only difficulty which he had, was, not in answering any one point put by the hon. Member as a ground for the granting of the committee for which he prayed, but the selection of one which presented the smallest reason for the motion being acceded to. The hon. Gentleman had gone over every department of the law of Scotland, and had made observations on most of them, none of which, however, appeared to be founded on any very strong ground. He had often expressed a wish that the hon. Gentleman would attend the Court of Session for a month, and he had expressed his belief, that the hon. Member in that time would have an opportunity of acquiring some knowledge in reference to their proceedings. He was confident that if the hon. Member had acted upon this suggestion, he would have received a great deal of information, and he would have viewed the matter in a very different light from that in which he now looked upon it. What was the nature of the present motion, however? Was the hon. Member serious in making it? The hon. Gentleman must recollect that on the one subject alone of Sheriff's Courts, a committee of this House had sat in the last year. What better right had the House then to believe that any committee now appointed, would be more successful in its inquiries than that? If the hon. Member had desired to set up any par- ticular grievance, he should have brought forward that point before the House, and should have made it out, but according to the hon. Member's speech, it would be necessary to have ten or twelve different committees to inquire into the various topics on which he had treated. He must say, however, that there was no instance in which any law had been so sedulously and carefully examined into, and in which so many attempts had been made to improve it, as the law of Scotland, since the time of Lord Grenville's speech. At that time jury trials were utterly unknown in Scotland, and the hon. Member now said, why not have them in every case? He could not be so well aware as those who were acquainted with the difficulties attending such undertakings of the great danger and trouble accompanying the introduction of an entirely new system throughout a country, however excellent that system might be in its effect elsewhere. No man could be more anxious, or more zealous than he was, in endeavouring to introduce reforms, when they were heeded; but it was impossible to suppose that an attempt to introduce a system like that of trial by jury in all cases could be at first and at once successful. It had been in existence, and in operation in England for a long period; and not only judges, but juries and witnesses had acquired a knowledge of its usefulness and importance; but the introduction of such a system fresh into a country where it was previously unknown, was an undertaking which would be attended with infinitely greater difficulties than could be surmounted very soon. If the absence of the jury system were complained of in some cases, however, it could not be denied, that it was in some cases highly beneficial, and he conceived also, that in many particulars the Scotch law, as it now stood, was far superior to the law as it existed in this country. Take, for instance, the ecclesiastical courts, the chancery courts, and the Admiralty courts. While these jurisdictions in England, formed the subject of consideration in various courts, in Scotland the separate courts of jurisdiction had been abolished, and all the various duties were performed under one system. The hon. Member spoke of the number of judges; but did he consider how many situations had been by this means abolished? First, five of the judges of the Exchequer had been removed, and their duties were now performed by one of the judges of the court of session. The judges of the Admiralty courts had also been removed, and their duties taken in like manner; four commissaries, whose powers exceeded those of the ecclesiastical courts in England, had here in like manner been taken away, and their duties apportioned among the court of session, and two members of that body itself had also been taken off the list. Had the hon. Gentleman, too, considered the great increase of business caused by the removal of the jurisdictions of those courts to the court of session? The committee which had sat upon this subject, had inquired into the possibility of any reduction taking place, and the evidence of one person, the Dean of the Faculty had been, that the number had already been too far reduced, while two others who were examined, declared that it was impossible that the number could be any further diminished. He could not concede, therefore, that on this point either there was any ground for appointing a committee. With regard to the present system of trial by means of depositions, he was prepared to admit that it was attended with some difficulty; but it had been introduced long before the jury system was known there, and the alteration, he repeated, would be a matter of too great difficulty to attempt to accomplish at once. The question had been considered again and again, but if the hon. Gentleman could point out any practicable measure, by means of which the defects of which he complained, might be remedied, he knew there was no person more disposed to give it the most liberal and immediate attention than he (the Lord Advocate). With regard to the statement made as to the rejection of the four clauses of the bill of last Session, in the other House of Parliament, that surely could not be urged as a reason for a committee being granted; for could it be contended that this House, had any power over the proceedings of the House of Peers? Did any ground, therefore, remain upon which it could be said, that the motion should be acceded to, or upon which it was reasonable to suppose, that any benefit could be reaped? The hon. Member in the course of his observations, had, made some remarks upon the age of the justices of the court of session, and upon their infirmity. It was true that one of the judges was suffering from infirmity; but although a doubt had been expressed whether this had been caused by length of service or the extent of labour to which that functionary was exposed, he could assure the House, that that doubt was one which ought not to have been expressed, for he could assert, that the infirmity of the learned individual was caused, entirely by his too constant and laborious attention to the duties of his office. He believed, that although the infirmity was severe, it was not likely to prove lasting, and that the learned individual would be again able to resume his avocations, and he was confident, that the hon. Member would agree with him in saying, that there could not be any person more zealous than the learned judge in question, in the discharge of his duty, or more desirous of resuming his labours. The hon. Member bad referred also to another instance, and this was indeed a most unfortunate circumstance, for the individual in question was one whose talents and whose character entitled him to the respect of all, and he was one of the most distinguished and most able judges on the bench. As regarded the question of the retiring salaries of the judges, there needed not another committee, for the report of the commission expressly approved of the recommendation, that the judges should be enabled to retire on their full salaries. He denied, that injustice to criminals was usual in Scotland; on the contrary, he called on the hon. Member for Greenock to prove a single instance in which a criminal had not had full justice done to him. Every person accused, was furnished with a copy of the indictment, a list of the witnesses, and a list of the jurors; and no charge was looked on as substantiated unless proved by two competent witnesses. In England, on the other hand, there was great room for injustice; for by the practice of the courts it was possible for a man to be tried in the Criminal Court on the very day of his committal by the magistrate. He was thus precluded from making any sufficient preparations for his defence, and great opportunity was given, if a conspiracy existed against him, for the infliction of an unjust sentence. Notwithstanding the greater stringency in Scotland, more convictions in proportion to committals took place in that country than in England or in Ireland, although juries were known in Scotland to be most scru- pulous and conscientious in sifting the whole of the evidence before pronouncing their verdict. As regarded the financial part of the question, it was already in proof, that in the judicial establishment of the country a saving of from 54,000l. to 68,000l. per annum had been effected. On the first of January in the present year, a further alteration had come into effect, by which it was calculated 14,000l. a year would be saved to suitors in Scotland, by reductions in the fees of the courts; yet the hon. Member, before the effect of this new arrangement could be known, called for a committee of inquiry. He by no means denied, that there might not be room for improvement in the administration of the law in Scotland, and he gave the hon. Member full credit for a desire to effect what he conceived to be improvement, for that person was no friend to his country who would not desire to see improvement; but he must say, that the course proposed by the hon. Member was one, that so far from aiding the cause of improvement, was calculated much to retard it, by forcing on the attention of a Committee of that House subjects calculated more to provoke distaste and disgust, from their dryness and want of interest, than to induce a full, fair, and sifting inquiry. He did not conceive it necessary for him to enter further into the question, and he therefore should content himself with opposing the motion, for the reasons he had stated.

