said, he would beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, Whether his attention has been called to the practical increase of Duties on Imparts into the United States consequent upon such Duties being payable only in specie, the premium on such specie being likely to be excessive owing to the gradually increasing depreciation of American Paper Currency?

said, that at present the Government had received no information that Congress had passed any Act declaring that Import Duties should be paid in specie. It might he so, but he was not aware that such was, the fact. Of course the effect in such case would be what the hon. Member had described.

in rising to call attention to the Papers presented in 1861, relating to Reforms in Turkey and to the mission of Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster to Constantinople, and to move an Address for copies of their Report on the Finances of Turkey, and of any correspondence that may have taken place between the Governments of France and England, relative to their mission, said: I very much regret, Sir, that my hon. Friend, the Member for Manchester (Mr. Bazley), who had intended to second and speak upon this Motion, has been obliged to go into the North, and that I shall lose the benefit of his valuable assistance. I must ask therefore, for the kind indulgence of the House while I call attention to the matters to which my Motion refers, and to the important English interests, commercial and political, which are involved in this exceedingly grave Turkish Question. I will not weary the House by any attempt to plunge into the mysteries of Turkish Finance, or by laying before it any details or supposed details of Turkish Revenue and Expenditure; we have quite enough to do with the details of Finance at home, and it is our first duty to press upon the Government of this country the necessity, if possible, of reducing our own enormous expenditure especially at a period when a large portion of our population is suffering from extreme distress—distress unavoidable but most nobly borne; and here let me say in passing to those suffering masses, that there is one thing which makes nations great in history, and in the long run populations happy, and that is the triumph of great principles over the lower motives of immediate personal or national gain. What I wish on the present occasion, is to call attention to the position of English interests in connection with the Turkish question; and to ask respectfully for that information of which the Government are in possession, which Gentlemen discharging important functions in this country have been sent to Constantinople to obtain, information which the people of this country, largely interested politically and commercially in everything which relates to Turkey, are I think not less entitled than any Member of Her Majesty's Government to possess. I wish also in very few words to advert to some of the leading reforms in Turkey, of which Lord Russell in able despatches has advised the adoption, and to ask whether substantial progress has been made in giving effect to any of them. At the present moment it is most desirable that we should have an expression of public opinion upon this subject. The Turkish Government, it is said, wants a fresh loan, and the capitalists of this country will be asked to provide one. Lord Russell in the papers presented to Parliament on reforms in Turkey says, and says truly, that public credit must follow and cannot precede reform. Lord Stratford tells us that public opinion, save in extreme cases, has no legitimate action in Turkey, and that the motive power must come from abroad. If, then, a loan is wanted, if reform must precede it, and if the action of public opinion cannot be brought to bear in Constantinople, an expression of public opinion here may have an effect in accelerating the march of reform in Turkey such as no other step that could be taken would have, Through banks, through loans, through imports and exports this country has an extensive commercial interest in the progress and well-being of the Turkish Empire, We have, also, an immense political interest in everything affecting its stability. Our trade with Turkey is a trade of great extent and importance. Our exports to Turkey, not including, of course, those to Moldavia and Wallachia, to Syria, or to Egypt, in 1861, fell but little short in value of our exports to the whole of the northern and southern ports of Russia combined. In 1860 they largely exceeded them. In manufactured cottons our export trade with Russia is very small, but it is very considerable with Turkey. In the supply of cotton stuffs to Turkey we have distanced our old competitors, Austria and Switzerland; and the trade admits, I believe, of great extension. In cotton yarn the value of our exports to Turkey was in 1861 nearly double, and in 1860 more than treble the value of our exports to Russia. Our general exports to Turkey exceed in value and in some years largely our exports to Prussia, and very largely our exports to Austria. They exceed in value, and in some years largely, our exports to Spain. Taking the last three years together, they have exceeded in value our exports to China by a sum of between two and three millions sterling. The total value of our exports to Turkey in 1861 was £ 2,988,443; in 1860 they amounted to £ 4,408,910—nearly four millions and a half. No doubt a large portion of these exports, though carried in ships that clear out for Constantinople, passes on to the Black Sea, and much of it passes in transit by way of Trebizond to Persia. But it is Turkey, which holds in Constantinople the keys of this extensive commerce. And here, Sir, let me implore Her Majesty's Government, for it is of immense importance to