said, he rose to move the insertion of the words "medical and other." His object was to give the Secretary of State power to appoint medical as well as other officers, and thus to obviate the necessity of passing the Public Health Bill, which stood next on the orders of the day, and under which the Privy Council would have the appointment of medical officers for purposes connected with the public health.

. said, he should oppose the Amendment, on the ground that it was inconsistent with the object of the Bill.

said, he wished to ask the Judge Advocate General whether he is prepared to give a general estimate of the sums claimed or awarded for compensation under the Probate Acts (England and Ireland) of 1857:—1st. To Proctors; 2nd. To the Ecclesiastical Judges, the Registrars, and other officers entitled to compensation under the said Acts; 3rd. The probable amount of fees or other charges that will be payable in the Probate Court, and will go to the reduction of the said compensations; 4th. The amounts saved by employing persons whose offices shall have been abolished in any new or other offices under the said Probate Acts, and the probable amount to be allowed to each class under the said Acts (exclusive of the compensation that may be claimed under the Divorce Act); and whether he will be prepared to lay the particulars of said claims and grants before Parliament this Session, or at what other time, and the probable amount that may be ultimately granted under said Acts, distinguishing the several classes herein-before particularized.

said, that at present it was impossible to answer the question of the hon. Gentleman in precise detail, but he was ready to afford such information as he was in possession of. It would be in the recollection of the House that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, upon the 26th of March, speaking on a rough estimate furnished him by the clerks in the Treasury, had stated that the possible charge might, in the first instance, be £250,000. Subsequent to that statement a Commission had been appointed to inquire into the subject, and that Commission commenced its labours on the 12th of April last. Up to the present time they had investigated the claims of thirty-seven London firms, amounting in the whole to £29,647, or giving an average of £801 to each. There were the claims of forty-four more to be investigated, and taking the same average, their claims would amount to £35,244, giving a total of £64,89,1. From calculations made, however, at Doctors' Commons, it appeared probable that the amount would only reach £53,000. Then, with regard to country proctors, there appeared in the Law List the names of about 120 persons, many of them being in partnership, and thirty-five claims bad been investigated, and found to amount to £8,847, giving an average of £252 each. Upon the same average, calculating that there were sixty claims more, which would amount to £15,120, the gross total for the country Proctors would be £23,967. As regarded Ireland, the probable amount would be £15,000. Then, as regarded the Judges, Chancellors, Archdeacons, Registrars, Clerks, Apparitors, and other officers, 236 claims had been received. The income of the claimants amounted to £51,387. The compensation, according to the scale allowed, would be £39,782. A considerable additional sum must be set down for the remaining claimants under this head. As regarded clerical surrogates, the claims received amounted to £206; the incomes of the claimants amounted to £5,800; and the compensation would probably be £4,000 for the rest of the surrogates whose claims had not yet come in, he would put down £2,000 more. The best approximate estimate which he could give from the information before him was, for the London proctors £60,000, country proctors £25,000. Irish £15,000; clerical surrogates, £6,000 judges, officers of courts and managing clerks, £70,000, making together a total of 1£76,000. He was not able to give a more correct estimate at the present moment. All he could state as matter of fact was, that the claims received from the London proctors amounted to £29,647; from the English country proctors, £8,847; Irish ditto, £1,000; Judges, &c., £39,782; surrogates, £4,000. These figures made the total sum absolutely and formally claimed £83,276. Some of these claims however, might be subject to reduction upon further investigation. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's question as to the probable amount of fees or other charges that would be payable in the Probate Court, and would go to the reduction of these compensations, he had asked for a return from the Inland Revenue Department, according to which he found that a sum of £28,000 had been paid in the shape of Stamp Duties during the six months that had clapsed since the Probate Act came into operation. If this was a fair average, the amount receivable in this form would be £56,000 per annum. With respect to the hon. Gentleman's fourth question, he had to state that he had communicated with Sir Cresswell Cresswell, the Judge of the Court of Probate, who had informed him that he had had to appoint forty district registrars, above thirty of whom had held offices which were abolished, and had a claim to the new registry. In the principal registry three old registrars had resigned, and three new registrars were appointed. All the clerks in the Prerogative Office had likewise been transferred to the new registry by the Lord Chancellor, in compliance with the Probate Act. Sir Cresswell Cresswell had also authorized him to say that if the hon. Member would move for Returns, the fullest explanation would be afforded as to the appointments made under the new Act. As to the last inquiry made by the hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. Mowbray) begged to remind him that the Commission with which he had the honour of acting was only a Commission appointed by the Treasury to investigate those claims. With respect to the probable amount of the claims not yet awarded, the hon. Gentleman must be content with the general statement he had made until the inquiry was fully terminated, when, of course, he would be able to give him much more accurate information.

said, he wished to know whether the figures adduced by the right hon. and learned Gentleman included Mr. Moore's claim.

was understood to reply in the affirmative.

said, he rose to ask the question of which he had given notice, and at the same time to state that the Commission appointed under the Oxford University Act had now expired. Before its expiration, the Commissioners issued an Ordinance regulating St. John's College. That Ordinance divided eighteen Fellowships into two equal classes—nine open and nine close Fellowships, to be between certain public schools. Under the power given by the Act St. John's College, however, put their veto upon that Ordinance of the Commissioners. The Commission having expired, St. John's College would remain in its present state unless some step be taken by that House. He would, therefore, ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is his intention to propose to the House any measure for confirming the Ordinance of the Oxford Commissioners for regulating St. John's College?

said, the right hon. Gentleman had correctly stated the facts as they now existed in regard to St. John's College. The right hon. Gentleman would, no doubt, agree with him (Mr. Walpole) that it would have been improper to force upon the College an Ordinance which was framed contrary to the wishes of two-thirds of the College. The inexpediency of such a course would be more apparent when they recollected that the Commissioners of the University of Cambridge were now dealing with the College Statutes. He should like to see the result of the negotiations that were now going on with the College—the number of statutes assented to or dissented from—before the Legislature were called upon to act in this matter. The difference between the Commissioners and the College was really whether there should be nine open and nine close Fellowships, as proposed on the one side, and ten open and eight close Fellowships on the other. He trusted, when they had had the whole matter before them, the House would be enabled to deal with any difficulty that might appear to have arisen from the operation of the Act. On looking into the matter with a good deal of care, it struck him that, if anything were to be done by them, it would be probably more desirable in the first instance to refer any point of difference to the Committee of Privy Council.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State far War whether it is a fact that the new Gun Foundry at Woolwich, for casting Iron Ordnance, has up to this time proved a failure, and from what cause; and whether any serviceable guns have as yet been produced there, and, if so, how many?

said, it was not the fact that the new Gun Foundry erected at Woolwich for casting Iron Ordnance had been, up to the present moment, a failure. On the contrary, there was every reason to believe that, under the superintendence of that able and talented Officer, Colonel Wilmott, it would prove perfectly successful. It was true the number of guns made last year was not the same as that which had been promised by Colonel Wilmott's assistants in that gallant officer's absence. But thirty-four of the heaviest guns had been cast there, and twelve 68 pounders were to be proved on Monday next. Four or five of these guns were turned out each week; and the delay had arisen not from any defect in the foundry, but in consequence of the proving-butt being out of order.

said, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is true that, on the arrival of the 92nd Regiment in Bombay in May last, it was quartered in the Colaba Barracks, which had long been pronounced unfit for European troops; whether the Regiment had not many oases of fever in those barracks; and why the usual Indian clothing was not given to that Regiment till six weeks after its arrival?

said, that an inquiry had been made, both at the Board of Control and the East India House, on this subject, but he regretted to say that they had not received any official information, or indeed any information whatever upon the matter. He, therefore, could not say whether the 92nd Regiment in Bombay was quartered in the Colaba Barracks; neither could he give any answer to the other question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman, as to whether there had been any cases of fever in those barracks, or whether the clothing had or had not been delivered to the troops before the time referred to. He would, however, bear those questions in memory, and if some report on the matter did not shortly arrive, he would feel it his duty to cause an inquiry to be made. He was afraid it was true that the Regiment had been quartered in the barracks alluded to, because, although there were other barracks selected for them, yet he understood that they were not, it the time to which the hon. and gallant Gentleman referred, in a state for occupation.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made in printing the Calendars of Wills in the principal and district Registries, in compliance with the provisions of the Acts 20 & 21 Vict. cap. 77, sec. 67, and cap. 79, sec. 72?

said, the question was one which did not lie immediately within his knowledge, but he had referred the matter to the proper quarter, and if the hon. Gentleman would repeat his question on another day he should have the required information.

said, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the reason why the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Medical Department of the Army which reported on the 3rd of July, 1856, relative to the pay and position of the Medical Officers of the Army, have not been attended to? He put this question in consequence of the statement made the other night by the right hon. Member for South Wiltshire (Mr. S. Herbert) that several Regiments of the Queen had marched up the country in India unaccompanied by Medical Officers, and that great difficulty was experienced in finding candidates for the Medical Department of the Army. The Select Committee to which he had referred had strongly recommended that increased pay and other advantages should be held out to those officers, but though two years had elapsed since that recommendation was made, it had not yet been carried into effect.

replied that, just previously to the Report of the Committee of 1856 being presented, Lord Panmure had submitted to the Treasury a draft Warrant laying down an increased scale of pay for the Medical Officers of the Army. The Treasury, however, refused to sanction the Warrant, and a subsequent effort on the part of Lord Panmure for the same object was equally unsuccessful in the same quarter. Under these circumstances, although the Select Committee had reported on the subject, Lord Panmure did not think it expedient to renew his application to the Treasury again after so recent a refusal. The Report presented in March last as the result of the inquiry in which the right hon. Member for South Wiltshire took part, and suggesting a scale of pay for medical officers similar to that which had been previously rejected, was now undergoing consideration in the War Department, and a warrant had been drawn up in order to be submitted to the Treasury, from whom he hoped it would meet with a more favourable reception.

said, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether Her Majesty's Government will lay upon the table of the House Copies of the New Police Ordinance issued by the Viceroy of Egypt, and of a Petition recently presented to the Queen from the British inhabitants of Cairo, complaining of the withdrawal of most important privileges enjoyed for many years by our countrymen in the Turkish dominions; and whether Her Majesty's Government consider these new regulations to be in accordance with the treaties now existing between the Queen of England and the Sultan.

said, that at the close of last year a representation was made to the Egyptian Government, in consequence of the insecurity of life and property at Cairo, that it was advisable that new Police Regulations should be issued. This suggestion was made by the European Consuls resident at Cairo, and accordingly in the month of March last new Police Regulations, which had been previously submitted to the European Consuls, were issued. Some dissatisfaction had been expressed by the European community; and, in consequence of the representations made to him, the noble Lord at the head Of the Foreign Department submitted these regulations to the law officers of the Crown, who advised him that in some respects they were likely to be oppressive, and that they trenched upon some of the privileges which had hitherto been enjoyed by European residents. In consequence of this opinion our Consul had been instructed to use all means open to him in order to obtain the modification, and, if necessary, the abrogation of those portions of the regulations which were considered offensive. There would be no objection to lay upon the table of the House papers which would give the hon. Gentleman the information which he desired.

said, he begged to ask the hon. Member for Gateshead whether he intended to bring on his Motion respecting the discontinuance of the Right of Search on going into Committee of Supply to-morrow?

said, it was his intention to submit his proposition for the consideration of the House on the Motion for going into Committee of Supply tomorrow. He was aware that the question involved in No. 4 of the supplies which was first to come on did not refer to the Slave Trade, but as the Committee would proceed from No. 4 to No. 5, being the one with which his Motion was connected, he would submit his question at once on going into Supply.

said, he did not wish to interfere with any arrangement made by the hon. Gentleman; but if it would be equally convenient to him to bring his Motion on on Monday, it would greatly facilitate the progress of public business. His right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, he was afraid, would be absent from the House to-morrow. Between the present time and Monday the Government were in anticipation of receiving some communication from the United States which might bear upon this question. Of course, he should not interfere with the hon. Gentleman bringing forward his question on Monday, if he should consent to postpone it to that time.

said, under such circumstances he would not hesitate in acceding to the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman. He trusted, however, the right hon. Gentleman would afford him every facility for introducing his proposition to the House on Monday.

It may come on first in Committee of Supply on Monday evening.

said, he would beg to ask the Chancellor the Exchequer whether, in the terms of the Superannuation Bill, as now before the House, the Officers of the Dockyards are intended to be embraced in its provisions; and, if so, whether the entire period of their service will be included in computing their pensions, as recommended by the Royal Commission; and, also, whether it is intended to include the permanent day labourers.

said, if the hon. Gentleman would refer to the Act he would find by the second clause that it did not apply to those who were appointed by Order in Council or by Royal Warrant, Now, the dockyard labourers held their appointment by an Order in Council, and therefore the Act did not apply to them. The same observation would also apply to the day-labourers; therefore the Act did not apply to those to whom the hon. Gentleman had referred. In regard to the general question whether, if those classes be brought within the provisions of the Superannuation Act, it is the intention to allow their continuous service to be estimated, that, he would remind the hon. Gentleman, would depend altogether upon the Board of Admiralty; but, as far as the Treasury was concerned, their opinion was decidedly favourable to that arrangement. If then they were brought under the Act in question, which by rescinding the Order in Council might take place, he should wish the continuous service to be acknowledged, of course upon the condition of making the operation of the Act general as regarded all parties. It was not his intention, however, to proceed with the Superannuation Bill that night.

said, seeing that the New Caledonia Bill was down for Second Reading, a subject which included that of the right of the Hudson's Bay Company to their present territory, but as it would be inconvenient for him then to bring forward his Motion in reference to it, he wished to know whether Government would grant him a day for doing so.

said, the proposition he was prepared to make was this. If the hon. Member for Gateshead (Mr. Hutt) and the hon. Member for London (Mr. Crawford) would consent not to press their Motions on going into Committee of Supply on Monday, he would fix the first convenient day for those two hon. Members to bring forward the questions of which they had given notice; and he would have no objection also to place the name of the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield number three on the list, when the hon. and learned Gentleman would no doubt have the opportunity he so much desired.

said, that he had postponed his Motion from to-morrow on the understanding that he should have an opportunity of bringing it on on Monday. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would adhere to that arrangement.

bowed his assent.