, jun. (St. Andrew's) without adverting to the various subjects introduced in the speeches of his hon. and learned Friends, would observe on one question alone—the fitness or unfitness of the judicial bench of Scotland for the due discharge of the duties resting upon them. At the present moment four of the judges were disqualified by personal infirmity from serving, so that there was great danger, that the public business might, in the event of illness among the other judges, be suspended altogether until their recovery. Three of the judges in question were disqualified in such a way as to leave no hope of their ever being able again efficiently to perform the duties of their office. He now referred particularly to one (while he desired to express his high respect for his professional character) who, by reason of his great age and other infirmities, had come nearly to a state of mental imbecility. In the next case, the learned individual was stone-deaf, and the third was at the present moment so afflicted by the hand of Providence, that it was extremely unlikely he would ever be able again to preside in a court of justice. In the case of the fourth judge, there was reason to hope that, perhaps he might ere long be enabled to resume his duties. The effect of the present state of things was, however, that, in fact, there were only four efficient judges. The facts he had stated were currently known, and believed in Edinburgh, and, surely they called for some inquiry. He, nevertheless, did not support the motion of the hon. Member for Greenock, because he did not think it calculated to produce favourable results. But he thought, that the observations that had been made in that House on the subject, would have the effect of drawing the public attention to it. He trusted, however, that judges who were past the possibility of further usefulness, would take advantage of the law, which had provided retiring allowances, which he had not the slightest objection to see increased.