English commerce, to use their utmost efforts to procure the construction by the Turkish Government of a good road, with substantial bridges, from Trebizond by way of Erzeroum to Persia. A vast transit trade passes along this route, and Russia, I am informed, is making great efforts to divert it to the route by Baku and Poti which would be under her own control. The political and commercial consequences of such a diversion would be most serious, and I hope that the earnest attention of the Government will be directed to this transit trade. The whole of our extensive export trade with Turkey is materially affected by the financial and other derangements in that country. Our exports in 1861 were much less than in either of the two preceding years, and the trade returns for the first month of the present year show a still more serious diminution. A sound financial system lies at the root of all commercial operations and confidence, especially in a country governed as Turkey is by a despotism. Where the finances are in disorder, no man knows, from day to day, upon what branch of commerce or of productive industry the burden of State necessities, in the shape of oppressive or unwise taxation, may chance to fall. Our imports from Turkey are also of considerable magnitude. In 1861 the total value of them was £ 3,178,109. The chief items are madder, maize, and goat's wool or hair. I wish I could have added to these three the article of cotton. A Committee formed for promoting improvements in Syria, on which I sat last year, in conjunction with my hon. Friend the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs and others not Members of this House, made great efforts, and instituted inquiries, in order, if possible, to introduce the culture of cotton into Syria. I hope that my hon. Friend will be able to tell us that the Government have done something in order to induce the Turkish Government to improve their roads, for on this, after all, the culture of cotton must to a great extent depend. The improvement of the roads in Turkey was promised, if I remember rightly, in the Haiti Humayoun of 1856. I want to know if that promise has been redeemed. But, Sir, not only have we great com- mercial interests involved in the Turkish Empire, we have a great political interest in its stability as affecting the balance of power in Europe; as affecting our interests in the Mediterranean, and perhaps ultimately more than one of our routes to India—I mean the routes by the Euphrates and by Egypt. Lord Chatham, we are told, said that he did not take the trouble to discuss the question of the East with any one who did not see that the independence of the Ottoman Empire was a question of life and death for Great Britain. But, Sir, there lies also in the background of this grave Eastern question a great danger. Lord Statford de Redcliffe has referred to it in the able memorandum written, he says, as a last act of duty on leaving Constantinople. If Turkey is to continue weak, there lies, says Lord Stratford, in its continued weakness, the danger of a grand European struggle for its partition. To the protection of Turkey from such a source of danger, to the maintenance of its independence, prompt reforms and above all things the restoration of a sound financial condition are indispensable. Lord Russell seems to feel this strongly. In January of last year he directed our ambassador to call the serious attention of the Porte to the disordered state of its finances. In the following April he sent Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster to Constantinople to examine into, advise, and report upon them. Those gentlemen went to Constantinople. I believe that they were well received. They must have had great difficulties to encounter in dealing with Turkish accounts, but I believe that they surmounted them. After remaining in Constantinople six months they returned to England, and made a report, which, if produced, would, I have no doubt, prove to be a very full and valuable one on the finances of Turkey. This is one of the papers for which I ask on behalf of the public. As a loan is to be applied for, I think that the public are entitled to see it. Lord Russell in his instructions to Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster pointed out as an object of the utmost importance "publicity of the accounts of revenue and expenditure." Is publicity to be claimed at Constantinople and withheld in England? I believe that the action of public opinion in England which would follow publicity is the next best thing to the action of public opinion in Turkey, which at present we cannot hope to obtain. The Morning Post, which is supposed to enjoy the confidence of a distinguished portion of the Government, gave in November last what purported to be an account of this report. It anticipated the figures. It expressed its belief that the report of Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster would be found to be the most satisfactory and reassuring statement that had ever been presented touching the finances of the Turkish Empire. I know nothing of the report, and have no means of knowing its contents. I believe that, if published, it would show that there are considerable disorders in the finances of Turkey, but that the disorders which prevailed were within the reach of remedies if the Turkish Government would but set about the work of reform in a decided, prompt, and vigorous manner. Everything depends on that. As to the general reforms mentioned in the papers which have been laid before us, I shall only refer in few words to some of those most wanted, in order to ask my hon. Friend whether any substantial progress has been made in effecting them. Sir Henry Bulwer, writing in February, 1861, mentions three as most important. 