said, he rose to ask the President of the Board of Control what would be the position of the East India Company as a chartered body after this measure should have passed. He believed the Company would still be possessed of the same charter under which they had always acted, and he understood, also, that in handing over the property of the Company to the Crown the rights of the Proprietors of India Stock had been specially reserved. What he wanted to know was, would the proprietary continue to have the power of electing a Board of Directors as they had hitherto done, and what would be their means of obtaining redress, should they require any, as a chartered body? He would suggest that when the Bill went to the House of Lords a clause should be introduced putting an end entirely to the charter of the Company, and so avoiding all those difficult questions which might otherwise arise in future. It was not desirable that a great association like the East India Company should drag on a nominal existence, without any real power or vitality.

said, that he was unwilling to let the third reading of the Bill pass without saying a few words upon it. The three first clauses contained a principle of such importance, and one pregnant with so much probable future advantage to India, that they had justly received the support of those who sat on his own side of the House. In six of the twelve divisions which had taken place on the Bill in Committee the bulk of the Liberal party had voted with the Government. Such had not been the case, however, with regard to the constitution of the Council. The President of the Board of the Control was entitled to every credit for the candour and ability he had displayed in carrying the Bill through the House, but he could not help regretting that the noble Lord should have foregone the greatest opportunity which had ever occurred to a young statesman since the days of William Pitt of coupling his name with an important and permanent measure of legislation. He thought that the noble Lord had undervalued his own influence in not attempting to carry out what must have been his own deliberate opinions, for he was sure that the noble Lord, who possessed the confidence of the Liberal party, and of the middle and working classes of the country, for the attention which he had paid to social subjects, could have carried any measure which commended itself to his sound judgment. The Council of India should consist of the ablest and most experienced men who could be found, but the provision which had been made for the home government of India was nothing more that a rifacciamento of the Court of Directors, which reappeared almost in a more objectionable form than before. He had always been opposed to the Court of Directors, thinking that persons selected from men of business and men in the ordinary walks of life were not those best fitted to form a consultative Council for India, the necessity for which he quite admitted. Nor did he think that that duty would not be satisfactorily discharged by the Council appointed under the present Bill. For candidly stating his objections to this portion of the Bill he had drawn down upon himself the rebuke of an important Member of the House—a rebuke not only uncalled for, but unjust, because untrue. Still, in his opinion, the government of India was an elaborate question of statesmanship, much more complicated than European government so complicated that lie feared they never would be able to form a good government for India. Moreover, history afforded no instance of a good government being framed for a. distant dependency by a handful of foreigners. At the same time, he admitted that probably India would remain for generations under our rule, and that it was, therefore, our duty to frame the best provisional government we could for her. But instead of obtaining the services of men who were required to devote their whole time and energy to the duty of the Council, it appeared to be the intention of the Government to select the Councillors from the ordinary walks of life; and, instead of calling upon them to devote their whole time to the duties of their office, merely to call upon them to devote so much time as might be necessary. In giving his vote for the third reading of the Bill, he did so under the solemn conviction that it would not last more than four or five years, and that in that time the Council would probably be found unworkable. There was only one other point to which he wished to refer. It was singular that the Bill did not contain a single allusion to the native interests of India, which the thought was an omission greatly to be deplored, as in every previous Act the people of India had been assured that their religion and customs would not be disturbed.

who had previously presented a petition on the subject from Singapore—said, that he had proposed on a former occasion that Singapore and other neighbouring settlements should be placed in immediate connection with the Indian Council. He believed, however, that it would be equally satisfactory to these settlements if they welt placed in immediate connection with the Colonial Office, and he hoped that the noble Lord would give the subject his attention during the recess. It was a source of satisfaction to him that it had fallen to the lot of the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) to legislate for India, for he had visited India, and knew something about the population over which he was called to rule. The three great points to which the attention of the Indian Government should be directed, as the seeds of the future prosperity of that empire, were commerce, civilization, and Christianity. He believed the first two would lead to the third, without any extraordinary pressure or exertion. He had lived amongst the people of India for many years, and believed them to be intelligent, docile, and honest. For many years he had been surrounded by Native servants, and had never lost even so much as a pocket handkerchief.

said, that it had fallen to his lot to object to many parts of the Bill, particularly in connection with the constitution of the Council. He thought it, therefore, only right to say, that, retaining his objections to that particular part of the Bill, yet, as the measure embodied principles of infinite value and importance, he gave to its third reading not a grudging, but a cordial and hearty assent.

said, that in reply to the question asked by the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Hankey) he had to state that the East India Company had hitherto filled two different capacities, which were perfectly distinct in their characters. In one view the East India Company was a company possessing a joint-stock, entitled to a dividend guaranteed to them, and also in a certain degree to require a redemption of that dividend, and having also a security fund for the payment of the guaranteed dividend; in the other character the Company was the governing body of India, subject, of course, to the control of the Indian Commissioners. This Bill proposed to deal with the East India Company only in the second of its characters. It took from it its governing powers over India, and vested them in Her Majesty, but left untouched their whole rights as to stock, dividends, the power of requiring redemption of the dividend, and the security fund for the payment of the dividend. And as the stock must be protected, as the rights for the security of the stock must be protected, as the dividend must be paid, and as the dividend must be paid by somebody, the scheme of the Bill had been to preserve the East India Company in its legitimate functions of a body with a capital stock, and for the payment of a dividend. The money would be put into the hands of the Company for the payment of that dividend, and the Company would be preserved for the protection of the rights of the proprietors with respect to stock and dividend.

said, that as they now had a specimen of the united ingenuity of the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) and of that House in the matter of legislation for India, he thought it but fair to himself to record his opinion of this great effort of legislation. He agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Devonport (Sir E. Perry) that a greater opportunity was never offered to any man upon any occasion than that which had just been offered to the noble Lord, but he must be permitted to add that his power, united with that of the House, had produced a scheme of Government which to hint appeared wholly insufficient, and which he believed future experience would prove to have been totally unequal to the circumstances; indeed, he felt satisfied that in a few years they would be called upon to patch up this rickety progeny of the noble Lord's. The task which England had to perform in respect to India was one such as no country ever had imposed upon it before: at a distance of many thousand miles a small body of enlightened men were called upon to govern a people wholly different from themselves in religion, in manners in customs, even in thought and in feeling, and if ever that House was tasked to furnish a good instrument of legislation it was on that occasion. And what had they done? After something more than a century's experience, after trying many schemes of Government, we had come to legislate for India. The great objection which had been taken to the existing Government was its double character. It had been said that that Government was not broad and plain and open in its working, but that so far as the Minister was concerned it was hidden and controlled; that we had besides a Board of Directors of the East India Company, who were in a position of no responsibility as they should be that they were an obstruction rather than an advantage, and that by this double Government delay and every possible mischief were introduced into the Government of India. Well, they had done away with that Government, and what had they put in its place? In a few words he would institute a comparison between the Government provided by the Bill now about to be read a third time and the existing Indian Government. The first part of the existing Government of India was the President of the Board of Control, who by Mr. Pitt's Bill was constituted the really paramount authority in the Government of India, for he had the power of doing anything and everything, subject to the subsequent sanction of that House. What had the Bill done as regarded that functionary? It had changed his name, and proposed to call him a Secretary of State for India; and that was the only change it effected so far. What had it next done with regard to the Council who surrounded him? In the place of the Court of Directors the Bill appointed a Council; but it should be recollected that the Court of Directors were to a certain degree responsible; they were chosen by a body, not well selected, certainly, but still a popular body. What had the House done with regard to them? They had put in their place a body called the Council for India, eight of the Members of which were to be chosen by the Minister amongst persons who had been in India, and the remaining seven were to choose themselves. They were all to be chosen for life, so that in place of the Court of Directors, who were now responsible to the proprietors of the East India Company, there would in future be a body of fifteen persons responsible to nobody. Such was the great alteration which the ingenuity of the noble Lord and that House produced. He would defy the ingenuity of man to compose a plan for the Government of a distant dependency worse than this. It had not one quality which a Government of India ought to have. With respect to the Councillors the choice was circumscribed, and instead of looking round to find the cleverest men in the community, the selecting parties were bound to choose the best they could out of a small number. He believed that the very fact of being in India for ten years unfitted men to govern India. That statement might appear paradoxical, but he thought a moment's reflection would show that it was not so, for he felt convinced that a man might learn in England more of India than he could acquire by travelling in India. What struck the eye affected the imagination, and the attention of a man who went to India must necessarily be confined to a small part of the country, and he would not learn one-half as much as the man who studied it in this country. He would remind the House that the historian of British India, James Mill, was never in India, and that the most remarkable man now in the India House, and he might add in England, John Mill, never was in India. It might be that those two persons might be selected, but it would be very remarkable if the Government of this country selected the two best men for the Government of India. He believed, as he stated the other night, that the only clause in the Bill which would enable it to work was the one giving to the Secretary of State the power to do away entirely with the Council. They would eventually be obliged to make the Secretary of State for India the sole governing power of India, and they would have then what they might have had long ago, an efficient Government for India. He felt convinced that the Council would be a stumbling-block in their way, and that five years would not pass over the head of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) without a necessity arising for the Amendment of this Bill, and he hoped the noble Lord would live for those five years to experience the truth of his prophecy, and to amend a measure upon the preparation of which he had bestowed so much trouble and attention.

I do not wish this Bill to go through its last stage charged with the malediction which has been launched against it by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sheffield. There are some redeeming features in the Bill to which the hon. and learned Gentleman has not referred, and which I will venture to point out. My hon. and learned Friend has very truly said that under the last of Pitt's Bills the President of the Board of Control became, in fact, the supreme Governor of India; but the original intention was that the Board of Control, as its name implies, should control the Directors and Proprietors of the East India Company, who it was supposed—and upon very just grounds—were at that time inclined to carry on aggressive wars in India, with little regard to justice or true policy. The Board of Control, however, became in fact the supreme government of India. Now we take away that mask, and give to a Secretary of State for India the power of directing and controlling the affairs of that portion of the empire. I say, then, that if we have merely removed what was a delusion, and substituted that which is real for a thing of no reality, we have made an advance by exchanging the government of the Board of Control for that of a Secretary of State. My hon. and learned Friend has said that the Directors were chosen by a body of Proprietors, to whom they were responsible; and, undoubtedly, the Directors were appointed by the Proprietors, after a canvass which was not very seemly, and by means which would be very distasteful to men of high character and honour. I believe, however, that after the Directors were once chosen, nobody ever heard of their being called to account by the Proprietors for their proceedings, or of their being removed by the Proprietors on the ground that their constituents were dissatisfied with the course they had pursued. In the place of the Court of Directors we are now to have a Council composed of men well acquainted with Indian affairs, who will afford information to the Secretary of State with reference to any questions upon which he may require assistance or advice. I think this is a great improvement in the government of India, I can imagine that a Secretary of State might be so unwise as to transfer to the members of the Council mere routine duties, burying them beneath the load of papers that arrived from India; setting them to work which could be as well performed by under secretaries or clerks, and not consulting them on the main points of Indian policy; but I should conceive that any Secretary of State, who acted in such a manner, would ill discharge his duties. I think the Secretary of State may derive most valuable assistance from the Council with regard to important questions of policy, revenue, the administration of justice and war. In the next place the Council ought, in my opinion, to be independent, and my belief is that that object will be attained as the tenure of their office is during good behaviour. The Bill, then, contains these two elements of a good measure—a Secretary of State, who is supreme when he chooses to be so; an independent Council who can give him advice. With regard to the numbers of the Council, their exclusion from seats in this House, and the maintenance of the Secret Committee, I differ from the views which are embodied in the Bill; and I have no doubt that with respect to these and other questions we shall, before the lapse of five years, or of three years, or even, perhaps, of two years, have the Secretary of State coming down to this House and informing us that there are portions of the measure which have not answered the intentions of its framers, and which require alteration. There are other questions which are not touched by the Bill, and which if they do not require legislation on the part of this House will undoubtedly require the earnest attention of the Government. By this measure we merely regulate the home government of India, but the great questions of the tenure of land, of revenue, of the government of the army, of the services of the army, and of the administration of justice, will require careful and anxious attention, and I think that in the course of a year or two the Secretary of State and the Council will probably be prepared to introduce great measures of reform with reference to these subjects, although it may not be necessary to submit them to this House. Hon. Gentlemen are aware of the settlement of the land question in India which was effected by Lord Cornwallis, and which was at the time, and long aferwards, regarded as a measure of great wisdom and prudence. Lord Grenville declared in Parliament that he regarded that settlement as one of the most important and beneficial measures that could have been adopted by the most benevolent Government. Some time afterwards, however, public opinion veered round, strong opposition was manifested to the arrangement, and the Government sought to substitute everywhere but in the Presidency of Bengal—where they could not touch the existing settlement—a system which would destroy the power of the Zemindars, and establish an immediate connection between the Government and the peasantry. Another change of opinion has since taken place, and many persons now state that observation and experience have convinced them that unless there are considerable landowners between the rulers and the people it will be impossible to secure the welfare of the population, and to provide for their good government. These circumstances show that questions of this nature require the most careful consideration. The mode in which the revenue is at present collected in India is most unsatisfactory. No one can be satisfied with the excessive amount of land tax in some districts, or with the nature and character of the salt tax, or the opium tax. Nor is the administration of justice satisfactory. These are questions which require minute and careful investigation; but we have not attempted to deal with them in this Bill. I think we have acted judiciously in abstaining from any such attempt, for they are subjects which require much closer examination than we could devote to them; but, after establishing a Council in which such questions can be considered, and en- abling the Minister of the Crown to obtain information and advice from persons of Indian experience, we may expect a solution of these difficult questions. In referring to this subject, I cannot abstain from adverting to the remarkable speech which was made the other evening by the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright), and which did not at the time attract much observation. I think the speech of that hon. Gentleman was one of the most remarkable ever delivered in this House. I do not concur in some of the opinions which he expressed. I do not agree with him that it will be possible—at least for a long time to come, perhaps never—to abolish the important office of Governor General of India, but I do agree with him that we ought to endeavour to give large powers to the Governors of the different Presidencies in India, and that it is only by entrusting great powers to them, and enabling them to govern their Presidencies with vigour and efficiency, that we are likely to improve the government of India. I agree, generally, in the principles laid down by the hon. Gentleman, although they may not be immediately applicable. I think they are the true principles upon which the Government of India ought in future to be conducted. Whether our decisions may have been wise or not, we have, at all events, gone through this Bill with an absence of party spirit which, I believe, evinced on the part of the House a desire to come to a right determination upon the various important questions which have been brought under our consideration, and I am sure that, having framed the Bill in such a spirit, it will be most satisfactory to the House if its operation should prove beneficial to the people of India, and honourable to the Parliament of this country.