felt it his duty, after what had fallen from his hon. Friend, to say a few words, because if what he had stated were really the fact, it could not but reflect discredit on the Government that they had not looked with sufficient vigilance to the administration of justice in Scotland. With regard to what his hon. Friend had stated, this was the first time he had heard that that distinguished and venerable judge (Lord Gillies) was afflicted with mental imbecility, That he was not bending under the weight of years, he (Mr. Maule) was not prepared to assert; but that his mental faculties were not adequate to the discharge of his duties he was prepared to deny. It was not surprising that men of large families should struggle, even under the weight of declining years, to maintain their position and receive their salaries from the public to an hour when perhaps it would be more prudent that they should retire from the discharge of their public duties. Was it to be concluded however, that the feelings of a father in leaning to the interests of his family should wholly overlook the interest of the public. For the first time in twenty-eight years, after active and zealous services, one distinguished judge was absent from his post.—No one who had looked to the administration of justice in Scotland, could hesitate in dealing out to the Lord Justice Clerk the fullest meed of praise for the manner in which he had discharged his duties; and it was gratifying to find that after a short interval of absence he was likely to return to his Court with recruited strength, not only of body but of mind. With respect to the venerable individual who presided in hi Court n his absence, he had the Lord Justice Clerk's Assurance that he was fully able to discharge the duties of his office. As to the gentleman who had been afflicted suddenly in Edinburgh, it would be ungracious in him to say further than that it would be hard to call on him to resign his office. With respect to the general state of the court it was desirable to have young men and efficient men as judges; but how could they expect a general succession going on unless they had a fit and proper allowance for the judges to retire upon as they declined in years? The House owed its thanks to the hon. Member (Mr. Wallace) for bringing forward this question, inasmuch as it would tend to settle it in the public mind. No evil could afflict a country so much as having bad judges; but there was another evil scarcely less, that of having the confidence of the people shaken in the fitness of those who filled the responsible office of Judges. An inquiry by a Committee of the House into the conduct of men sitting on the Bench would be likely to have such an effect, and he deprecated the motion mainly on that principle. It would have no other effect than to unsettle the minds of the people, and give them a want of confidence in the administration of the justice of that country. With respect to the points mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, he no doubt entertained so clear an opinion on them, that he could not want any evidence to substantiate his views. Why, therefore, did he not come forward and bring in a bill, and lay it on the Table, so that they might discuss, point by point, those reforms which he thought the judicial establishment of Scotland required. He would ask the hon. Member not to make sweeping attacks on the whole judicial administration without submitting some measures, because such a course could have no satisfactory effect. He would not trouble the House further on this subject, believing it would pause long before it agreed to the propositions of the hon. Member.

rejoiced exceedingly that the hon. Gentleman, the under Secre- tary of State, whose duty it was to ascertain that there was no person remaining on the judicial bench of Scotland who was not perfectly competent to discharge his duty, had come forward and contradicted the statement that had been made. Why it had been said that four Judges of the present Bench of Scotland were incompetent—[Mr. O'Connell—Three] He was surprised to hear the statements made whether of three or two. It was true, that unfortunately one of those learned persons had been obliged to relinquish his duty on account of severe illness, but he trusted that that learned person was in a fair way of recovery, and that before many days had passed he would be able to discharge his duty with the same honour and credit as he had done for the last twenty eight years. When the hon. Gentleman talked of persons being on the Bench who were incompetent from mental imbecility to perform their duty, he begged leave distinctly to deny, that there were any such. He wished that hon. Gentlemen would look at the voluminous judgments delivered by every Judge in that Court in the course of last year. Nothing could reflect greater credit upon any person than the judicial research, the great learning, and the acuteness displayed in those judgments. He believed, that at no period of his life was that learned person more capable of giving judgment to the great satisfaction of all suitors than at the present moment.—The only inference that could be drawn from the speech of the hon. and learned, Member was this, that every person who filled a judicial situation ought to tender his resignation the moment he became indisposed. He hoped, that for the sake of Scotland, Lord Corehouse's health would speedily be restored.

said, it was true his venerable relative the President of the Court of Session was now advanced in years, and he was far from denying, that that advance in years had not told considerably against him. He had been in constant communication with that venerable person, and he could say, that in all the ordinary intercourse of life it was impossible to see the slightest symptoms of that mental debility to which the hon. Member had alluded. The observations of the hon. Bart. the Member for Stamford (Sir G. Clerk) had done away with the necessity of his saying a great deal that he had intended to state; but he could not sit still and hear allusions which he thought might have been made in more gentle language by the hon. Member—and he begged to bear his testimony to the inaccuracy of the hon. Member's statements.