1. The reorganization of the general system of police; 2. Reforms in the mode of levying the tithes; 3. The Reforms relating to the admission of Christian evidence in the tribunals. Now, I wish to ask my hon. Friend: Has the police been reformed? Are the tithes levied fairly, or is the produce left to rot on the ground until it pleases the assessor to come and extort, instead of a tenth, perhaps a fifth of its value? I wish also to ask: Is Christian evidence really admitted on equal terms before the tribunals? That is a very delicate and difficult question, and I shall be glad to know that some real progress has been made in relation to it. With regard to Financial Reforms adverted to, a telegram has been received this morning from Constantinople; but it only gives results, not details. Perhaps the Government can inform the House whether anything has been done to carry out those recommended by Lord Russell in his despatch of April in last year? Well then, Sir, I am anxious to know in what position we stand in this matter of the financial mission as regards our great ally the Emperor of the French. Was it proposed to him to unite with us in this financial mission? Was there any correspondence on the subject between the two Governments; and, if so, can it be produced? I do not ask this question, and it is one which I will not press, as matter of mere idle curiosity; but I feel most anxious upon this point, because, having for many years devoted much attention to this extremely interesting and, as I believe, important subject, I am convinced that the frank and cordial co-operation of the French and English Governments in connection with the Eastern Question is of the utmost importance both to the well-being of Turkey, and to the maintenance of European peace. I have referred, Sir, to the policy of Lord Chatham on the Eastern Question. That policy has been adopted by great ministers in England, though connected with different political parties. The policy of France has, I rejoice to think, been in the main identical with our own. It was referred to by M. Guizot some twenty-three years since as the policy of Henri IV., the policy of Richelieu, the policy of Louis XIV., the policy of the first Napoleon. It was defined to be, to maintain the balance of power in Europe, and, as a means of maintaining it, to maintain the Ottoman Empire according to the circumstances of the time and within the limits of the possible. I hope, Sir, that these last words do not now involve the risk of any possible divergence in the policy of France and England with reference to the Eastern Question. Since they were uttered. France and England have acted in concert in the Crimean war, at the Treaty of Paris, and in Syria. Our Ambassador has informed us that at Constantinople M. Thouvenel always acted in the most friendly manner. I believe, Sir, that France will loyally continue so to act that she will not undo at Alexandria or in Syria that which she does at Constantinople. I do most earnestly hope that all the Great Power, but the Governments of France and England in particular, in their relations with that interesting country and with those interesting populations to which my Motion refers, will look, not to the objects which sometimes prevailed formerly of gaining partisans in this sect or in that sect, among the Druses or the Maronites, the Protestants or the Catholics, the Greeks or the Armenians, but rather to the interests of the native races without distinction of race or creed, as well as to those great interests of humanity and civilization which, to a large extent, are mixed up with this important question. I trust that, in the interest of the native races, they will urge conjointly on the Government of the Porte, the adoption of large administrative and sound financial reforms—such reforms as I believe that the report of Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster have pointed out. On the prompt adoption of such reforms, not only the well-being of Turkey, but her national existence may depend. But, Sir, I trust that England and France, while acting in concert for the good of Turkey, will tell our friends the Turks frankly and plainly that, whether for financial reforms or independence, their opportunity has come—that in the history of nations as well as of individuals opportunities once lost seldom recur. They have upon the throne a young, sagacious, and energetic Sovereign. They have at the head of their Divan an able and enlightened Minister. The presence of Riza Pasha in the capital, and of Mehemet Ali Pasha in the Ministry, are, it is true, serious obstacles to the return of local or European confidence; but I trust that the firm will and clear-sightedness of the Sultan will speedily remove those obstacles. What Turkey wants is not continual interventions, not mediation, not a succession of financial missions, not wars waged by foreign nations to sustain her at a fearful sacrifice of life and treasure. She wants that strength which lies within her reach—that strength which springs from Hatti Sherifs and Hatti Humayouns not resting as idle promises on paper but enforced in practice—that strength which springs from wise laws well administered—that strength which enables Governments to throw themselves on the attachment of a well governed people, and to repel not only foreign invasions, but even interventions, if necessary, by force of arms. Believing that to the maintenance of the independence of Turkey the adoption of a sound system of finance is indispensable,—believing that the publication in this country of the report of Lord Hobart and Mr. Foster will accelerate the adoption of such a system, I beg, Sir, to place in your hands the Motion which stands on the Notice Paper in my name.