Sir, I cannot refrain from congratulating the House upon having, by the combined exertions of hon. Gentlemen on both sides, brought this Bill to its present stage, and from offering them, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, our sincere thanks for the candour and patience with which they have assisted us in the progress of the measure. There is, I believe, no one in this House who recognizes or appreciates more completely than I do the necessity and importance of party organization. Indeed, I do not know how a popular assembly so numerous as the existing House of Commons could be defended from the influence of the Crown without an organization of that nature. There are, however, occasions on which there is an universal agreement that that political discipline may most advantageously be modified or suspended, and I cannot but feel that when we are called upon to consider a question relating to the better government of India—especially under the existing circumstances of that country—the occasion is one on which we should combine our common efforts for the common good. I think that on the whole the country has every right to be satisfied with the result of our labours. I think this measure is a very great improvement upon the state of affairs it is intended to supersede, and, although it pretends to be no more than an effort to institute in this country a vigorous home government for India, it is impossible not to believe that it will have a very beneficial effect upon the government of India in India itself. That is the point to which the feelings of all England must now be directed. Having by the cordial assistance of all parties in the House of Commons succeeded in framing a measure which I trust will institute a vigorous government of India in England, let us now hope that by the wisdom of our statesmen, by the skill of our commanders, and the bravery of our troops, we may soon put an end to the great rebellion which has so long raged in that important part of Her Majesty's dominions, and that we may be able to re-establish her empire in that part of the world on those principles of truth and justice without which no empire in this or any other age can be established or permanently maintained.

Sir, the Bill which I rise to ask the House to sanction, is necessary to the maintenance of law and the preservation of life in the district in which it proposes to establish a Government, and it realizes at an earlier period than was anticipated an object which has already entered into the colonial policy of this country. The House is aware that in 1849 the Crown granted to the Hudson's Bay Company the soil of Vancouver's Island, on the condition of establishing a colony there, disposing of the land to emigrants, and defraying its expenses; at the same time the Crown reserved a right to resume the land on the expiration of the grant of exclusive trade in 1859. But the Company enjoy in Vancouver's Island no rights of government or of judicature. The government is administered by a Governor appointed by the Crown, with a Legislative Council, and the House of Representatives chosen by the people. The judicature is administered by Courts instituted by the Crown, under the special authority of an Act of Parliament, "to provide for the administration of justice in Vancouver's Island." Next year it is the intention of the Crown to resume the soil, and the whole public connection of the Company with the island will cease. Indeed, my right hon. Friend the Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice), in his able evidence before the Committee on the Hudson's Bay Company, says, "The sooner the public re-enter into possession, and the sooner they form establishments worthy of the island, and worthy of the country, the better." My right hon. Friend proceeds to say, "that this island is a kind of England attached to the continent of America; that it should be the principal station of our naval force in the Pacific; that it is the only good harbour to the northward of San Francisco, as far north as Sitka, the Russian settlement; that you have in Vancouver's Island the best harbour, fine timber in every situation, and coal enough for your whole navy; that the climate is wholesome, very like that of England; the coasts abound with fish of every description; in short, there is every advantage in the Island of Vancouver to make it one of the first colonies and best settlements of England." But when my right hon. Friend was asked by the Committee if he thought it desirable to attempt also at once to colonize the land on the adjacent coast he answered, "No, we should have enough to do in colonizing the island." He will not say that now. He knows that since that evidence was given circumstances have arisen which call upon us to place, as soon as possible, the adjacent territory under the safeguard of an established Government, such as this Bill will provide. And those circumstances are the discovery of goldfields, the belief that those goldfields will be eminently productive, the number of persons of foreign nations and unknown character already impelled to the place by that belief, I need say no more to show the imperative necessity of establishing a Government wherever the hope of gold—to be had for the digging—attracts all adventurers and excites all passions. At this moment there is no Imperial Government at all in the place, for the Governor of Vancouver's owns no commission on the mainland. Thus, the discovery of gold compels us to do at once, what otherwise we should very soon have done—erect into a colony a district that appears, in great part, eminently suited for civilized habitation and culture. Before I proceed further it may be interesting to the House to give a sketch of the little that is known to us, through official sources, of the territory in which these new goldfields have been discovered. The territory comprehended in the proposed Bill lies between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific; it is bounded on the south by the American frontier line, 49 degrees of latitude, and may be considered to extend to the sources of Fraser River, in latitude 55 degrees. It is, therefore, about 420 miles long in a straight line, its average breadth about 250 to 300 miles. Taken from corner to corner its greatest length would be, however, 805 miles, and its greatest breadth 400 miles. Mr. Arrowsmith computes its area of square wiles, including Queen Charlotte's Island, at somewhat more than 200,000 miles. Of its two gold-bearing rivers, one, the Fraser, rises on the northern boundary, and flowing south, falls into the sea at the south western extremity of the territory, opposite the southern end of Vancouver's Island, and within a few miles of the American boundary; the other, the Thompson River, rises in the Rocky Mountains, and flowing westward joins the Fraser about 150 miles from the coast. It is on these two rivers, and chiefly at their confluence, that the gold discoveries have been made. Hon. Gentlemen who look at the map may imagine this new colony to be at such an immeasurable distance from England as to be fatal to anything like extensive colonization from this country; but we have already received overtures from no less eminent a person than Mr. Cunard for a line of postal steamvessels for letters, goods, and passengers, by which it is calculated that a passenger starting from Liverpool may reach this colony in about thirty-five days by way of New York and Panama. With regard to the soil, there is said to be some tolerable land on the lower part of Fraser River. But the Thompson's River district is discribed as one of the finest countries in the British dominions, with a climate far superior to that of countries in the same latitude on the other side of the mountains. Mr. Cooper, who gave valuable evidence before our Committee on this district, with which he is thoroughly acquainted, recently addressed to me a letter in which he states that:—

"Its fisheries are most valuable, its timber the finest in the world for marine purposes; it abounds with bituminous coal well fitted for the generation of steam; from Thompson's River and Colville districts to the Rocky Mountains, and from the 49th parallel, some 350 miles north, a more beautiful country does not exist. It is in every way suitable for colonization."

Therefore, apart from the goldfields, this country affords every promise of a flourishing and important colony. In Charlotte's Island, which we include in this new colony, gold was discovered in 1850, but only in small quantities. Here I may perhaps correct a popular misconception. In Vancouver's Island itself no gold has been yet discovered. The discovery of gold on the mainland was first reported to the Colonial Office by a despatch from the Governor of Vancouver's Island, dated April 16, 1856. The Governor had received a report from a clerk in the service of the Hudson's Bay Company at Fort Colville, on the Upper Columbia River. Further reports followed in October, 1856, testifying to the importance of the discovery. From experiments made in the tributaries of Fraser River there was reason to believe that the gold region was extensive; the similarity in the geological formation of the mountains in the territory to those of California induced the Governor to believe that these would prove equally auriferous. Subsequent accounts, in 1857, varied as to the quantity of gold obtained, but confirmed generally the opinion of the richness of the mines, especially above the confluence of the Fraser and Thompson Rivers. The Governor writes on the 15th of July, 1857, that gold was being discovered on the right bank of the Columbia, and the tableland between that river and Fraser's. On December 29th he ascribed the small quantity found to the want of skill and tools on the part of the natives, who opposed any white men digging. The Indians were especially hostile to the Americans, and opposed their entrance into the country. Great excitement now prevailed in Oregon and Washington Territory. An influx of adventurers might be expected in the spring, in which case collisions between the whites and the natives might be expected to occur. As far back as the first discovery in April, 1856, the Governor had suggested the system of granting digging licenses. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere), then Secretary of State for the Colonies, pointed out, in a reply (August 4), that it would be abortive to attempt to raise a revenue from licenses to dig for gold in that region in the absence of effective machinery of government, and left to the Governor's discretion the means of preserving order. In the exercise of that discretion he issued a proclamation (December 28th, 1857), declaring the rights of the Crown to the gold in Thompson's and Fraser's Rivers; establishing license fees of 10s., which, on the 1st of January, 1858, he raised to 20s.; and prohibiting persons from digging without authority from the Colonial Government. But this proclamation has virtually proved a dead letter, for, in point of fact, the Governor had no legal power to issue the proclamation, or cause it to be respected, he having no commission as Governor on the mainland; his sole power has been the moral power of his energy, talents, and extraordinary influence over the natives. Indeed, the manner in which he has preserved peace between the white man and the natives is highly to his honour. In a letter from the Governor to the Hudson's Bay Company, March 22, 1858, he trusts that Her Majesty's Government would take measures to prevent crimes and protect life and property, or there would be ere long a large array of difficulties to settle. "A large number of Americans," he said, "had entered the territory; others were preparing to follow." On the 8th of May, in the present year, he states to the Colonial Office that 450 passengers, chiefly gold miners, bad come from San Francisco; that they all appeared well provided with mining tools; there seemed to be no want of capital or intelligence among them; that about sixty were British subjects, about an equal number Americans, the rest were chiefly Germans, with some Frenchmen and Italians. And I have here the pleasure to observe that he states, that though there was a temporary scarcity of food and a dearth of house accommodation, they were remarkably quiet and orderly. The Governor then touches on the advantage to the trade of the island from the arrival of so large a body of people; but he adds significantly:—

"The interests of the empire may not be improved to the same extent by the accession of a foreign population whose sympathies are decidedly anti-British. From this point of view the question assumes an alarming aspect, and leads us to doubt the policy of permitting foreigners to enter the British territory ad libitum without taking, the oath of allegiance, or otherwise giving security to the Government of the country."

He states that—

"The principal diggings at Fraser's and Thompson's Rivers at present will continue flooded for many months, and there is a great scarcity of food in the gold districts; that the ill-provided adventurers who have gone there will exhaust their stock of provisions, and will probably retire from the country till a more favourable season; that on the dangerous rapids of the river a great number of canoes have been dashed to pieces, the cargoes swept away, many of the adventurers swept into eternity—others, nothing daunted, pressing on to the goal of their wishes."

He again, in a letter to the Hudson's Bay Company, repeats his fears:—

"How seriously the peace of the country may be endangered in the event of the diggings proving unremunerative, and the miners being reduced to poverty and destitute of the necessaries of life."