having been alluded to so pointedly by his hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Greenock, begged to make a few observations. He entirely concurred in the view taken of this subject by his learned Friend, the Lord Advocate. He had had a very fair opportunity of seeing how justice was administered in Scotland; and he must say, that, on the whole, it was administered very satisfactorily. That there were abuses, no one would deny, although they had been most monstrously exaggerated by the hon. Member for Greenock. The House would recollect what the hon. Member said about the people of Scotland being mulcted in 2,000,000l. a-year, by the costs they paid in the Sheriffs' Court. It must give English and Irish Members a right notion of the growing wealth of his country—that the people, without any considerable inconvenience, could spare 2,000,000l. a-year for costs in the Sheriffs' Court. The hon. Gentleman had been led away by his zeal to dream of things that were utterly impossible. He agreed, that trial by jury might be more generally introduced; but as to the trouble of making the change, he concurred in what had been said by the Lord Advocate. Trial by jury required to be familiarly understood by witnesses, jurymen, and all concerned in the working of the machinery. There was some inconsistency in what the hon. Gentleman said; he wished trial by jury to be more generally introduced, and yet he said, that where trial by jury had been introduced, the parties were always ruined. His hon. Friend had referred to the office of public prosecutor. Why, what he had said went against the appointment of a public prosecutor altogether; because it would be impossible for the Lord Advocate to be in every court in Scotland, therefore he must have a deputy to represent him, and that deputy must have a discretion as to who should be prosecuted, and how the prosecution should be conducted. There were great reasons for thinking, that the office of public prosecutor might be introduced into England with advantage. He believed, that it would be much better if a prosecution were instituted by a responsible adviser, who was able to say which cases should be brought before a jury and which should not, than that the matter should be left to blind chance, or to the passions of individuals. He did not deny, that great improvements might be advanced or facilitated by the Committee proposed by his hon. Friend: he, himself, had been a Member of the Committee on the Sheriff's Courts, and had gone there day after day, and sometimes there was a quorum and sometimes there was not. There was very little advantage, however, to be obtained by going into all the details of the business of the courts. Such an inquiry would occupy several years, and should, if necessary, form the business of a Commission. He had had the honour of being one of a Commission which would cause no expense to the public, and had effected, he hoped, no inconsiderable improvement. He would not boast of his own services, but he would say he was a zealous member of that Commission. Great talent was devoted for days and months to that service, from which service it was to be expected great improvements would be introduced into that department of the law. Could improvements in the law be expected from a Committee of the House of Commons? Trial by jury might be introduced, so that his hon. Friend would perhaps hereafter have the pleasure of going and hearing in a Scotch court, a suit for 20s. tried and decided by a jury; but he doubted whether the people would regard that as an advantage.

would recommend his hon. Friend to withdraw his motion for a Committee, which he was certain nothing but a sense of public duty could have induced his hon. Friend to bring forward. The hon. Baronet, the Member for Stamford, must have misunderstood what had been stated, when he referred to Lord Corehouse; it was, he believed, stated generally, that the Scotch judges were inefficient from age or bad health, but no special allusion was made to Lord Core-house. If the power of securing the comforts of age were withheld from those venerable characters, it was to be expected they would remain on the bench till overtaken by years and infirmity. He thought his hon. Friend had obtained his object in the public attention he had attracted to the state of the judicial bench in Scotland, and he did not foresee any objection to his withdrawing his motion.

said, he was able, from his own personal knowledge, to contradict much that had been stated in respect to the Scotch judges, and he regretted hit hon. Friend, the Member for St. Andrew's, had been led into the statement he had made.

had been in the Court of Session in Edinburgh, and he had there seen a venerable judge, an honourable and upright man, and had heard him deliver his opinion on two short cases. He was in such a state of imbecility, that he regretted to see him, and he was prompted by his brother judges on the right and left. The Lord President was not there on that occasion; and he was sorry to hear his hon. Friend say, that his mind was decayed; he was, however, in bad health. He hoped the Scottish judges would soon be enabled to retire on full salaries, and if his hon. Friend did not bring forward a measure to enable them, he would.

said, the judges of Scotland were not adequately paid for their services. It was impossible they could save money, and yet support their families. It was a paltry species of economy, that they were not allowed to resign on full salaries. Such economy was pursued both in Scotland and Ireland, and was equally bad in both countries.

denied, that the venerable Scottish judge alluded to by Mr. Bannerman, was in a state of imbecility; he was in full possession of those splendid abilities for which he had been so much and so justly admired in Scotland. It had been lately his lot to hear him give his opinion on some case, and he could assure the hon. Member, that the learned judge evinced that singular ingenuity of mind by which he had long astonished his hearers. There was no judge in his recollection, who had borne a higher character than that venerable judge had done.

denied, that the judges of Scotland were under paid. He thought, considering the short period the judges sat, they were admirably paid for the duties they performed. He thought the public money could not be better applied than by giving the judge a proper retiring provision, but it should be at that time of life when they were incapable of performing their duties.

considered the subject with respect to the Scotch judges had been brought forward prematurely. He thought the hon. Member would not gain much by the appointment of a Committee of the House of Commons, as he considered a Committee of the House of Commons was not the best authority to take up the matter. He was in hopes, however, that what had taken place, would induce her Majesty's Government to take the subject into their serious consideration, for the purpose of revising the whole judicial system in Scotland.

thought, that the House had run away from the question, and that it would be vain on his part to attempt to bring them back to it. In answer, however, to the observations of the Attorney-General, he had to complain that they would not allow juries to try for shillings and sixpences in Scotland, but they would for necks. He would not detain the House, to take a division on the subject; but seeing the impression that was entertained, he would withdraw his Motion.