said, he rejoiced to find that there was an hon. Member of that House who took so much interest in the well-being of the Turkish Empire as his hon. Friend; and certainly his hon. Friend was, perhaps, as well entitled as any hon. Member to be heard on a subject to which he had given much attention. He entirely agreed with him that the interests of the Turkish Empire were intimately connected with those of this country. The maintenance of Turkey as a powerful, prosperous, and independent empire was a wise policy—a policy which had ever been advocated by the noble Lord now at the head of Her Majesty's Government, and which ought always to be advocated by any future Government of England. He equally concurred in the view taken by his hon. Friend as to the necessity for a cordial understanding on that matter with France. If this country and France understood one another, little fear need be entertained with regard to the independence of the Turkish Empire. His hon. Friend had dwelt on the state of Turkish finance. No doubt the independence and prosperity of an empire mainly depended upon the condition of its finances, and not long ago the state of Turkish finance was by no means encouraging. During the reign of the late Sultan the confusion seemed to increase almost daily. The civil list was exceeded by a very large amount; there was an entire want of control over the different officers of State, misgovernment in the provinces, foreign war, internal insurrection; and, to embarrass the Government still more, the salaries of all the public servants were in arrear, and the pay of the troops, generally speaking, from one year to two years behindhand. Attempts were made to remedy these evils, but without much success. Budgets were published, but they did little to satisfy the public, and much reliance could not be placed upon them. The consequence was that the exchange upon this country fell to an unprecedented extent, and the credit of the Turkish Empire, which ought to stand as high as that of any other country in the world, was almost destroyed in Europe. The late Sultan died, and was succeeded by the present Sultan Abdul Aziz. Although, according to established custom in Turkey, he had been excluded, while heir to the throne, from all connection with the outer world, some reports favourable to the character of Abdul Aziz had passed beyond the narrow precincts to which he was confined; and certainly those reports had not proved to be unfounded. The new Sovereign had shown great vigour of mind, great energy of character, great ability, and, what was even more than all these, an ardent love of his country, and an earnest desire to raise it to that prosperity which it deserved to attain. On ascending the throne he immediately set about making changes which he thought essential to the welfare of Turkey. Not only did he insist on these reforms being carried out by others, but he set the example himself. He at once reduced the civil list very considerably. Finding the salaries of the public servants in arrear, out of the savings of only a few months he himself sent a sum of money amounting to about £ 100,000 to pay up those arrears. Every department of the public service had been under his immediate supervision. It was of course difficult for a Prince who ascended the throne without that experience of government or knowledge of men which heirs to the Crown in the rest of Europe generally acquired, to initiate great reforms himself, or to carry them through successfully at once. But the present Sultan had shown so anxious a desire to introduce and to carry out reforms, that no doubt he would ultimately succeed—indeed, he had already succeeded to a degree far beyond what might have been expected. The difficulties with which he was surrounded were entirely inherited. The condition of Turkish finance during the reign of his predecessor had been such as to cause great anxiety to Her Majesty's Government. Earl Russell, who had always felt a deep interest in Turkey, had been desirous that something should be done to put her finances in order; and it was suggested that some gentlemen from this country, acquainted with our system of financial administration, should be sent out to Constantinople to inquire into the state of the Turkish finances and give their advice and assistance to the Turkish Government. Two gentlemen were selected for this purpose—one of them Mr. Forster, of the Pay Office, the other Lord Hobart, of the Board of Trade—both having great experience and being well-known in their respective departments. They went to Constantinople, and were received very cordially by the Turkish Government, who evinced great confidence in them, placed at their disposal all the information they possessed, and gave them permission to inspect the public accounts. Moreover, the Commissioners obtained most valuable aid from Her Majesty's Ambassador, who had devoted great attention to Turkish finance, and derived great assistance from our Consuls and Vice Consuls in Turkey, men of great intelligence and attainments, who furnished reports upon the condition of the various provinces with which they were connected. Upon the information thus procured those two gentlemen prepared a report, which they submitted to the Sultan and the Turkish Government. Whatever his hon. Friend had heard of that report, it certainly deserved all the praise that had been bestowed upon it. It was a most