I should state that I have also seen private letters recently from San Francisco, giving an account of the extending excitement prevailing there, and of the number of Americans, of other foreigners, and of negroes preparing to start for Fraser's River. In one letter it is stated that 2,000 persons have already left, and 20,000 persons might leave before the end of the summer, if the news continued favourable; but perhaps the news of the flooding of the waters may for a time retard so copious an emigration. I think I have said enough to convince the House of the necessity of providing at once for the government of a country threatened by so many disturbing elements. My first care has been to urge upon my right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty the necessity of despatching an adequate Naval force in the harbour of Vancouver—sufficient to provide against lawless aggression, and instructions to this effect my right hon. Friend assures me he has given, and my next care is to bring in this Bill which is intended to establish lawful authority and order. Now, Sir, the Crown, of itself, could, if it thought proper, make a colony of this district. But the law officers decided, in the case of Vancouver's Island, that no Legislature can be established by the Crown, except an elective assembly and a nominative council; and, considering the very imperfect elements for such a constitution at such a moment, considering the ordinary character of gold-diggers, considering that our information as yet is really so scanty that we are at a loss to constitute even a council of the most limited number, I think that most hon. Gentlemen will agree that it would not be fair to the grand principle of free institutions to risk at once the experiment of self-government among settlers so wild, so miscellaneous, perhaps so transitory, and in a form of society so crude. This is not like other colonies which have gone forth from these islands, and of which something is known of the character of the colonists. Neither is it like those colonies in which the first thought of the emigrants is the acquisition of land, and the first care of the governor those allotments of land, which are the preliminary of representation. As yet the rush of the adventurerers is not for land but gold, not for a permanent settlement but for a speculative excursion. And, therefore, here the immediate object is to establish temporary law and order amidst a motley inundation of immigrant diggers, of whose antecedents we are wholly ignorant, and of whom perhaps few, if any, have any intention to become resident colonists and British subjects. But, where you cannot at once establish self-government, all sound political thinkers, all friends to that responsibility which is the element of freedom, will perhaps agree that the next best thing is to establish a Government which shall have as few checks as possible on its responsible functions, which shall possess unhampered what powers we can give it, to secure the respect for recognized authority; which shall be clearly for a limited time, and with the avowed and unmistakeable intention of yielding its sway at the earliest possible period to those free institutions for which it prepares the way, and which it will always henceforth be the colonial policy of this country to effect. I think that all complicated attempts to construct half-and-half forms of Government for such new societies are unsatisfactory. They only serve to weaken the Executive and to form an excuse for retarding the completion of popular systems. What, therefore, we propose to do by the Bill we now ask the House to read a second time is, to empower the Crown, for a limited period, till December 1862, and the end of the Session of Parliament next ensuing after that time—a period nominally of five years, though in reality of four, to make laws for the district by Orders in Council, and to establish a Legislature; such Legislature to be, in the first instance, the Governor alone; but with power to the Crown, by itself or through the Governor, to establish a nominative Council and a representative assembly. If, therefore, before the five years expire there are the elements for a representative assembly, I cannot doubt that, whoever then may be the advisers of the Crown, a representative assembly will cheerfully be given. Sir, there will be some, no doubt, who think the term of five years too short, who think that the materials for popular self-government could not be matured at the end of that term, and that there would be many inconveniences in coming again to Parliament to renew the powers of the Act. To these objections I have given the most respectful care, and I would submit that the larger proportion of the immigrants attracted by the goldfields will probably be Americans, accustomed to self-government; that, if you desire to keep them loyal and contented, you should give them the prospect, at the earliest possible period, of that representative form of government to which, in their native country, they have been accustomed; and that if you desire a strong Government for the preservation of internal order, no Government we can make, without the aid of armies, is so strong as that where the whole society is enlisted in securing respect to the laws which it has the privilege to enact, and has no motive to rebel against the authority in which it participates. And if, which is not impossible, the goldfields should prove a delusive speculation, and the principal settlers should be the steadier class of emigrants,—perhaps our own countrymen, who will rather cultivate the other resources of the land in its coal mines, timber, fisheries, and other agricultural produce—you may have at the end of five years a quiet and orderly population, well fitted for self-government. Therefore I think we had better fix the shortest term for the experiment of a provisional Legislature. With regard to Vancouver's Island, which has already a free constitution, we do not propose to annex that island to the new colony. In fact, if the goldfields should prove to be really productive, a very large population will rapidly spread over the neighbourhood of the diggings, which it will be impossible to govern from the distance of several hundred miles at Vancouver; while, if we extend our view to the natural destinies of Vancouver as the great naval station to our only possession on the Pacific side of the whole of America—a station from which we should carry on a trade with India, China, the Indian Archipelago, Australia—a trade now carried on exclusively by the Americans from California—I think we must allow that the Government of the island would have enough to occupy its care and attention in developing the true interests and resources of that single colony. Nevertheless, difficulties in the severance of the two colonies may be found in their geographical relation to each other. According to maps the maritime access to New Caledonia can be only made facile and guarded by its command of the noble harbour of Esquivault at Vancouver's Island—natural circumstances may thus compel the fusion to which otherwise there may be sound political objections—we therefore propose to leave the question of annexation open to further experience, and the Act will empower the Crown to annex Vancouver to New Caledonia, if the Legislature of the island intimate that desire by an Address to the Crown, under such terms and conditions as may be approved. Meanwhile, as the most pressing and immediate care in this new colony will be to preserve peace between the natives and the foreigners at the gold diggings, so there is nothing in the Act which impairs the prerogative of the Crown to permit the Governor of Vancouver to administer also New Caledonia, should that be absolutely necessary, in the first instance, just as the Governor of the Cape, which has a free constitution, is also Governor of the Crown colony of British Kaffraria, holding separate commissions for each. Our object, in short, has been, under our very imperfect information, and the uncertainty, as yet, of the value of the goldfields, to insure some immediate Government, and to leave to the Crown all discretional power, according to the advice it may receive and suited to the variation of circumstances. I should add that it has been deemed necessary by the law advisers of the Crown to abolish in the proposed Act—as was done in the Act for Vancouver's Island by the advice of the Committee of Privy Council, in 1848—the jurisdiction which the courts of Canada claim over civil and criminal cases in this region. The Crown has power to appoint magistrates and constitute courts having a concurrent jurisdiction with Canadian courts up to a certain amount. The Canadian jurisdiction is a dead letter, and though it has subsisted nominally for nearly 40 years it has never been put into execution, certainly not in the North-West territories. It is clear, however, that the concurrent jurisdiction would be attended with many practical inconveniences, which, in creating a colony, it will be necessary to remove, as we did remove them for Vancouver's Island. I have now, Sir, stated the substance of the Bill I ask leave to introduce. I have shown, I trust, the necessity of an immediate measure to secure this promising and noble territory from becoming the scene of turbulent disorder, and to place over the fierce passions which spring from the hunger of gold the restraints of established law. If the machinery we propose is simple, it is because the society to which it is to be applied is rude. But, happily, in that new world, the true sense of the common interest is rapidly conceived, and the capacities of self-government no less rapidly developed. And probably even before the end of the five years to which I propose to limit the operation of this Act, the materials for a popular representation may be found, and the future destinies of this new-born settlement boldly intrusted to the vigorous movement of liberal institutions. It may be necessary to observe that, both as regards Vancouver's Island and this more extensive territory of New Caledonia, it is not intended over these colonized districts to renew to the Hudson's Bay Company the license of exclusive trade, which expires next year. The servants of the Company will then have in those two colonies no privileges whatever apart from the rest of Her Majesty's subjects there, and therefore I was glad to hear the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) express his opinion that the present occasion was not a fitting opportunity for raising the question of which he had given notice; it is desirable to keep any discussion upon this Bill free from the more angry elements which may be involved in the general question as to the powers of the Hudson's Bay Company, by virtue of its charter, on the different district of Rupert's Land, on the eastern side of the Rocky Mountains, a question which the hon. Member for Sheffield will have a distinct opportunity to introduce. Sir, I have wished to keep my statement of the present value and ultimate importance of this new colony clear from all the exaggerations which belong to the philosophy of conjecture. I have carefully abstained from over-colouring our imperfect knowledge as to the permanent richness of the gold discoveries. Nothing can be more cruel to immigrants and more dangerous to the peace of the settlement than to give undue favour to any extravagant expectations as to the produce of these goldfields. It is a terrible picture, that of thousands rushing to what is already called the New El Dorado, influenced by avarice and hope, and finding, not wealth, but disappointment and destitution—provisions dear and scanty, and the gold itself meagre in its produce, and guarded by flooded rivers and jealous Indians. At present, whatever may be the riches of the discovery, it is fair not to forget the fact that California exported in the first eight months from the discovery of its mine 150,000 ounces of gold dust, while the largest amount ascertained or conjectured from Fraser's River since 1856 is not more than 1,000 ounces. More rational, if less exciting, hopes of the importance of the colony rest upon its other resources, which I have described, and upon the influence of its magnificent situation on the ripening grandeur of British North America. I do believe that the day will come, and that many now present will live to see it, when, a portion at least of the lands on the other side of the Rocky Mountains being also brought into colonization and guarded by free institutions, one direct line of railway communication will unite the Pacific to the Atlantic. Be that as it may, of one thing I am sure—that though at present it is the desire of gold which attracts to this colony its eager and impetuous founders, still, if it he reserved, as I hope, to add a permanent and flourishing race to the great family of nations, it must be, not by the gold which the diggers may bring to light, but by the more gradual process of patient industry in the culture of the soil, and in the exchange of commerce. It must be by the respect for the equal laws which secure to every man the power to retain what he may honestly acquire; it must be in the exercise of those social virtues by which the fierce impulse of force is tamed into habitual energy, and avarice itself, amidst the strife of competition, finds its objects best realized by steadfast emulation and prudent thrift. I conclude, Sir, with a humble trust that the Divine Disposer of all human events may afford the safeguard of His blessing to our attempt to add another community of Christian freemen to those by which Great Britain confides the records of her empire, not to pyramids and obelisks, but to States and Commonwealths whose history shall be written in her language.

said, he thought there could be no difference of opinion in that House as to the propriety of taking steps to meet the wants which this Bill was intended to supply, and to establish a settled form of government in that part of British North America to which circumstances were directing the steps of large bodies of men. While he held the seals of the Colonial Office he received information of the probability of considerable gold discoveries being made, but he thought it was premature to incur expense in taking steps to found a new settlement until those discoveries should have been confirmed. The information, which had been received since, showed that there was now a stream of adventurers setting in towards that part of the world, and therefore it was indispensable that some steps should be taken to establish a settled form of law. He thought the measure proposed by the right hon. Baronet was judicious, and well calculated to effect its object. The right hon. Baronet was also perfectly correct in the interpretation he had put on the charter for exclusive trading granted to the Hudson's Bay Company. It was a common but mistaken belief that that charter precluded the Crown from taking any portion of the territories ceded to the Company for colonization or settlement. The fact was, that in every license for exclusive trading the Crown had reserved to itself the power of resuming at pleasure any portion of the territory. He would not enter upon the question of the propriety or impropriety of renewing the license of the Hudson's Bay Company, as another opportunity would be afforded for discussing that matter, and the only question now before the House was how they could best assist the Government to establish colonial institutions in that country. Although he was as attached as any one could be to free institutions, yet, considering the nature of the population that would be gathered together, he agreed with the right hon. Baronet that it was best to provide a strong and settled government with established laws at first. There was one circumstance which constituted the main danger of disorder, and that was the strong aversion which the Indians entertained towards the Americans. It was a remarkable fact, that, while on the northern side of the frontier, in the British possessions, there was perfect harmony and order between the white and the red men, there had been on the other side of the frontier scenes of carnage and bloodshed which had generated a deadly hostility on the part of the Indians towards the Americans. Governor Douglas, in the papers before the House, had referred to the feeling as likely to create difficulty. Under those circumstances he thought the House would agree that it was most important there should be a strong Executive to control the Indians and to prevent the white settlers from molesting them. The right hon. Gentleman had adverted to the soil and climate of the country, the excellence of which it was impossible to deny, and he (Mr. Labouchere) believed that in the course of time Vancouver's Island and the adjacent territories were destined to be the homes, of a large, industrious, and flourishing population. He might mention that before he left office notice was given to the Hudson's Bay Company that when the term of their present license expired the Crown would resume complete control over Vancouver's Island, and he was glad to find the right hon. Baronet had taken the same view of the necessities of the case. He could not conclude without paying a humble tribute to the excellent qualities of Governor Douglas. Through out that correspondence which he had had with that gentleman he had been much struck with his good sense, ability, and sagacity, and he could not but think that we were very fortunate in having such a public servant to watch over our interests in Vancouver's Island. The right hon. Baronet had very properly abstained from pronouncing any positive opinion as to the amount of gold which was likely to be found in that colony. The information hitherto had been very deficient on that point; but scientific persons, who were well qualified to give an opinion, had stated to him (Mr. Labouchere) that the geological formation of the country was extremely similar to that of California, and that they saw no reason why gold should not be found in very great quantities. Under these circumstances, it was certainly our duty to take such measures as the large population likely to congregate there rendered necessary. He did not know why the name of New Caledonia had been selected for this colony. He had seen several gentlemen connected with the colony and none of them appeared to know it by that name. There was a large island in the neighbourhood of Australia belonging to France which bore that name already, and he thought it possible that some inconvenience and confusion might result from two colonies having the same name. That however he would content himself by leaving to the judgment of the right hon. Baronet. He believed that the provisions of the Bill were well drawn, and he should give his hearty support to the second reading.

said, he supposed that there would be no opposition to a Bill, which would lead to the settlement of the whole line of the Atlantic frontier, and tend to create a counterpoise to the power of the United States in those regions. He would call to the mind of the right hon. Baronet that by this Bill he obtained the power of making such laws for these colonies as the Queen thought fit. If he sent out a Governor without a body of laws prepared, he would not be taking a right step towards the settlement of the colony. In the formation of a colony it was of importance that persons on going into that colony should find themselves surrounded by law and order. The first thing to be done was to survey the territory, and then to have a code of laws established at once, so that any settler on going to the colony, would find any purchase he might make surrounded by the law. There ought, then, to be an Executive with ample power to administer the law. The first thing should be to send a body of men to survey the country, then to establish a body of laws, and there ought to be a Governor armed with authority physically to support those laws. You could not send out a Governor without soldiers. He (the right hon. Baronet) looked with wonderment at his (Mr. Roebuck's) saying this; but the population of this colony was wild and vagabond, the scum of every country; much of it coming from California, where they had been living under Lynch law, and if they got a large body of this sort of population, and planted a Governor in the midst of them without the means of enforcing the law, the right hon. Gentleman might as well not have brought in this Bill. The right hon. Gentleman must send out a Governor and an armed force with him, or there would be no preserving the peace of the colony. He knew that it was unpopular language which he was using, but it was the truth. In ordinary colonies, as in the instance of New Zealand, you sent out a population accustomed to law and order, and which could govern themselves, and out of which you could create a militia. But if out of a population coming from California you created a militia, you created a force against yourself, and one which would put down order instead of preserving it. The right hon. Baronet was also wise in limiting the operation of the Bill to four years; for that time, if properly employed, would so accustom the population to law and order that you might safely leave the colonists to govern themselves. Allusion had been made to California, but that was a peculiar instance. It was far from the United States; it was full of gold, and the attraction of the gold discoveries brought to it vagabonds from all parts of the world, even from China, but especially from America; while the British Islands also supplied some of the rascally population. The result was, however, that peace and order reigned in California to an extent that was marvellously early, considering the character of the population. The Executive was not powerful, and the consequence was the establishment of Lynch law. Now Lynch law was much misunderstood. It was the only law in that country, and it was a really beneficial institution (laughter). Hon. Gentlemen might take that as a joke, but he was not in the habit of making jokes—at all events good jokes on any subject. But he could say that Lynch law was a sort of wild justice, which the nature of the case compelled the population to adopt. They adopted Lynch law, and law and order reigned in California. He did not, however, wish to see that law established in our colony, though it was a good law under certain circumstances, and if the right hon. Baronet wished that law and order should be established in those colonies, he must introduce the civil law, which could only be maintained by a strong body of soldiers—supported by this country. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere) had said something on the subject of the native Indians. He (Mr. Roebuck) would warn the right hon. Baronet against any mock sentimentality on that point. He was about to establish a colony before which the Indian would disappear. The successful civilization of the white man, as a necessary consequence, killed out the brown man, and depend upon it the red man would have to disappear before it in this instance; and the same feeling would exist amongst the Indians against all the colonists as now existed against the Americans. The Americans had been successful colonisers, and there was universal hatred of them amongst the Indians. In Canada, Lower and Upper, there was hardly an Indian left, because these colonies had been peopled by a civilized white population. He knew something of Canada, and he could state from personal knowledge that in that country the Indians were like the wandering gypsies of other countries. They were disappearing fast from the face of nature. One might occasionally see a poor wretched being, clothed in a dilapidated blanket, creeping along, degraded and miserable, and that was the Indian of Canada. That was what we were going to do in New Caledonia. We were about to introduce civilization there. Before that civilization the Indians must disappear, and the more rapidly the better. This might seem harsh and cruel language; but it was the language of truth. The absorption of the red man was an inevitable consequence. It was not man's fault that it was so; but wherever civilization advanced the red man retired. He had abstained from introducing any topic connected with the Hudson's Bay Company into the discussion, and he had done so on the understanding that he was to have a day on which that question could be debated by the House. To show that it was imperatively necessary that that subject should be considered without delay, he would remind the House that in May, 1859, the license by which the Hudson's Bay Company now held certain territory east of the Rocky Mountains expired, that it was necessary therefore to provide for the future, and that they could only do so efficiently upon a thorough understanding of the case. The House was not yet thoroughly in possession of all the facts, and a night's discussion was needed for that purpose. Although he contemplated depriving the Hudson's Bay Company of a certain portion of their territory, yet the right hon. Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice) might rest assured that he purposed to do them no injustice. He was prepared to give them all they ought to have, but he believed that they possessed their powers under a misconception of an illegal char- ter; nevertheless, he was prepared to deal liberally with them. He repeated, he hoped the House would understand that he had abstained from entering on all topics of this kind in the belief that he would have a full opportunity of stating his opinion with regard to the position of the Hudson's Bay Company with reference to the territory east of the Rocky Mountains; and as the question was a great and imperial one, be would entreat the Government not to treat it lightly, but from a statesmanlike point of view, as involving British interests in the region between the Atlantic and the Pacific. By so doing they might create a counterpoise on that continent to a power which was rising into overwhelming importance there. They ought not to shut their eyes to the threatening aspects which beset the condition of that country, and they ought to look on the question as one intimately concerning the interests and honour of this country.