seconded the Motion of his hon. Friend. Although Government might see fit occasionally to introduce measures of importance towards the close of the Session, yet that could seldom be the case. The President of the Board of Trade must in general be aware of what was required to be brought forward before that period. Last Session, more bills affecting important interests had been brought forward at a late period than in any other Session. He thought that this Motion which would compel an early introduction of important measures, would prevent the public being taken by surprise.

said, that some bills of the nature alluded to by his hon. Friend who had brought forward this Motion, could only be introduced at a late period of the Session. If hon. Gentlemen paid attention to the manner in which public business had of late pressed on the House, they must also be aware that many measures, although they might be of the utmost importance to different interests, were necessarily postponed in consequence of the number of questions and discussions relating to party differences which had unfortunately greatly increased of late. His hon. Friend who brought forward this Motion, and his hon. Friend, the Member for Kilkenny, who had seconded it, had referred chiefly to bills connected with trade and commerce. He was satisfied, even if the hon. Mover should be inclined to press the question, which be was happy to see the hon. Member was not—that he should be enabled to show that this motion was unnecessary. The House of Commons would not, at any time, allow a bill to be introduced unless grounds were shown for the necessity of its introduction. The motion, therefore, was supererogatory. The motion might be opposed also on other grounds. It would be putting a stop to the legislation of that House. All bills relating to commerce must involve revenue considerations. How was it possible to introduce bills involving revenue considerations until public accounts were made up, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer knew what money would be at his disposal. The revenue accounts were only made up to the 5th of April, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer must have made his financial statement to the House, the Budget must have been brought forward before bills could be introduced affecting articles of commerce. He would be glad, that his right hon. Friend would place at his disposal money to be disposed of in different ways; he should be happy to come down to that House on the 5th of February, and say that it was in his power to reduce duties on such and such articles; but his right hon. Friend would tell him that it was necessary that the financial accounts should be made up before he could be enabled to announce his intention to lessen or to take off a tax. Of late years, he had had the good fortune to propose and carry many ameliorations in the Customs laws; but these ameliorations required much preparation and consideration. In the first place, it was desirable to ascertain what sum of money could be spared for the reduction of duties; next, it was of importance to know on what particular articles these reductions would tell most for the public advantage; in order to ascertain this, it was necessary to consult different individuals, and to listen to the claims put forward by different interests. Hon. Members were not to imagine that because discussion did not take place within these walls, that therefore none took place at all; a vast deal of discussion took place without these walls. Different interests were heard, and such an adjustment of those interests took place as might best conduce to the interests of trade in general. He would refer to a reduction which had recently taken place, of the duty on fruits. Constant and frequent consultations had been had with persons connected with every branch of that trade before it was settled in what manner that reduction should take place. He would mention also another instance; the reduction of the duties on dyes, which for a long time previously had been the subject of daily consultations. He mentioned these circumstances to show the House the necessity there was of consulting the different interests in such cases as those which he had adduced. The effect of the hon. Member's motion would be to retard all this business. On no subject was more care taken to inform the public mind than upon the subject of financial measures, which had to go through more forms than ordinary bills. If more had not been done within the last few years for commercial improvement, it had been the fault of that House, and not the fault of the Board of Trade. He had done all that he thought the House would permit him to do, to improve the commercial legislation of this country. He appealed with confidence to the various articles (not of very great importance), to the number of between 300 and 400, in which he had effected a reduction of duty, and the result of which, in most cases, had been an advantage to the revenue by an increase of consumption. The restrictive duties upon those great articles, corn and timber, from which duties he believed the commerce of this country was suffering—were beyond his power, and it depended upon the House whether any alteration should take place in them.

said, that having a motion upon the books of the same nature as the hon. Member for Greenock, though he proposed to effect the same object by different means, he would say a word or two. He considered that his proposition, that no public bill be read a second time after a day to be fixed at the commence- ment of each Session, except for special reasons, and under urgent circumstances, was the better of the two. When he made his customary motion, that no business likely to create debate should come on after twelve o'clock at night, he was always assailed by the objection, that it would have the effect of retarding the public business, and lengthening the Sessions. But his answer to that was, that if the Session was protracted to Christmas, new bills would constantly be pouring in to the very last. As a proof of that he might state, that last Session, when there were 120 public acts passed, fifty-five new bills were introduced after the first of July, the Session closing in August. Hon. Members ought to know what business was before them when the Session opened. A limitation was already in force in regard to private bills, which could not be introduced after a certain time, and he thought it would be to the public advantage, that a similar limitation should be established with regard to public bills. If, however, the sense of the House were expressed against the motion of the hon. Member for Greenock, he would not press his.