able, and, what was of more importance, a very practical document. It suggested no wild schemes; it did not recommend to the Porte any of those extravagant measures the adoption of which had been over and over again pressed upon it; for no sick man had ever had a greater variety of prescriptions urged upon him by the physicians assembled round his couch than had the unfortunate Turkish Empire. The reforms and measures suggested were eminently practical, and could be at once adopted by the Turkish Government; but, perhaps, the most gratifying feature of the report was, that it showed there was nothing fundamentally rotten or bad in the state of Turkish finance, that the difficulties into which it had fallen arose entirely from mismanagement and want of experience, and that with a very little sound management and good will those difficulties could be got over and a balance restored between revenue and expenditure. The report, as he had stated, was prepared to be submitted to the Sultan and the Turkish Government. Those gentlemen were not sent out directly for the service of this country, but for that of the Turkish Government. It was the desire of Her Majesty's Government that their knowledge and experience should be placed at the command of the Turkish Government. On that understanding the Turkish Government had treated them with great con- fidence, and had placed all the information they possessed at their disposal. His hon. Friend would therefore see that it would be a breach of the confidence reposed in the Commissioners, and consequently in Her Majesty's Government also, to publish the report, unless the consent of the Turkish Government were previously obtained. The report had not been prepared for idle purposes. Its object was to show the Turkish Government how they could remedy the present state of things, and regulate their finance so as to restore an equilibrium between revenue and expenditure. It was very possible that the publication of the report at the present moment would frustrate the object in view. Therefore, if hon. Members wished to serve Turkey, that object would be better accomplished by withholding the report until the recommendations therein contained should have been carried out. Her Majesty's Government had no objection to the production of the document other than this, that it might defeat the object which they wished to see accomplished. When that object should have been attained, and the consent of the Turkish Government obtained, they would immediately produce it. His hon. Friend had asked what reforms had been effected in Turkey. His reply was, that very considerable reforms had been already carried out, while others were in progress. In the first place, the present Sultan on coming to the throne endeavoured to find out the most capable, and, what was still more important, the most honest men to whom he could confide the administration of public affairs. The first person he selected was Achmet Vefyk Effendi—whose name was already well known to those who took any interest in Turkey, a statesman of European reputation, he might say even of genius, of vast information, and of most scrupulous honesty—and placed him at the head of a very important department—the administration of the "Vakoufs" or property given in trust to mosques and religious bodies for charitable purposes, or to be held in trust for individuals. The "Vakoufs" formed a very large branch of public revenue. He believed that already the administration of that department by Achmet Vefyk Effendi had resulted in a considerable gain to the revenue. A commission of finance was also named, and at the head of it was placed Fuad Pasha, the present Prime Minister, a statesman well-known both in this country and elsewhere for his great ability. His hon. Friend had alluded to the telegram which had announced that a budget had been published at Constantinople. He had not seen the details; but if what was stated in the telegram was true, it disclosed a very gratifying fact—namely, that the revenue of Turkey was £ 800,000 in excess of the expenditure. It was important to remember, that although Turkey had been in financial difficulties, her floating debt was very small. She had only £ 14,000,000 of foreign debt; and the whole interest on her foreign and domestic debts together amounted to only one-eighth of her revenue. Again, her taxation was exceedingly light—he believed only one-sixth of that of this country, but hitherto it had been very unequally distributed. The system of farming what might be termed the tithes referred to by his hon. Friend was a very old and objectionable one and much needed reform. The "Verghi," a kind of property tax assessed on towns and villages, had not been changed for a long period of time. The consequence was, that sums levied on villages many years ago, when those villages were prosperous, were still raised, though the places were, comparatively speaking, deserted; and, vice versa, small sums imposed on a country that was thinly populated at the time the tax was assessed, were still collected, although the district had now become thickly inhabited. However, he believed it was the intention of the Sultan and his Government to revise the "Verghi," and to do away with the farming system. Many of the financial difficulties of Turkey had arisen from the detestable system of farming the revenue. The present Sultan had determined to abolish that system, and