said, he entirely concurred in the remarks which had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere) as to the wisdom of those clauses of the Bill which reserved to the discretion of the Government the period when representative institutions should be introduced into the new body. The right hon. Gentleman had also alluded to the title of the colony. Now, when he (Mr. Mills) first saw the Bill, he certainly imagined that they were going to legislate for the French possessions of the same name in the Pacific, being ignorant of the fact that there was any other new Caledodian in the world; and he thought it might possibly create some surprise in France when they found the British Parliament legislating for a French colony. It was very desirable, then, that confusion should be avoided, if possible, in describing the colony; for he remembered once hearing an anecdote of a governor, who having been appointed to a colony, quitted this country, and after a lapse of a certain time returned, and said he was not able to find it.

said, he understood the general feeling of the House to be that the discussion should be confined to the object of the present Bill, and that they should refrain from entering on the subject of the Hudson's Bay territory; but he would beg to remind the right hon. Baronet that that great question required his immediate attention. Not only would there be emigration to these colonies from Cali- fornia, but it would flow in from Canada, as these territories were only forty-seven days overland from Montreal. That emigration could not take that route without interfering with the territory of the Hudson's Bay Company. The hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) had talked of employing large military force in these colonies but he would recall to his recollection what had happened in New South Wales when it was found impossible to keep troops there on account of the desertion of the men. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) had complained of the designation of the colony, but if he referred to Cox's Tour to the Rocky Mountains, in 1831, he would find that at that time even the country was well known as New Caledonia. In conclusion, he cordially approved of the Bill, and would congratulate the right hon. Baronet on this good commencement of his Colonial administration. He would at the same time point out the desirability of making an alteration in the existing boundary, which had been found to be an inconvenient one. A degree of latitude had been suggested for that purpose, but he thought it better that the course of the river should be adopted.

said, that he entertained no objection to the Bill; on the contrary, he thought it would answer well the purpose for which it was intended. He had no objection to any part of the Bill which gave powers to the Governor. With all his predilections for free institutions, he should not have objected to have extended the period fixed in the Bill for establishing them. He would beg the House, however, not to be led away by any flattering notion of the facilities for colonizing those territories. There were difficulties connected with it which did not exist in the cases of California and Australia. In the first place, not a spade had been struck into the soil on the Frazer River. The country was difficult of access; it contained no provisions, and as the gold mines were situated at the confluence of the Frazer and Thompson Rivers, they were 350 miles from the coast, and the emigrant population would have not only to find the means of transit, but must carry provisions with them for their support by the way, and when they arrived there as well. This country was different from the other gold countries. California was a settled country, rich in corn and other provisions; and in Australia our colonists had prepared the way for emigrants. He agreed with the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck), that the Government ought not to establish a colony without having adequate means at hand to keep the peace and protect life and property. They must administer justice. They could not expect that there would be no crime, and how could justice be administered without the Executive being in possession of such a force as was necessary for that purpose? Those were questions of difficulty and importance, and he hoped the House would not be led away by the notion that we were about to establish a colony at the mouth of the Frazer River which could at once support itself. The plan shadowed out by the right hon. Baronet was probably the hest that could be adopted at present, and he believed the man most fitted to carry it out was Governor Douglas. The native Indians in Vancouver's Island and the adjacent coast were numerous and tolerably well armed, and they had attacked trading ships on several occasions. Governor Douglas, by his good management, had, however, maintained his colony without any quarrel or dispute with them. But there could be no such management in the interior when the emigrants first went to the gold regions, and it was necessary to make such provision in that respect. He argued that the matter could be left in no better hands than those of Governor Douglas. The advice of the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield, that the instructions to the Governor should be accompanied by certain rules and ordinances, which might be thought necessary by the Government at borne to enable him to carry on his administration, was well worth the consideration of the Government. He thought it was very expedient that the Government should in all matters give the most specific details to the Governor, who would have a responsibility cast upon him which would require the support of the Government at home. He ought to be instructed on what terms his proclamation should be issued, and what protection he should hold out to persons going into the interior. With respect to the unfortunate Hudson's Bay Company, he could assure hon. Members that whatever policy was adopted by the House would be accepted by them. No lawyer doubted that the grant of territory to the Company by the Crown was valid. The license to trade was given to the Company to enable theta to maintain peace, They desired no renewal of the license, and it might be withdrawn to-morrow without affecting their position. At the best, it was but a miserable concern, having half a million of capital, on which they divided 10 per cent. They desired only to be treated as the East India Company, and, provided the interests of their shareholders were guarded, they would be only too happy to give their best assistance to carry into effect any policy which might be thought for the general benefit of their territories. His right hon. Friend deemed it practicable to make some arrangement to enable the Company to establish colonies on the Red River, and if he did so he would find none so anxious to promote that object as the Hudson's Bay Company.

said, he wished to congratulate the right hon. Baronet (Sir B. Lytton) on having introduced a Bill which was the first step towards putting an end to the monopoly enjoyed by the Hudson's Bay Company. The territory which the right hon. Baronet now proposed to form into a colony was the subject of discussion in this House ten years ago, when he (Mr. Christy) had the honour to call attention to the impolicy and inexpediency of handing over to that powerful company an island of the importance of Vancouver's Island. On that occasion he was supported by many of the most influential Members of the House, and a very narrow division was taken upon the question. Since that the late Government had had the courage to propose a Committee, which sat last year, to take into consideration the whole subject preparatory to again granting, as he then feared, the exclusive right of trading over this vast territory to the Hudson's Bay Company. But the Bill now before the House, he presumed, would settle that question. That Bill, indeed, was a conclusive commentary on the impolicy of granting such a monopoly, and he believed they might thank the gold discoveries for having interposed and brought this important territory under the direct authority of the Crown: He understood that the exclusive right of the Hudson's Bay Company to trade over the territory would now cease; but he begged to observe that, although Governor Douglas might be exceedingly skilful in managing the Indians, he was in reality the chief factor of the Company, and had the management of the whole of their trading operations; and that Mr. Cowper, in his evidence before the Committee, had stated that, instead of governing Vancouver's Island with a view to induce emigrants to settle there, the policy pursued had had the effect of driving emigrants away. He hoped, therefore, that if Governor Douglas were retained in his office under the authority of the Crown, the Colonial Secretary would send him the most specific instructions on this head, and that he should not continue to encourage competition on the part of the Company's officers with the settlers and colonists who might emigrate there. It appeared to be a matter of agreement that the discussion on the main question was to be taken on the Motion of the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck). If there was to be any discussion it was important that it should take place in the present Session, because the exclusive right to the trade expired in 1859, and it was very important that persons who took a deep interest in the country, as well as the people of Canada, should know what were the intentions of the Government, and what was the feeling of the House as to the renewal of the Company's charter for any lengthened period. With respect to the measure before the House, he certainly thought that in its main features it was a good one. He had some objections, however, to the geographical arrangement proposed, and on a future stage he should move an Amendment with regard to the boundaries of the colony, which he hoped would commend itself to the approval of the Government. He gathered from those men who had been in the territory that the gold which was found in the Frazer River was merely the debris of the gold that existed in the Rocky Mountains, and he therefore thought it desirable that the boundaries of the new colony should be extended further north—up to Finlay's River, and to the main chain of the Rocky Mountains that ran east and west. He was far from thinking that it would not be a judicious arrangement to confine the Hudson's Bay Company to those northern districts which were productive of profit to them. These districts produced fur-bearing animals, and were little suited to settlement and colonization. As the right hon. Baronet had alluded to the construction of a railway, be hoped it would be within his contemplation to propose to Parliament some plan which would have for its object the formation of another colony in the district of the Red River. Unless the Government directed its attention to the subject, the country would be filled with American settlers, and questions of boundary would arise, which might bring about a repetition of previous difficulties with the United States. He could not help complimenting the Government upon having carried out the views recommended by the Committee which examined this subject last year, and he had to complain that the right hon. Gentleman who was at the head of the Colonies under the late Administration never informed that Committee of the discovery of gold in this district; though it now appeared, from papers on the table, that the Government was in possession of this information two years ago. They were now told that the amount of gold found there was overrated. That might be so; but, at all events, the subject had very properly attracted the attention of the Government, who now proposed to found a colony in consequence; and he quite agreed with the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield, that this colony could not be founded without sending out an adequate military force.

said, that having been a Member of the Committee referred to, he wished to remark that when the license was granted to the Hudson's Bay Company the Government fixed the price of land at £1 per acre. It appeared from the evidence adduced before the Committee that that high price had prevented colonization from being carried on to any great extent. Perhaps the right hon. Baronet (Sir B. Lytton) would take this subject into his consideration when he was establishing a Government for the new colony. It was important that land should be more easily obtainable, so that out of the shifting population who might be attracted to the colony a deposit of good settlers should be left.

said, he thought that the right hon. Baronet had done quite right to introduce his Bill now. To form a colony without a population was a useless expense, and to allow a colony in which a population had grown up to remain without a Government led to anarchy, misrule, and bloodshed. He was not very sanguine of the success of the new colony (although the right hon. Baronet had taken the right course with regard to its government), because it was certain that the first thing that would happen would be a terrible collision between the whites and the Indians, which it would not be in the power of any Minister to advert. Now, would it be suf- ficient to send a frigate there, as some had proposed. The place, although very beautiful, was most inaccessible, and it would be necessary to have a larger force for the purpose of enforcing order upon the lawless spirits who would flock to the colony than could be spared from any frigate. He hoped, also, the right hon. Baronet would take the advice of the noble Lord (Viscount Sandell), and at once fix such a price upon the land as would stimulate population. It was the unanimous testimony of all the witnesses who had been examined, that nothing had tended so much to obstruct the settlement of Vancouver's Island as the high price of land. While land could be obtained in Oregon for a dollar and a quarter per acre, in Vancouver's Island the fixed price was £1. Land ought to be obtained in the new colony upon terms at least as favourable as in the neighbouring country. This was one of the settled colonies in which the general principles of the law of England, has laid down in the well known chapter of Blackstone, would become the law of the colony. But these general principles were not sufficient for the basis of the law and constitution of the colony. Her Majesty was to be empowered by order in Council to make laws for the government of the colony, or to delegate the power to the Governor for the time being. Would it not be better to follow the precedent adopted with respect to other colonies, and give the colony the fundamental laws under which we lived, merely reserving to Her Majesty the power of passing supplementary laws as they might be found necessary? The provision that so much of the law of England as could be applied to the new colony should be enacted would be perfectly understood by the colonial lawyers, and upon this the Government might erect the requisite superstructure. It would be proper that the boon of the law of England should come to the colony through the Act of Parliament to which it owed its existence rather than by any laws passed by the Governor for the time being? He had submitted these suggestions fully under the conviction that if they were not adopted by the right hon. Gentleman it would be because he had some good reason for not adopting them. In conclusion, it did seem to him a pity that when they had one Caledonia already in Australia, another on an island off the coast of New Holland, and on the east coast of America the colony of Nova Scotia; which, he supposed, meant the same thing, that there should be so much poverty in their vocabulary that they were obliged to adopt a name that was identical with that of a French colony in the Pacific. He suggested that the right hon. Baronet should hit upon some other name that was not quite so much used up.

also objected to the name, and suggested that the right hon. Baronet should follow the fashion which had of late years been set by America of adopting the native name. He thought they were bound to perpetuate the aboriginal names in all those districts as much as possible. He would strongly urge upon the right hon. Gentleman, also, the propriety of at once fixing the land tenure, so that every colonist might know from the first what he had to expect. He could speak from experience on this point, for he happened to have been one of the earliest settlers in the colony of Hong Kong, and such was the discontent and heartburning arising from the uncertainty on this matter, that, if the colonists had been near America, they would certainly have prayed to the United States for annexation. He was happy to add that all difficulties now were satisfactorily adjusted; but he begged the House to consider what would be the effect of such disputes when the colony was only divided by a stream from the United States. He hoped, therefore, the Government would give all the settlers there a right of preemption to the lands they occupied. He would remind the House that the foundation of a new colony was a grave matter. There were many financial reformers who looked upon every new colony as a new cause of war, and in this case he believed the utmost delicacy and care would be required to prevent this colony from causing jealousies with our neighbours. He was rather surprised that the right hon. Gentleman said so little about Vancouver's Island. He believed the importance of that island could not be overrated. He had heard many Americans say that they would willingly give California in exchange for it; and, looking to its position in the Pacific, its possession of coal, and the importance of that article to the navigation of those seas, giving its possessors a dominant influence over the future of China and Japan, he fully agreed in the importance they attached to it. As to this new colony, if he thought it would be the cause of future disputes with the United States, he would rather be inclined to adopt a proposal which he believed the Americans would be willing to make—namely, sell it to them outright. He knew such a proposal was very repugnant to British feeling, as descending from that high position which he hoped this country would long maintain. He had only further to urge upon the right hon. Gentleman to make this colony as soon as possible self-supporting, and to adapt its institutions to such a scale of expenditure as the colonists would be willing to pay. For the rest he heartily joined in the aspirations which the right hon. Baronet had expressed for the prosperity of this colony; and such was his confidence in his intentions and his solicitude for its welfare, that if no other name were found for the colony, he hoped gratitude would inspire the colonists themselves to call it the colony of Lytton Bulwer.

said, he also would urge upon the right hon. Gentleman the inconvenience attending the multiplicity of names. He could mention as a proof of it that a letter posted at Plymouth addressed to his firm in Halifax, and containing a number of bank notes, but without a penny stamp, was sent over to Halifax, in Nova Scotia, though he was happy to say that the letter afterwards came back unopened, and the notes safe. Now if there was so much inconvenience with the names of towns, how much greater would the inconvenience be with the names of large tracts of country. He joined in the hope that this colony would soon become self-sustaining. But at the same time, it must not be forgotten that the Governor must be supported by an armed force. He hoped, also, that the Government would not fix the price of the land higher than it was in the neighbouring states, where the average price was a dollar and a quarter per acre.

said, he agreed that the price of land ought not to be too high; but he must say, that he had been in Vancouver's Island, and he did not think it was the price of the land so much which retarded the progress of the colony as the baneful influence of the Hudson's Bay Company, who systematically used their influence to drive private traders out of their territories. If a private trader attempted to open a trade with the natives, orders were immediately sent out to the Governor, who was also the chief factor of the Company, to outbid the trader in his dealings, and so drive him out of the country. A curious instance of this occurred while be was in that district. A gentle man sent a quantity of cranberries to California, where the fruit was highly prized; but no sooner was this known than the Governor of the district caused all the cranberries of the district to be collected and sent over to California, where they were to be sold at such a price as would drive the private trader out of the market. He agreed with those who thought there should be a survey of the country,—not such a survey as would be deemed necessary in England, but one that would be useful for practical purposes in the existing state of the colony. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Coventry told the House that there were no settlers and no cultivation where the gold was discovered, and from thence he augured all sorts of evil to the colony. But he did not think the colony would be worse than others in this respect. There was no cultivation where the gold was discovered, either in California or in Australia; and in this colony labour would not be placed at a greater disadvantage than in either of those. The right hon. Gentleman had also spoken in high terms of the value of Mr. Douglas as Governor. Now Mr. Douglas might be the ablest Governor that ever was created; but still he was not fitted in his present capacity for the duties proposed to be entrusted to him, seeing that the post he now held was that of chief agent to the Hudson's Bay Company. For his own part he knew a little of Governor Douglas, and he should say he was a very incompetent man for the post. He had never been accustomed to deal with white men; all his dealings were with Indians, and his idea of law was that might was right. Now that would not do in the new colony. It would not do with Englishmen, far less with many of the men whom they might expect from the western States of America, because they had made the western States too hot to hold them. These men must be treated gently; their hair must not be stroked the wrong way, or else they would give a new reading of the maxim that might was right, for they would certainly show that their power was stronger than any which the Governor might immediately bring to bear against them.