objected to both motions, and would resist any attempt to place any limitation upon the House in respect to the introduction of those measures which the public interest might demand. The President of the Board of Trade had talked a great deal about the reductions he had made, and was prepared to make in duties on articles of commerce. He was glad, that the right hon. Gentleman had thus gone far to make up for a material omission in her Majesty's Speech, and he was happy, that the public had to expect reductions in those duties. He hoped, that in future the estimates would be laid on the Table of the House within the time agreed upon by the House, on the motion of Sir John Newport. He also trusted, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would find it convenient to revert back to the old system, and commence the financial system from the 5th of January, so that the balance sheet of the Government might be laid on the Table of the House one week from the meeting of Parliament. It was now brought forward, if not at the very end, at a very late period of the Session, and the President of the Board of Trade was obliged to wait until the Budget was brought forward before he could in- troduce any bill for the relief of the commerce of the country. He hoped the hon. Member would not press his motion to a division.

would take upon himself to say, and he believed without fear of contradiction, that ever since he had the honour of filling the situation he then held, the estimates of the great interests of the country—the estimates for the navy, the army, and the ordinance, had always been laid on the Table of the House within the period limited by the motion of Sir John Newport. His hon. Friend opposite had asked him to return to the old financial year, but allow him to ask, in what condition was the House placed under the old practice? Why, in nine cases out of ten, the Ministry were carrying on the affairs of Government without any authority whatever from Parliament. The right hon. Baronet knew well enough, that such was the case with many of the Governments with which he had been connected. On the accession of the present Ministry, they were told from all parts of the House, that they ought rather to adopt the plan followed by the French Chamber, and take a vote of confidence, than proceed on the plan which had hitherto been followed. The Government, however, took a different course. They altered the financial year from January to April, and they were supported, not only by the great body of the House, but also by the people out of doors. By the plan now in practice the Government had always the sanction of Parliament; the number of men were voted; the Mutiny Bill might be progressing, and the wages of the navy would be paid, and all would go on under the sanction of the House. It would be a great departure from principle if they were to go back to the old system, unless at the same time they were also to recur to the old practice of assembling in November. If the House met, at that time, Government might make the financial year commence in January; but meeting as they did in February, it was absolutely necessary that they should adhere to the system of commencing the financial year with April. He trusted, that his hon. Friend would not divide the House, for he obtained all that he wished by getting a recognition of his principle which should be followed in all practical cases.

said, if he understood the suggestion of the hon. Member for Greenock, it was this, not that there should be one universal rule, but that bills should be brought in in an early stage of the Session. For his own part he wished the House to recognize two classes of cases—1st. That wherever duties were to be imposed or raised, the bills should be brought in on the first day of the Session; but in the second place, when duties were to be taken off he would allow the Government to have power to introduce the Bill when they pleased. The right hon. President of the Board of Trade said, that it was the fault of the House that the duties on corn and timber remained in the same state as they had been during the last few years. That was not quite correct, because it was the duty of the right hon. Gentlemen to have brought in a bill to carry into effect the recommendation of a committee which had sat some years ago and recommended that the duty of timber should be reduced. The right hon. Gentleman, therefore, should accuse himself and not the House, because he and his Friends around him were very anxious for the reduction. When he sat on the opposite side of the House, along with the right hon. Gentleman, he had frequently brought the subject of the timber duties before the House, and had been frequently cheered by him and his Friends. Suppose that he were to introduce a bill now for that purpose would he have the cheer of the right hon. Gentleman—or would he have the cheer of the right hon. Gentleman's friends? No; they would be mute. Let the right hon. Gentleman carry out the recommendations of the Committee, and he should have his earnest support.

did not mean to divide the House upon the question. He would merely say, that if bills had to pass through seven stages, instead of five, this would be an argument in favour of an earlier bringing in of bills. He thought the financial year ought to be closed in January. He thought, that such a course would save a vast deal of trouble to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

would not detain the House on the present occasion, but he could not let that opportunity pass without tendering his thanks to his right hon. Friend for the useful and material alteration in the law, which he proposed to introduce. It was, no doubt, a most material alteration, most desirable in itself, but he could not help looking at the two first propositions of making a more effectual register of judgments and Crown debts as at least one important step to the panacea—the real medicine and remedy for a great many of these evils, the establishment of a good system of general registry—He looked to this as a most important advance, he did not treat it as an immaterial matter in the benefit which it contained itself, but he looked at it with most satisfaction as an advance, and an advance in the right direction, towards that which was the only effectual remedy for our present complicated and expensive system of real property.