had already done so to some extent. The consequence would be that the revenue would flow direct to the Turkish treasury, instead of being absorbed by nefarious agents through whose hands it had to pass. Another very important measure was the Treaty of Commerce just concluded with this country and other countries. Before that treaty was entered into, exports from Turkey were subject to a duty of 12 per cent. That had been at once reduced to 8 per cent. and was to be further reduced 1 per cent each year till it came down to 1 per cent. The imports were charged with a general duty of 8 per cent. He might say that no country had shown a more liberal commercial spirit than Turkey, and he believed she would derive no small advantage from that liberality. The trade of Turkey was capable of great extension. No empire was richer in its resources; a vast extent of territory of every diversity of soil and climate, from Moldavia and Wallachia to the mouth of the Euphrates, yielded products of great variety and value, which would be brought into the market by the operation of the treaty. He believed that the treaty would prove of equal advantage to Turkey and to this country. In order to make up for temporary loss of revenue, the Turkish Government had made monopolies of tobacco and salt; and a duty was to be imposed on them, from which a large revenue would be realized. Another reform undertaken was the abolition of the separate credits of the Ministers. Under that very objectionable system each Minister had power to issue bonds for liabilities contracted in his own department; and as that power might be exercised without any restraint whatever, the Sultan could never possess an accurate knowledge of the state of his finances. That system had been abolished. A Finance Minister had been appointed, who would have the sole control of the finances of the country. His hon. Friend was desirous of knowing whether the system of police had been reformed. He believed that up to the present time no very extensive reform had been effected; but there were great difficulties in the way. He was sorry to say that the police in Constantinople and the principal cities were chiefly required, not for the Turks, but for the Europeans. The state of crime among the Mahomedan inhabitants of Constantinople would contrast favourably with that in any Christian city in Europe. There was a time when a Turk scarcely ever thought of locking his door when he retired to rest. Crime chiefly abounded among the foreign residents—for this reason: the European Powers through their representatives claimed, by virtue of what are termed "capitulations," exclusive jurisdiction over their own subjects, and the Turkish police were not allowed to interfere. The consequence was, that crime was committed by foreigners with impunity. England was the first Power that offered to renounce this claim. To aid the Turks, we had now established at Constantinople a very efficient consular court, under Sir Edmund Hornby, by means of which law was dispensed, and with its assistance the Turks were now better able to enforce good order among the subjects of this country. He trusted that in time an effective system of police would be introduced in Turkey. The admission of Christian evidence in Turkish courts of law was a very important point; and he could not help thinking that in the consideration of such a question this country did not always act fairly towards the Turks. We never made allowance for the immense difficulties which a Government, situated as that of Turkey was, had in introducing such reforms. We knew how many years—he might say centuries—it had taken in this country to introduce the most necessary reforms, more especially those connected with religion; and when we asked the Turks to put the Christian on the same footing as the Mahomedan, we ought to bear in mind that hitherto they had been taught to look on the Christian religion as an antagonistic element. It was not surprising, therefore, that they should be somewhat afraid to place Christians on the same legal footing as themselves. He had no doubt but that the best policy they could pursue would be to give the fullest liberty to their Christian fellow subjects, to concede to them equal rights with the Mahomedans, as they would thereby conciliate large numbers who were now discontented and antagonistic to the Government. The enlightened men now at the head of affairs in Turkey were, he believed, fully aware of this. The policy of religious and legal equality was initiated by that eminent statesman, Redschid Pasha, and Fuad Pasha was the most distinguished pupil in the school of politicians founded by him. Other leading politicians in Turkey were animated by the same spirit, and he believed that the time was not far distant when the Christian population would be put upon the same footing as the Mahomedan. Already, in the question of evidence, the reform had been carried through in the commercial courts. But we must give the Turkish Government time. Unfortunately, Turkey had never as yet had a fair chance. Internal peace and tranquillity were required for the introduction of great and important reforms. He did not wish at the present moment to enter into the reasons why Turkey had not had internal tranquillity. But there were elements which had been constantly at work. Whether these had been intended to prevent the prosperity of Turkey he did not now