Sir, in rising to move the second reading of the Dublin Police Force (Ireland) Bill, I am anxious to take the earliest opportunity, which the forms of the House will allow me, to correct various misapprehensions and misstatements which have been made in regard to the objects and principles of this Bill. I observe that among a large proportion of the population of Dublin this Bill has undergone considerable discussion. It has been discussed both in the corporation and at a public meeting of the inhabitants held a few evenings ago. The objections brought against the Bill at both of these meetings are utterly untenable and entirely without foundation; and if the House will give me their attention for a few minutes I shall show that these objections are founded on a misunderstanding of the Bill. Now, it has been objected to for many reasons. It has been said that this Bill will not remove or diminish the taxation of the rate-payers of Ireland; and in the observations I have to address to the House I shall divide my explanations entirely into the operations of the Bill as it affects Dublin, for I believe that in the western parts of the country, both in Belfast and in other parts of Ireland,—the proposed Bill is very well received and universally approved of; but in Dublin it had been said that this Bill will not in reality diminish the local burdens. It has also been said that the proposed new police force will be insufficient for the preservation of the peace in the present increased population of the town. It has been further asserted that the constabulary force will suffer from this amalgamation; and that unless the City of Dublin should be placed precisely in the same position in this respect as the counties of Ireland, the constabulary would suffer; and, lastly, it has been attempted to impute sectarian motives to the promoters of this Bill. Now, upon all these points, misconceptions, and misstatements, I am in a position to satisfy the House that these objections do not in reality exist. I will first address myself to the financial part of the proposition. I observe that even after the statements that I made to the House the other night, when I thought I showed satisfactorily to the House that a very considerable diminution of expense would occur in connection with the local burdens, it has still been stated that nothing of the kind will be effected. I will, therefore, now ask the House for a few minutes to give me its attention while I state, as briefly as I can, what will really be the financial effect of the measure I propose. The present expense of the force of the Dublin metropolitan police, in the shape of material and men, rent, taxes, clothing, and forage for horses, exclusive of Commissioners' salaries, amounts to £65,123 per annum. Now, I can show, if I go into detail, that the expense of the new force will be £45,377 per annum, so that there will be a difference in these two items of £19,746. But the whole charge for the metropolitan Dublin police, including police-courts and other departments, has been stated in detail, in an estimate on the table of the House, to amount this year altogether to £77,000, whereas, under the new system, when it comes altogether into operation, the charge will be £57,126; so that the difference in the charge of the entire police establishment will be £19,874. I will show the House, however, without wearying it with details, that this expenditure will not be exceeded. The items appertaining to the old force are taken from the documents before Parliament. The items appertaining to the new force have been collected in the most accurate manner by the heads of the constabulary department. The expenditure under the new system will amount to £57,126, and is made up of the following items:—

Men and Material	£45,377
Police Courts	7,942
Police Departments	2,330
Recorder's Salary	1,477
	£57,126

Now, the income that I expect will be necessary for the maintenance of this force, when the whole of the new system comes into operation, will be derived from the following sources:—

Local Income	£14,800
Parliamentary Grant	36,500
Police Rate	7,000
	£58,300

This would be for the whole force. I can give the number of men that will be furnished for the preservation of the peace in Dublin, for this expenditure, which would be something under 800, and I believe that the estimate will be amply sufficient. I am free to admit that it may be some time before the Dublin metropolitan police districts will obtain the whole benefit of this reduction in their local taxation; but during the first year it is possible that there will be no great decrease, and certainly nothing approaching to an increase. It will give one Assistant Inspector General, the City Inspector, one sub-Inspector, sixty-nine constables of the first- class, 25 of the second, 100 of the third, 50 acting constables, and 652 sub-constables, making a total force under 800. Some statements have been made in Dublin, and it has been attempted to be proved, that the amount of pensions it would be necessary to grant by way of retiring allowances, and in the shape of state pensions, would be £13,000 a year, but I cannot make out upon what ground that can be substantiated, for upon a careful calculation of the whole sum necessary for retiring allowances consequent upon the amalgamation of the two forces, I find that at the outside it cannot amount to more than £4,600 per annum, and I believe it will be considerably less. To show how I arrive at that I may state that it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to disband any one single man at present in the Dublin metropolitan police force, or reduce his pay. Some of the officers will be reduced at once, and it will be necessary to retire a certain number of officers, but it is not proposed to dismiss a single man, and it will not be necessary to retire so large a number as was originally expected. There are 69 officers in the upper ranks of the Dublin metropolitan police force, at salaries of £6,810; and, supposing it necessary to reduce all at two-thirds salary—a very high scale indeed—it would only amount to £4,600 under any circumstances whatever. My present impression is, that it will be much nearer £3,000. There will be no increase in the general charge, for it is to be observed that the members of the Dublin metropolitan police force, owing to the severity of their duties, leave the force very much, and recruiting goes on to a greater extent than was proposed. In a force amounting altogether to something like 950 men, the House will be surprised to hear that to keep up that force it was necessary in 1855 to recruit 259; in 1856, 195; and 1857, 180 men. This fact shows how unnecessary it is to take any harsh step in order to reduce the number of the men; because the mere suspension of recruiting for a single twelvemonth would suffice to bring down the force to the standard requisite for the preservation of the peace of the city. Therefore, even assuming that the retiring pensions cost as much as £4,600, this will be more than compensated for by the saving of £6,000 a year that will be effected by a reduction of 200 men. It has been said that the Government intend to force the men to change into the constabulary whether they like it or not. That is entirely a mistake. They simply mean to give the men the option of taking service in the constabulary force; but though the duty was lighter, and the service was country service, yet the pay being considerably lower it is not expected that many of the Dublin police will accept that offer. The Government have therefore excluded that element altogether from their consideration. In accordance with these views a notice has been addressed to the Dublin Metropolitan Police by the Government, explaining to the men the real nature of the proposed change, in order to guard against any misrepresentation of its objects. That document I will read to the House.

"NOTICE.

"There being reason to apprehend that the Bill now before Parliament for the consolidation of the constabulary and metropolitan police is not correctly understood by the latter force, his Excellency deems it necessary to make known the principal changes which are proposed by the Bill:—

"1. That the metropolitan branch of the force will be under one chief officer, and an assistant, instead of under two Commissioners.

"2. That, except some few senior members of the establishment, it is not intended to discharge any of the existing force, but to retain them with their present rank and pay while serving in the metropolitan district.

"3. That it is not intended to remove compulsorily any of the present metropolitan force to other places. If at any time any of them wish to go to country duty it will be open to them to do so, but they will there receive only the ordinary pay of the constabulary, and such long service pay as they may be entitled to by their former service as well in the police as in the constabulary.

"Dublin Castle, July, 1858."

This is the rule we intend to adhere to in the amalgamation of the two forces, and I defy any one to prove that any practical injustice can, under that rule, be adopted towards any member of the force. But to snake it perfectly clear and certain that a diminution in the local rates will arise, we propose to introduce a clause in the Bill which will at once reduce the power that now exists of levying 8d. in the pound to 6d. in the pound, which I believe will be the best guarantee to the ratepayers of Dublin of our intentions, and which will give us an ample fund, even during next year, for carrying out this plan. I do not mean to say that 6d. will be necessary in future years, for I believe that when the plan comes fully into operation the sum required will be more like 3½d. or 4d in the pound. I believe if this scheme were properly understood it would be considered as a great boon by a larger proportion of the force. There would be no injustice done to the force. No man will be deprived of one shilling pay or pension or be turned out as long as he was able to serve, and if they like to join the constabulary they can. I believe that the offer we give the men of country service will be accepted as a great boon. A great deal has been said about the low sanitary state of the army; and though the House had been surprised at the high rate of mortality among the Guards, they will be still more surprised when they hear the state of the Dublin metropolitan police, which contains in its ranks as fine a set of men, physically speaking, as are to be found in the service in the world. The following was the testimony of the medical officer on the subject.

"Seven years and eight months make a period of police service, after which the constitutions of the stoutest members of the force will begin to exhibit symptoms of decay; and in their report for the following year the medical officers, in referring to the non-increase of the average service of that year, state that it is confirmatory of their opinion as to the deteriorating effect of seven years and eight months' police service on the constitutions of the stoutest men.'"

I think therefore, that men subject to duties which occasion so early a deterioration of the strength of very strong men, will appreciate the advantages of country service held out by the Bill. It has been said that the numerical power of the proposed new force will be insufficient; but there are a far greater number of police now employed in Dublin than in any large towns, such as Liverpool and Bristol, where great vigilance is required for the protection of property. For ordinary purposes there is a force of 650 men provided by the Bill, and you have an additional reserve of between 400 and 500, making a total of 1,100 men, in the event of tumult, riot, or popular disturbance arising in Dublin; so that there is no sort of ground to assert that this new force will be insufficient, either for the ordinary duties that devolve on it, or in the event of riot and disturbance. On the general question of the amalgamation of the two forces I think I am bound to inform the House of the opinion of a man of the first authority in Ireland. I may say throughout the whole consideration of this scheme, from beginning to end, we have had the advantage of the advice and assistance of Sir Duncan M'Gregor, who is the best possible authority on a subject of this kind in the City of Dublin. He has given us the advantage of his experience of nearly twenty-five years, and although he was rather adverse to the proposition at first he is now an ardent supporter of it. In a letter on this subject he says:—

"Constabulary Office, Dublin Castle,

June 21, 1858.

"DEAR LORD NAAS,—Understanding that your Lordship wishes me to express my opinion of the Towns' Police Bill, which has been introduced into Parliament, I beg to offer the following observations. I confess that when your Lordship first informed me of your plan, the idea was so new to me that I hesitated to approve of it.

"But the more I have reflected on the subject the more have I become persuaded that the scheme will not only work well, but that it possesses several advantages over the present system, and that it will involve much fewer changes than may at first sight be apprehended.

"In enumerating the advantages, as they appeared to me, of the proposed Act, I confine myself to details.

"1. It will secure a very large saving to the ratepayers of Dublin and Belfast—in the last case immediate, and in the former partly immediate and partly prospective.

"2. Fully believing that co-equal authority vested in any two persons, however gifted, cannot fail, sooner or later, to prove detrimental to the harmony and discipline of any organized body of men, I am confident that great benefit will arise from placing the Dublin police under one responsible head.

"The amalgamation of the two forces will, I think, diminish the number of resignations, superannuations, and dismissals among the men serving in the city. For at present, if a metropolitan policeman falls into ill health, or bad habits, the only way, I presume, in which he can be disposed of, is either, in the one case, by discharging him on pension or gratuity, or releasing him, it may be for a length of time, from the performance of duty; and in the other, by dismissing or otherwise severely punishing him. Under the intended arrangement, men whose health maybe temporarily impaired could be transferred to easy stations in the country, as is now practised in other towns with benefit to the general service; and young men of unsteady habits might frequently be reclaimed by being removed to a quiet country station, away from the influences of the evil companions and temptations to which they are exposed in a large town.

"4. Beside such cases, I have reason to believe that the incessant labour of a city police, and the monotonous nature of their duties, become in the course of time most irksome to the great mass of the force. The proposed scheme would enable the inspector general to remedy this evil; and by occasional, or even frequent, interchanges between the men in the town and those in the country, to diffuse contentment throughout the force.

"5. In cases of emergency occurring in Dublin. the new plan would allow the inspector general to send promptly, and without investing him with the special authority now required for such duty, a portion of the reserve in the Phœnix Park in aid of the metropolitan force; and instead of acting independently, as at present, the whole would be placed under the orders of an officer, fully recognized both by the rural and city portions of the force.

"6. By making the constabulary cavalry at the depot available for such duties as might be required in the city, the necessity of maintaining the mounted Dublin police would be superseded, and an additional saving of expense thereby effected.

"7. The foregoing observations on the Dublin police apply with incalculably greater force to the municipal police at Belfast. For, while the former are, confessedly, in the highest state of discipline and efficiency the latter are, I fear, so little trusted, that on occasions of disturbance the constabulary would prefer dispensing altogether with their assistance.

"But I conceive that the success of the intended arrangement will chiefly depend on the character of the officer who may be selected as the head of the city force. For though it will be for the inspector general to prescribe certain general principles and regulations for their guidance, it will be quite impossible for him, with his other onerous duties, to attend to the innumerable details of the Dublin police."

"I remain, my dear Lord, very faithfully yours,

"D. M'GREGOR."