entirely approved of the main objects of this bill, and the necessity of introducing better discipline into prisons, and providing further accommodation therein. No person who had been in Scotland but must regret the state of the prisons there; but the hon. Member had introduced some things into his bill which were not connected with the main object, the improvement of prisons. He approved of the alteration as far as it went, but he wished to call the attention of the hon. Gentleman to the propriety of separating that part of the bill which went to provide for the improvement of prison discipline in Scotland, from that which provided for the building of one or two, or three other prisons for the confinement of prisoners after trial, and wherein an improved system of discipline was to be carried into effect. He thought the providing by an assessment for the building these additional prisons, without immediately raising the question as to the propriety of throwing the burthen of the expense upon the people, was premature. No person knew the proportion of expense which would be thrown on the people, because in former bills, he believed the returns from the different counties were made up on different principles and for different objects, and did not offer the means of judging of the present case. He regretted, the principal Secretary of State for the Home Department was not in the House, because he should be fortified by an observation made by the noble Lord to the House on his intended measure for building prisons. The hon. Gentleman had much better have divided his bill into two parts, and he hoped before the bill passed he would see the propriety of so separating it. He would add, that as little time should be lost as possible in carrying through the measure con- nected with the improvement of central prisons discipline. He thought this improvement should be under the direction of a central board; and in this respect he approved of the bill but he was not satisfied with the expense thrown on the people. He was friendly to the experiment of improved prison discipline being tried on an extensive scale, but he thought, that experiment might be tried in the building in the Isle of Wight, which was large enough to contain all the persons condemned for crimes in Scotland, without imposing on that country the heavy burthen of building additional penitentiaries. If, as the noble Lord at the head of the Home Department had announced last night, he meant to call upon Parliament for a grant of money, for the purpose of building prisons, let the experiment in regard to Scotland be tried in the same way' and at the same time. The prison in the Isle of Wight would incur an expense of about 20,000l., but it would hold all the prisoners of Scotland for many years to come. Let the experiment be tried, and let it be paid out of the public purse, and not paid for in this unsatisfactory manner by an assessment. He hoped for the sake of Scotland, that the right hon. Gentleman would divide the bill into two parts. He thought the erection of prisons in Scotland should be a charge on the Consolidated Fund, and not be paid out of the county rates.

was surprised at the course adopted by the hon. Gentleman. A new light seemed to have dawned upon him. He viewed with alarm the proposition of the hon. Member as it led him to anticipate an opposition to the measure which he had not anticipated. Notwithstanding all that had been said by the hon. Baronet, he considered it better, that the bill should be proceeded with in its single shape.

would detain the House but a very few moments with his motion respecting a bill to amend the laws relating to the registration of voters in Ireland, and to assimilate them as much as possible to those of England. The present state of the law was admitted on all hands to be exceedingly defective, and this was the opinion of all per- sons, of whatever political party they might be. A bill to amend its defects was brought in by the Attorney-General of Ireland in 1835, and also in 1836, and in the last Session of Parliament, none having been brought in in the Session of 1837. The fictitious votes committee, which sat a considerable time, had witnesses summoned before it from different parts of Ireland, witnesses composed of all classes, and it was agreed on all sides, that the evils of the present system were intolerable. It would be in the recollection of the House, that last year he took the liberty to bring in a bill to remedy these evils, and that after the bill had been read a second time pro formâ, it went into committee, so as to enable him to give the details of the measure the fullest consideration, and he had since taken all the pains in his power to render the bill perfect. A very important law was passed last Session—he alluded to the Irish Poor-law act, which contained much machinery which would be available for registration. That law, however, had not yet come into operation, but he availed himself of its machinery in the bill which he introduced last Session for the purpose of assimilating the law, as far as possible, in England and Ireland. He had been receiving suggestions upon his bill, up to the latest moment. He had not brought it in as a party measure, and he should be obliged to any Gentleman who would consent to give him any assistance. Among many important suggestions which he had received, he had been told, that it would be premature to attempt to introduce a change to the extent which he had originally contemplated, and it had been suggested to him, that he would do well to deal only with some of the leading defects in the law at present, and not attempt to go the full length of the bill which he had introduced. He was quite disposed to consider that proposition, and, therefore, he would not now apply for leave to bring in a bill, as he considered, that when a Member asked for leave to bring in a bill he ought to have it in his hands; but he should apply himself to the consideration of the suggestions which he had received without loss of time, and would endeavour to make his measure as perfect as possible before it was introduced.