pretend to say; but he did assert that those elements to which he had alluded had prevented the internal tranquillity of the country. Until time and opportunity had been afforded for the development of great reforms, it would be difficult for Turkey to advance with anything like rapid progress; but such was his confidence in the character of the Sultan, that he believed he would overcome all his difficulties, and that an era of prosperity was in store for Turkey. He had never altered his opinion. What he had stated when he was first returned to that House he now repeated—namely, that he had great hopes in Turkey. He did not, of course, for a moment attempt to justify the misgovernment and oppression which had existed in that country; but there was a fundamental honesty in the Turkish population which was greatly in their favour. The Government had shown equal honesty in their dealings with their foreign creditors. They paid the dividends on their foreign debts to the day. They had never been in arrear—they had never repudiated. It was true that, like other persons in difficulties, they had sometimes endeavoured to put off a large payment to the last moment; but they were strictly honest, and had shown themselves aware of the value of public credit. He thought that the Turkish Government could not do better than endeavour to carry out the able and practical suggestions contained in the valuable report, for which he hoped his hon. Friend would not press until a time when it might be laid on the table with the sanction of those for whose benefit it had been drawn up, and without detriment to their advantage.

said, that under the circumstances he had no objection to withdraw his Motion.

said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the question of the Consolidation of the Statutes; and to ask Mr. Attorney General, Whether it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Consolidation Bills prepared under the direction of the late Statute Law Commission? The present state of the question, and the little that remained to be done, would be best understood by the House if he gave a short account of the consolidation of the statutes, and what had already been effected. For more than two centuries the subject had occupied the attention of legislators, lawyers, and statesmen; but nothing was effected in the way of legislation until the year 1826, when the late Sir Robert Peel, with the aid of Lord Tenterden, succeeded, although in a limited and imperfect manner, in consolidating the statutes relating to the criminal law. Political events for some time interrupted the course of legislation, but in the year 1833 the first Statute Law Commission—emanating from Lord Brougham, the great law reformer of the day, and who then held the seals—was appointed to consider the state of the statute law, and more especially the criminal law, and to submit to His Majesty a scheme by which that law could be consolidated. Between 1833 and 1852 inclusive no less than seven commissions were directed to some of the most experienced judges and lawyers of the day. Thirteen reports and numerous Bills, schemes and plans, were submitted to the Government from time to time; but inasmuch as all these schemes involved, not only the consolidation of the statutes and the amendment of the statute law, but also the impracticable task of the codification of the entire common law of England, the commissioners failed in their efforts. In 1852, under the auspices of Lord St. Leonards, Mr. Greaves and Mr. Lonsdale were instructed to submit a Bill to Parliament, not only for the consolidation and amendment, but also, to some extent, for the codification of the criminal law. A Bill was prepared; but when it came to be submitted to a Committee of the house of lords, so large and extensive were its objects, and so many and so great the difficulties that beset the first step in the undertaking, that after some seven or eight days had been spent by the Law Lords, no more than three clauses of that Bill, which contained 1,000 provisions, were agreed to; and even with regard to these three clauses, considerable difference of opinion existed. Every scheme having failed, in 1854 Lord Cranworth, who then held the seals—and whom he could not name in connection with the subject without paying him the tribute of saying, that if the statute law of this country should ever be consolidated, more praise must be ascribed to that noble and learned Lord than to any other individual in the community—brought into existence the Statute Law Commission. In 1856 the first real and effective steps were taken towards consolidation on a plan submitted to the Commission. It was found that the whole of the 40 volumes of statutes at large—each volume containing, on an average, not less than 1,000 closely-printed pages, and comprising altogether between 40,000 and 50,000 statutes—might, by a proper system of consolidation, be reduced to somewhere about four volumes, and that the 40,000 or 50,000 statutes might be reduced to some 200 or 300 in number, each statute being confined to a single subject, and embracing within itself all that pertained to that subject. In order to satisfy the Government of the day and the public that the task might be accomplished, the attempt was first made in relation to the criminal statute law. In 1856, with the assistance of Lord Chief Justice Jervis, Lord Wensleydale, and Mr. Greaves, the