That is the candid opinion of one whose authority is unrivalled on questions of this kind. He has given the fullest amount of consideration to the question, and the result is that he had come to a favourable opinion. It had been said at a meeting in Dublin that that city ought to be placed on the same footing as the rest of Ireland in this matter. Now I beg leave to say that this is done by this Bill. The principle governing the distribution of the constabulary in Ireland was that each county should receive free of expense a certain quota of men. That the Bill proposes to give to Dublin; but if in any county exceptional circumstances should arise to demand it, the Lord Lieutenant is empowered to send additional men to such county, in which case the county is required to pay a moiety of the expense. That is the mode in which we propose to deal with the Dublin Metropolitan police force. We propose to have the Parliamentary quota of 400 men and 250 additional constables, so that, in reality, we adhere precisely and completely to the precedent set in the General Constabulary Act. I now pass to another objection made to this measure, which is, I think, even more untenable than any to which I have yet adverted. The Government have been accused of having framed the Bill for a sectarian object; and that, I own, is a charge at which I have felt not a little astonished. As far as I am concerned, I believe that after having been for many years engaged in public life, I have never said or done anything that could render me amenable to such a charge. I have invariably abstained from taking part in sectarian discussions, both because they are most distasteful to my own feelings and because I think they are calcu- lated to do much injury, while they can never effect any real good. I cannot, therefore, believe that I am fairly open to this charge, and as regards the Members of the Government generally I may observe that if we wished to establish a sectarian force in Dublin we should have taken a very different course from that which we have pursued. We should have adopted the plan which was, I believe, entertained, but was never brought to maturity by the late Government—namely, that of re-organising the Dublin metropolitan police force. We could then have made it an exclusively Protestant force. But we have followed an exactly opposite policy. We propose now to amalgamate the Dublin metropolitan police with a body against which no accusation of sectarianism had ever been advanced. The Protestants form almost one-third of the whole Irish constabulary force. That is, I think, a very fair proportion under the circumstances of the country, and to that proportion we mean to adhere in our future arrangements with respect to the force in Dublin. I believe that force, as it is at present constituted, may fairly be charged with bearing a sectarian character. In the metropolitan police force, however, the proportion is entirely different. I do not attempt to account for the facts of the case; that is a subject about which there may be differences of opinion; but there can be no doubt of the fact that the Dublin force is to a great extent—to an extent which I think improper—Roman Catholic. I find that in the statement I made upon that subject on a former evening I was led into a slight error, in consequence of the incompleteness of the information with which I was furnished. I then said that out of 836 constables in the force there were only between 60 and 70 Protestants; but I have since ascertained that at that period last year to which I was referring the whole number of constables, excluding officers, was 856, and that out of that number 95 were Protestants. I do not believe that is a proportion which the House will think it desirable to maintain. It must be borne in mind that in a country like Ireland, where so much bitter sectarian feeling still prevails, it is a matter of considerable importance that the police, who are brought into constant contact with the whole population, should be free from any sectarian taint or suspicion. It is manifestly possible to attain that object, because it has been actually attained in the case of the general Irish Constabulary force. We now want to diminish the great disproportion between Protestants and Roman Catholics which has hitherto prevailed in the Dublin police force, just as we want to diminish a disproportion of an exactly opposite character in the police force of Belfast. I shall now proceed to state the exact proportions at present prevailing between the numbers of the professors of the two religions in the different branches into which the Dublin force is divided. I find that out of five superintendents there are three Protestants and two Roman Catholics; but that is the only portion of the service in which the number of Protestants preponderates. Among twenty-six inspectors seven are Protestants and nineteen Roman Catholics; among thirty-eight acting inspectors three are Protestants and thirty-five are Roman Catholics; among sixty-six sergeants thirteen are Protestants and fifty-three are Roman Catholics; among a hundred acting sergeants—the body immediately charged with the supervision of the men—nine are Protestants and ninety-one are Roman Catholics; and among 836 constables 109 are Protestants and 727 are Roman Catholics. These figures are taken from a return furnished on the 4th inst. by the Dublin Metropolitan Police Office. Now, I believe that, no matter how excellent may be the discipline of the force, it will be found impossible that it can acquire the general confidence of the inhabitants of Dublin as long as this disproportion between the followers of the two religions prevails. I am persuaded that, however efficient it may be now, it would be ten times more efficient if this taint of sectarianism were removed; and I also think that the only way to accomplish that object is to adopt the plan which we propose for the amalgamation of the Dublin force with a well-known body like the constabulary, against which the shadow of such an accusation has never been preferred. I have not, however, yet stated the whole of the ease as regards the constitution of the Dublin force. It is found that the proportion of Roman Catholics to Protestants is so great in that body that Protestants are averse to join its ranks. I believe that the Commissioners are really desirous of diminishing that evil; but it was impossible to persuade Protestants, who, nice the rest of the people of Ireland, had strong religious feelings, to join a force in which the Roman Catholic element was known so greatly to prevail. That is a state of feeling of the existence of which every one who knows much of Dublin must be well aware. I will now briefly refer to the mode in which the Bill has been received in Ireland. It has been opposed by certain members of the Dublin Corporation, for many of whom I entertain a sincere respect, and I wish here particularly to allude to Mr. Alderman Campbell, who has taken up a hostile position to the Bill, but who appears in his statement to have confined his objections to considerations of economy, of which I think I have already disposed. With regard to others, who wished to make this a party and religious question, I have only to state that I can have no hope of altering their opinions. I believe that they wish to maintain the Dublin police force in its present form, because it is of an almost exclusively sectarian character. But arguments of that kind will not, I am sure, be employed in this House, and I feel that I need not allude any further to them upon this occasion. The Bill has been received with general approbation throughout the whole of Ireland. In Belfast, where it is proposed to do away with an exclusively Protestant police, the measure has met with no opposition whatever. In that town the disproportion of Roman Catholics to Protestants is even greater than the disproportion of Protestants to Roman Catholics in Dublin; for out of 150 constables in Belfast, only six or seven are Roman Catholics. No objection, I repeat, has been made to the measure in Belfast, and I had anticipated that it would have been received in an equally favourable spirit in Dublin. In Clonmel and other towns it has met with general support; and it will, no doubt, be a considerable advantage to the inhabitants of those towns that they should have the valuable assistance of the constabulary in the preservation of peace and order, on their undertaking to pay one-half of the cost of the force. I trust I have now disposed of all the arguments that have been advanced against the Bill; and I recommend it without the slightest hesitation to the favourable consideration of the House. I believe that it has been framed on sound principles; and I am sure that it has been framed in an honest and an impartial spirit.

said, he rose to move that the Bill should be read a second time that day three months. He felt justified in taking that step, as the Irish press and the citizens of Dublin had emphatically condemned it. He confessed he heard with great surprise the statement of the noble Lord to the effect that the Bill was an improvement in a political as well as a financial point of view. According to his calculations it would involve an outlay in the way of compensation and retiring allowances far exceeding the noble Lord's estimate. Its principle effect would be to saddle the ratepayers of Dublin with a charge of something like £12,000 or £13,000, while doing great injustice to the members of the existing force, who had entered the service upon the express understanding that promotion would be governed exclusively by merit. Under the Bill now proposed, sixty-three persons would be entitled to compensation to the amount of upwards of £6,000, although these persons were fully competent for the discharge of their duties. There were also eighty-seven sergeants, who would be retired at a cost of £4,220 a year. He hoped that a Bill entailing such an exorbitant expenditure would not be entertained at this late period of the Session. He passed by the religious question, not believing that their religious opinions would ever influence the police in the discharged of their duty. He would merely say that Colonel Browne had done his best to introduce Protestants into the Dublin police. He regretted to find that while the new Government was professing most liberal opinions in that House, in Ireland they were acting on the old Orange principles, and seeking for additional means to enforce those principles. Since 1838 the conduct of the Dublin police, 1,200 in number had been most irreproachable; and yet this one-sided measure was brought forward at the fag-end of the Session as a sop to an intolerant faction. Even the inhabitants of Kingston, who were ultra-Conservative, condemned the Bill in the most unqualified manner. Reference had been made to the police going to church; the circumstance reminded him of a story that was told in Dublin of a right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Whiteside) having visited a Catholic church in Dublin in the toga of a Roman warrior—and, notwithstanding his commanding presence and noble visage, he might have escaped detection but, for the circumstance of his blessing himself with his left hand instead of his right.

said, that he was disposed to move a negative to that question. They had just had an instance of what he supposed the hon. Gentleman on the Ministerial side considered very able party tactics, but what he must designate as sharp practice. On an important question of this sort, which it was known was likely to elicit considerable discussion, the ordinary course of proceeding was, that after an hon. Member on one side of the House had stated his objections to the Bill, some hon. Member on the other side should rise and endeavour to defend its provisions; but the hon. Gentleman on the Ministerial side had not thought proper to pursue that course, and the question was then put before the Members on the Opposition side of the House had an opportunity of expressing their opinions with respect to the Bill. He certainly bad intended to oppose the second reading, and had moved for important Returns, intending to show that the financial advantages to be afforded by this Bill to the citizens of Dublin in a decrease of expenditure were incorrectly stated, and he also disputed the noble Lord's facts as to the relative proportion of Protestants and Roman Catholics in the force. As the Returns for which he had moved had not been produced, the House was not in possession of authentic documents which justified legislation on this subject. It had been asserted by some gentlemen in Dublin that the Bill would entail an increased expenditure on the citizens of Dublin of £13,000 a year. The Bill had elicited the strongest opposition from all classes in Dublin. [Mr. VANCE: No!] A number of Conservatives in Dublin had unanimously disapproved of the measure, but afterwards, on maturer consideration, and having, no doubt, received advice from the friends of the noble Lord, had, with one exception, become converts to the views of the noble Lord. He regretted that the noble Lord should have alleged, as the chief ground for effecting a change in the Dublin police, that the majority of that force were Roman Catholics. The noble Lord had admitted, that in the Belfast police force there was a preponderance of Protestants; but what analogy was there between the two cases? No attempt had been made to show that the Dublin police were not an admirable municipal force, who discharged their duties most efficiently; but a Royal Commission had reported that the Belfast police were very inefficient, and, as Orangemen, were not fair and impartial guardians of the public peace, He felt it his duty to oppose the committal of the Bill.

said, that he did not believe that the Government intended to make amends for their liberal conduct in that House by their conduct in regard to Ireland. He believed the Members of the Government to be men of honour and gentlemen, and that they would in every respect act as became gentlemen and men of honour. Giving them credit for desiring to deal impartially towards Roman Catholics and Protestants, he nevertheless thought that the Bill before them was an inconsistency and a mistake, and that the sooner it was withdrawn the better. If it was proposed in England to deprive the local authorities of their control over the police, and to vest it in the Executive Government, the attempt would be resisted upon constitutional grounds, and as a breach of the principle which intrusted the people with the management of their own local affairs. But the effect of this Bill would be to transfer the control of the police in Dublin from the local authorities to the Executive Government. The noble Lord had said that the great majority of the Dublin police force consisted of Roman Catholics, but it was natural that such should be the case, when it was remembered that the vast majority of the class of people in Ireland from whom that force was recruited were members of the Roman Catholic Church. The noble Lord had not shown that the Dublin police were an inefficient force, that they had violated their duties, or that the local authorities by whom they were controlled had exercised their powers improperly. If the noble Lord could have shown any of these things, the House would have had reason to accept his Bill, but under present circumstances they ought to reject it as an ill-timed attempt to revive old sectarian principles.

said, he must repeat his determination to oppose the Bill. The corporation of Dublin had declared their objections to the measure; and the city of Dublin, with its 250,000 inhabitants, had, in public meeting assembled, prayed the House not to legislate with such haste in regard to a question of so much importance as that involved in the present Bill. He could tell the Government that, however anxious they might all be to return to their respective homes, he and the party with which he acted were determined to remain, if necessary, until the last day of August, in order to oppose the passing of this Bill. They would, next day, place on the paper four columns of Amendments, each of which would be fought to the last.

said, he could not allow the hon. Gentleman to speak in the name of the people of Dublin on the present occasion. He (Mr. Grogan) represented the city of Dublin since 1841, and was in the House long before the hon. Member for the King's County. He felt, then, he was better entitled than that hon. Gentleman to speak of the feelings of the people of Dublin; and in the name of that city he prayed the House to pass this Bill. He hoped that the Government would devote the morning sittings, as well as the evening ones, if necessary, to get through this Bill with its 150 clauses. He would not then go into the complaints that were made against the existing police force of Dublin. The disproportion of Protestants, as compared with Roman Catholics that were in that force, furnished the noble Lord with an argument quite sufficient to justify his present measure.