, in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend an Act of the 1st and 2d Victoria 1., cap. 56 for the more effectual relief of the poor in Ireland, stated that his object was to remedy a considerble degree of perplexity which had arisen consequent upon some of the clauses of the act referred to. In certain districts of Ireland it turned out, that the machinery for carrying the act into operation did not exist at all, consequently, the commissioners were at a perfect stand-still. This would be remedied. Provision would also be made for more accurately defining the boundaries of districts. Provision had been made in the act for certain preliminary expenses. These expenses were of a very limited nature, and provision was intended to be made for raising a limited sum with a view to meet them. It was directed by the act, that appeals should be heard at the courts of quarter sessions, which were presided over by assistant barristers. Now, there were certain towns, where assistant barristers did not preside; this bill would remedy the defect.

said, that difficulties had occurred in the city of Dublin with regard to the operation of this act, which it would be necessary to relieve by some legislative measure. He hoped that every bill on this subject, like the one of last year, would be discussed without reference to party feelings, and he hoped, that this would be the case in Ireland also in all proceedings that might be taken in consequence of this measure, but he was sorry, that in the city of Limerick such had not been the case. He thought, if the House of Industry in Dublin were placed under the superintendence of the Commissioners, a considerable saving would be effected, but he wished to recommend a class of old and deserving officers belonging to that institution, and who would be thrown out of employment, to the consideration of the noble Lord. The noble Lord would make no specific motion on the subject, as he was of opinion, that the Lords of the Treasury were the proper persons to be applied to to make the provision on this subject, but, however that question might be, he hoped that the cases of these officers would receive the consideration they deserved.

would take this opportunity of protesting against the delay that had taken place in bringing this measure into operation. It was too bad, that a measure for the relief of the poor in Ireland should thus be delayed—every day the public were shocked with the intelligence of outrages taking place in Ireland, though few were aware, that those outrages generally arose from the consolidation of farms. He would not express an opinion upon the policy of this consolidation, but considering the numbers who were rendered destitute by it, and the latest accounts from New South Wales, describing the advantages of that colony, he would call upon Government to grant some assistance for the furtherance of an extensive emigration which would materially diminish the temptations to crime. He hoped the noble Lord would furnish the House with a statement as to the manner in which this measure had been carried into effect.

asked if there had not been some difficulty in obtaining the barracks which were not used by soldiers in Ireland, and which the Ordnance, though it had been agreed that they should be given up for the Poor-law purposes, had refused to part with, except at very high prices?

was not aware that any very high prices had been demanded for such barracks by the Ordnance, which could not however, it should be recollected, part with those buildings for nothing, but was bound to require a fair price for them, and he did not think that they had shown a disposition to ask more; with respect to the complaint as to the delay in carrying out the Poor-law Act, the hon. Member (Mr. S. O'Brien) was the last person who ought to make that complaint for the county he represented (Limerick) had already been divided into Unions, and the work was going on throughout Ireland as quickly as possible.

rose to move, "that it is desirable that no new business should be brought on, likely to create debate, after twelve o'clock at night, except under urgent circumstances." It was fortunate for him, that he could bring on this motion, it being five minutes to twelve, without violating the principle he wished to lay down. His object was to ascertain, by the feeling of the House, whether he was likely to be supported in his objections against mid- night legislation? To general opposition to his views he should feel bound to submit, although he had long entertained a hope of breaking up a system that was injurious alike to the health of Members and the real service of the public. If his motion were negatived by anything like an unanimous vote, he might feel inclined to save himself from the personal inconvenience of moving adjournments of the House night after night; but not otherwise. To continue the practice was, in his opinion, most unwise, as well as unjust; for after midnight the House might be said to be sitting with closed doors—the reporters worn out, and the Members sleeping about on the benches and; it was only in the Legislative Assemblies of this country that midnight laws-making was attempted to be defended. On these grounds, and on others, which he would not detain the House to consider, he moved for leave to bring in the Bill.

supported the motion. On an occasion of his wishing to oppose the passing of a Bill, which was to him an exceedingly obnoxious one, he had attended the House four or five days until two o'clock in the morning; and on the last day, or rather night, he was assured there was no chance of the Bill being passed; and yet, on the following day, he learnt, to his great surprise, that it had been read a third time and passed at half-past two in the morning.

said, he thought the matter ought to be left to the discretion of the House. At all events, it was quite useless to pass such a resolution as this, as to which there would be a dispute every time it was attempted to be enforced. For instance, as to the words "urgent business," there would always be a discussion on that question; and so with regard to the words "likely to create a debate." There would be always a debate of half an hour to decide whether the subject was "likely to create a debate" or not.

concurred with the last speaker, that the adoption of the motion would lead to endless disputes. Every Member would naturally consider his own measure to be of urgent necessity, and universal exceptions would entirely put aside the rule. The effort would be found to be futile and useless.

would take the opinion of the House, as a means of, in some measure, deciding his future conduct. He had net the slightest objection to amend his motion if the principle were retained. Having met the constant opposition of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Dungannon), he was prepared still to expect it; but by that, nor by any other individual opposition, he would not be guided, unless it were sustained by the general opinion of the House. He should, therefore, press for a division.