said, he wished to remind the House, that they were now discussing what they did not discuss before, the second reading of the Bill—a question which now arose on the 'notion for going into Committee. The late Government had no doubt introduced two Bills upon the subject, but they never intended to destroy the present police force, but only to alter the government of that force. They thought that the divided authority between the two Commissioners did not work well, and they proposed to substitute for such a system but the one authority, and to consolidate and amend the police force generally. The Bill they proposed in 1857 met with the most determined opposition from the representatives of Dublin, the noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland and the present Attorney General for Ireland. That Bill, though introduced on the 9th of June, was opposed on the ground that it was too late in the Session then to discuss so important a measure. They were now approaching the morning of the 9th of July, and it was declared by the Government that they were determined to pass the measure. In 1857, the right hon. and learned Gentleman, the present Attorney General for Ireland, in opposing the Bill of the late Government, said it ought to be referred to a Select Committee, inasmuch as he considered it unmerciful to ask the House at such a period of the Session to consider a Bill with 180 clauses. Now, the noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had divided into two Bills the Police Bill of 1857, and although he had argued in favour of the former measure, the Government now declined to meet them with sound argument, but rather with what might be called brute force—[Cries of "Oh!"]. He did not mean to use that word disrespectfully towards the right hon. Gentlemen opposite, but only as a popular expression. In 1835, a Police Bill for Dublin had passed this House, but when it went into the House of Lords, the late Duke of Wellington opposed it, on the ground that the corporation of Dublin at that time had petitioned against it, and that it was then too late in the Session to consider it. With regard to the present measure, four-fifths of it applied to the Dublin metropolitan police district, comprising not only the city of Dublin, but a district outside representing forty square miles. In that district was an admirably organized police force, and his first objection to the Bill was, that it substituted for that force the constabulary. Now, the constabulary was an admirable body of men, but it was quite unsuited for metropolitan service. It was not a detective, but a military force; as a body of infantry it would match with any in the world, and would have done good service in the Crimea; but experience proved that, though it was well fitted to suppress disturbances and maintain the public peace, it was not calculated to enforce police laws in Dublin. In substituting for the metropolitan police force the constabulary, the noble lord was, he should maintain, calling upon the House to take a most dangerous step. What, he would ask, were the grounds upon which hon. Members were invited to adopt that course? He (Mr. FitzGerald) found that the citizens of Dublin protested against any measure having that object, and that the inhabitants of Kingstown were opposed to it. The Bill of the noble Lord might, in- deed, in his opinion, be very properly described as a measure introduced to the notice of Parliament at the instigation of the Members for the City of Dublin. But the noble Lord based his arguments in support of the Bill, in the first place, upon financial grounds; and secondly, upon the peculiar constitution of the police force in Dublin. In dealing with the financial view of the question, the noble Lord had represented the entire cost of the police force for Dublin and its suburbs to be £77,000 a year. [Lord NAAS: According to the estimate of last year.] He had got before him the estimate of the six preceding years, and he found the average cost to be only £72,000 a year, and not £77,000. The noble Lord then showed that the Dublin force was to be reduced in number. But that might be done if necessary without sweeping it away. But for his own part, looking to the fact that they had to take charge of a large suburban district, of forty miles square, he entertained serious doubts whether any such reduction could safely be made. The noble Lord's argument in favour of the reduction of the police force was inconsistent with itself. He told! them, on the one hand, that the force might be reduced from 1000 to 600, while at the same time he said that the duties of the force were so heavy that the men broke down after seven years' service. The noble Lord had told them that the amount of the retiring compensation to be paid to the discharged members of this force would only be £4,500 a year; but there were now men in that force who were entitled to retire, and to claim £13,500 retiring pension. These men would all retire, for they would not serve in the constabulary, and this £13,500 would be charged on the City of Dublin, besides which the difference in the pay of the constabulary as compared with that of the present police would amount to a further charge of £8,117 upon that city. All this might be very wrong; all these calculations might be very baseless; but it showed the injustice of attempting to carry this Bill without further inquiry at this late period of the Session. But he would now deal with the question in another point of view. One of the noble; Lord's reasons for the introduction of this measure was the large proportion of men of one religion in the police forces of Dublin and Belfast, and which, in a country of mixed creeds, he said was a great evil. He quite agreed in that, and if he could believe that by any contrivance the Dublin police force had had a sectarian character given to it, and that that would be removed by this Bill, he would go with the noble Lord in striving to get rid of it. But of the two Commissioners at the head of the Dublin force, the one who had the entire management of the recruiting department was Colonel Browne, a member of the Established Church. That gentleman accounted for the preponderance of Roman Catholics in the Dublin police, by the preponderance of that religion in the class from which that force was necessarily recruited in the districts round Dublin. So much had Colonel Browne endeavoured to remove a sectarian character from the force that, having Protestant officers, he had sent them to the north of Ireland to recruit. But the result was that these men, on account of their intelligence, were withdrawn to clerkships and other employments, and in this way the attempt to give a less preponderating Roman Catholic character to the force had failed. Could it indeed be fairly made a ground of objection to a police force that it partook larely of the religion of the country to which they belonged? He believed the noble Lord admitted the loyalty and the efficiency of the force. It had been efficient and loyal to the Government, and that in times of great peril. In 184B, when the French Revolution had made all things insecure, the peace of Dublin was entrusted to this force alone, and they kept it. The force had been complimented by the Government for its conduct on the attempt to rescue Mr. Mitchell, and again in 1848; and he had in his hand a series of letters from the public authorities expressing their satisfaction with the manner in which the police had performed their duties. The Earl of Clarendon, the then Lord Lieutenant, expressed his great satisfaction at their services. The Duke of Cambridge, the Earl of St. Germans, and other high authorities had borne testimony to the same effect. Another convincing proof of the efficiency of the police was the fact that since 1836 there had been a diminution of crime in the metropolitan districts to the extent of nearly two-thirds. Why, then, was such a force to be entirely swept away? If the force was too large, let it be reduced; if it was too expensive, let the expense be diminished; but why was it to be altogether abolished? Was it because they were efficient—because they had preserved the peace in times of peril? No; the only ground put forth was, that it was a Roman Catholic force. Now, he wished to call the attention of the House to the constabulary force which it was proposed to substitute in place of this police force. That force, at the close of the year 1854 consisted of 12,500 men, of whom 9,000 were Roman Catholics, and 3,500 Protestants of all denominations. The head of that force, the two deputy inspectors, the two assistant inspectors, and thirty-four out of thirty-five county inspectors, were all Protestants, besides a large proportion of ordinary inspectors and head constables. Now, if he came forward and asked the House to dissolve this force because, while the great body were Roman Catholics, it was officered by members of the Established Church, he wondered how that proposition could be received. It was true the noble Lord had done his best to relieve this debate of a sectarian character, but would the House agree so to divest it of all sectarian character when lie read them an extract he had just received by telegraph from the Government organ published in Dublin to-day ["Oh, oh!"]. Yes, the paper in question was avowedly the Government organ; its editor and proprietor was Mr. John Robertson, a near relation of the right hon. Gentleman, and his brother, Mr. James Robertson, was the law adviser at the Castle. That paper stated that in the event of a war with France and an invasion of Ireland, Dublin would have nothing to expect from her Ultramontane police trained up in anti-English and disloyal principles. He pronounced these aspersions to be a foul calumny on the force, which in times of peril had preserved the peace of Dublin without having had recourse to military aid. If the noble Lord would consent to strike Dublin out of the Bill he would support the rest of its provisions; but he never would consent to cashier a force which had done good service, for no other offence than that it was Roman Catholic; and he would press upon English Members the importance of this question in a constitutional point of view, and ask them whether it was a desirable thing that they should disband a well-trained and highly-efficient metropolitan police force for the sake of introducing a military constabulary? He would, therefore, give his cordial support to the Amendment of the hon. Member for Kildare.

said, that this Bill was very short and very simple, and it was one against which he did not believe an ar- gument could be urged by any candid mind, He would state to the House how the matter stood. The constabulary force had been in operation through the greater portion of Ireland, with the exception of Dublin, for a great number of years; but the Act which constituted the force expressly excluded Dublin from the operation of the Bill. It was a force well trained, well educated, and well commanded—one, in short, which everybody commended, and its religious composition bore a fair proportion to the state of the different bodies in Ireland—that was to say, two-thirds of Roman Catholics to one-third of Protestants. At least those were the proportions of the two religions, though he believed of late years the relative proportions had been altered. Well, that being so, the question presented itself to every sensible man, why should they have under the same roof in the Castle of Dublin two sets of officials, each with large salaries, with extensive establishments, to manage two sets of police—the one the large force that was spread over the country, the other the small force that belonged to the city of Dublin. But, though the numbers of the Dublin force were small in comparison, yet the number of the officers was extraordinarily large and their pay was extravagantly high. But the absurdity of the case was this—that though there was at all times a large reserve force of the constabulary in the Phœnix Park, yet that force could not be called into the city of Dublin to compose a riot in the streets. Let them look at this question as one of finance. All the words that could be spoken by the hon. and learned Member for King's County (Mr. P. O'Brien) if the House were to listen to his entrancing eloquence till the end of August, could not change this fact—that the maximum rate under the new and proposed system would be 6d. in the pound, while the rate under the present system was now 7½d., with a prospect that it would soon be 8d. On the faith of calculations which could not err, he repeated that the highest rate under the proposed system would be 6d., with the expectation of seeing it shortly reduced to half that sum. There was no arguing against that. But that was not all. It was said that the men now in the force were to be treated with injustice? What was the injustice? It was provided in the Bill that any man now in the metropolitan force, who chose to enter the constabulary, might do so, and he would retain his full pay, which it was necessary to inform the House was £10 a year higher than the pay of that respectable force which sufficed for all the rest of Ireland. Then it ought to be remembered that by this Bill the salaries of the two Commissioners, which were paid now out of the Consolidated Fund, would eventually be saved to the country—a saving which would amount to £1,600 a year. But, said the right hon. Gentleman, there was no reason for this measure. His noble Friend, he thought, had settled that question by reading to the House the opinion of Sir Duncan M'Gregor, who was the most competent man in Ireland to give an opinion—who had been for twenty-five years at the head of the constabulary—not a native of the country, but respected by all for his impartiality and his many virtues, and that gentleman declared that the thing could be done easily and done well, and that the amalgamation would be attended with a great saving of life, because, when a policeman was worn out with his severe duties in the city, he could be sent to a quiet district in the country where his health would be recruited. But was that all? Look at the results of divided responsibility. They had now two Commissioners, Mr. O'Farrell and Colonel Browne. Sometimes those gentlemen spoke to each other when they met; sometimes they did not. He believed that in general they did not: the exception was when they did. They agreed to differ on all questions that related to the management of the force. It was impossible for the best disposed man who had ever had the government of Ireland entrusted to him to rule that force in the condition in which the governing body was now placed; and that was to be detected even in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman himself. When the officers in command were constantly endeavouring to counteract each other, what was the proper course to be pursued? Why, in London the number of police Commissioners had been reduced; and it was found to be for the advantage of the force that it should be governed by one head. And the proposition here was to reduce the Commissioners, and to place the force under the management of Sir Duncan Macgregor. He (Mr. Whiteside) had stated distinctly to the House that it had been said by the very person to whom the right hon. Gentleman had referred, that Protestants had no fair play in the force; not that he meant to say that Mr. O'Farrell would not do his best to remedy any grievance. He believed, however, that the governing body must be changed, and that a heavy responsibility would rest upon those who refused to effect that change; and the object of this Bill was not to turn out honest men who were willing to work in the public service, but to change the government of the force itself. With regard to the assertion that it was a sectarian measure, what had been the argument which had been addressed to the Government by the Roman Catholics of Belfast? "We call upon you to change this force, because it is a local and almost exclusively Protestant one." Well, it became the duty of the authorities to inquire into the complaint and see if it were well founded; and they ascertained that it was well founded to this extent, that the force was almost exclusively Protestant. Consequently they felt that it was impossible to apply a different rule to a Protestant force from that which was applied to a Roman Catholic force. The principle on which they acted was, that where a force had lost the confidence and goodwill of the inhabitants it ought to be changed, and the Members for Dublin had only spoken the truth when they said that a great number of the ratepayers were very much dissatisfied with the composition of the Dublin force. No doubt they were well trained; the men were most of them respectable men, all they wanted was good government; but that good government they had not, and nobody was more conscious of it than those who were endeavouring to govern them. This question had been forced on the Government; they had not sought it; they had found in the Government offices a mass of correspondence on the subject, which never could meet the public eye, and which was sufficient to coerce any honest men to bring in a Bill of this description. He submitted the Bill to the House, then, as a reasonable and just proposition, and he was satisfied that the more it was discussed the more it would commend itself to the impartial consideration and support of the House.

said, he rose to protest against the accusation which the Attorney General for Ireland had made against Mr. O'Farrell with regard to the treatment of Protestants.

I never mentioned his name. I simply referred to a Report which had been sent in to the Government. Here are the words:—

"The great evil in our force is a thorough conviction of the Protestants that they have not fair play. Some of their suspicions are unfounded; others, I believe, are well founded."

From whom does that come?

Colonel Browne.

Read the answer of Mr. O'Farrell to that statement The right hon. Gentleman has it in his possession. I give to that statement the fullest and most distinct contradiction. I can prove it by documents; and in justice to Mr. O'Farrell I ask the hon. Gentleman to read the answer given to Colonel Browne by Mr. O'Farrell. I tell the House that that letter is in his possession, and it contains a most distinct refutation of the charge. Let that refutation be produced. I protest against the unfairness of the course which, without notice, the right hon. Gentleman has adoped with reference to on absent public functionary.

I beg to move the adjournment of the debate, in order to give sufficient time for the production of the paper alluded to by my hon. Friend.

said, the Bill had been read a second time, and yet they had gone on debating the principle of the measure for two hours, and now an adjournment was moved. He wished to ask Mr. Speaker if that course was in accordance with the rules of the House.

said, there was nothing irregular in the course which the debate had taken.

said, he thought the right hon. Gentleman had been guilty of a breach of official decorum unparalleled in his recollection. He had often known gentlemen in the same office differ in opinion, and he had been perfectly aware of the want of concert between these two Commissioners; but he had never before known a Member of the Government read, in his place in Parliament, a letter from one member of a department reflecting on the official conduct of a colleague in the same department.

said, the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. FitzGerald) had distinctly declared that neither of the Commissioners had expressed dissatisfaction with the force, and that if they had he would have joined in reforming it. Was it a breach of official propriety to refer to an official paper, when it contained a complete answer to an assertion made in debate? He thought not. Moreover, the paper he had referred to did not attack an absent man; Colonel Browne stated that the Protestants had not fair play, but he did not say that it was owing to Mr. O'Farrell. The only fact stated was that the Protestants could not be got to enter into the force; and he did not believe any one would be censured by the House of Commons for speaking the truth.

explained, that what he had said was that if it were shown the force had assumed a sectarian character he would have joined in any measure to alter it. He did not think a disagreement in opinion between the Commissioners was a ground for dissolving the force. He was aware that there had been disagreements between those two officers, but he thought they were temporary. It was, however, part of the Bills of 1856, 1857, and the Bill intended to be introduced by the late Government in the present year, to vest the authority in one Commissioner, instead of two.

said, his complaint was that the right hon. Gentleman had read the letter of one Commissioner, and suppressed the answer of the other Commissioner to it.

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would lose no time in laying the correspondence on both sides before the House.

said, that he thought the Motion for the adjournment was, under the circumstances, unprecedented. A full opportunity for discussion would be given in Committee. If the Motion were persisted in it would look like an organized factious opposition.

said, he must protest against the imputation of factious motives. What would the people of London think if it were proposed to abolish their police, and substitute a military force?

said, he would move an Amendment to the effect that the rate of charge should be uniform.

regretted that the hon. Member should renew a question which had been settled.

said, he should support the Amendment.

said, the Amendment would destroy the self-supporting principle on which the Bill was based.

said, he would support the Amendment, as the graduated scale was socialistic in its tendency.

said, he thought an ex post facto marriage ought, as in Scotland, to legitimise a bastard.

said, the Lord Advocate would introduce clauses to assimilate the law of Scotland to that in England.

said, he wished to know if the Attorney General meant that the English law would be altered to the Scotch rule.

said, he only meant that the Scotch and English courts should, in the decision of cases of legitimacy, have the same amount of jurisdiction.