whole of the criminal law of England was consolidated and comprised within seven Bills which it was proposed to submit to Parliament. These Bills afforded a fair specimen of what could be effected in the way of consolidation. They were, however, too late to be laid before Parliament that Session. In 1857 they were brought into the House of Lords by Lord Cranworth. They underwent the consideration, and he thought he might say the severe criticism, of a Select Committee of the House of Lords. These Bills passed the House of Lords with some Amendments, and came down to the House of Commons in the course of that Session. Political questions, however, of greater moment, which had been so often fatal to the consolidation of the law, effectually prevented any further steps being taken at that time. Parliament was dissolved in the course of that Session, and when it re-assembled there were too many other matters demanding attention to permit of any further progress being made that year towards consolidation. In 1858 the Bills were again submitted to the House of Lords. In that year there was a change of Government, and it was found impossible to pass the Bills, even through their first effective stage in that House. A great deal however was done in 1858. The Statute Law Commission, satisfied with the success of the attempt to consolidate the criminal statute law, proceeded with the assistance of competent professors of the law, to frame several other Bills, which they were prepared to submit to Parliament. Another event occurred in 1858 of the greatest importance in connection with the subject. The attention of his right hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Whiteside) having been directed to the subject, he was induced to undertake the assimilation of the criminal statute law of England and Ireland. He took counsel with the then Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Mr. Napier); and although it was found impossible to make any progress in 1858, yet at an early period of 1859 his right hon. and learned Friend, and those who assisted him, were prepared with a series of Amendments to the Bills, which had been almost perfected in England, by which the ciriminal statute law of the two countries was united and assimilated, and in effect, therefore, made to form a complete consolidation. In 1859 a dissolution of Parliament took place, and when Parliament reassembled it was impossible to do more than lay the measure on the table of the House. During 1860 these Bills were considered and revised, and in some respects amended by the present Government; and here, again, he could not but offer his humble tribute of praise to the noble Lord who now held the Great Seal, who, from the moment the question of consolidation was submitted to him, had done all that one man could do to aid in that great work. Those Bills, having passed through the house of lords, afterwards passed through the Lower House, and the statute law of England and Ireland thus united and assimilated became a portion of the consolidated statute law of the realm. What had been been done with the criminal statute law of England and Ireland might likewise be done with the other statutes of both countries. While all our criminal law had been thus consolidated in seven statutes, each upon one single branch of that law, but each embracing all the statutory provisions in respect of that one branch, we had nevertheless the law thus consolidated still dispersed through the statute-book in no less than 106 different Acts of Parliament. But how slight was the effect produced, and how almost useless were the efforts bestowed upon the matter, would be understood when he informed the House, that if any gentleman were to-morrow, upon becoming a Member of Parliament, a Barrister, or a Magistrate, to purchase the Statutes at large, he would probably have to pay a sum of 40 guineas for about 42 volumes, containing, among the rest, the 106 statutes which had been repealed. It was obvious, before any consolidation of the law could be really effected, that some analysis of the whole of the statute law should take place—that some complete and accurate index should be framed, pointing out what statutes, and parts of statutes, were still in force and what had been repealed. Accordingly, two gentlemen, Mr. Wood and Mr. Riley, with some assistance, were instructed to prepare an expurgatorial index of the statutes, beginning with the year 1858 and going backward, taking the Acts of Parliament as they had been passed Session by Session, and arranging their provisions so as to show at one view what statutes were in force, what were repealed, what had expired, or become obsolete. It might interest the House to know that that work had been carried back to the year 1800, the time of the Union between England and Ireland, and that the statutes passed between 1800 and 1858 occupied 23 out of 12 volumes, and that (with the exception of local Acts) they were to be found in extenso in 6,887 Acts of Parliament. Therefore any one washing to possess a moderate law library would have to pay a large price and to encumber himself with a load of nearly 7,000 statutes. He would now state what number of them were in force. Out of 6,887 statutes 3,371 were still wholly or in part, but many of them only in part, operative, and 3,516, or more than half to be found in extenso in every edition of the statutes at large, were absolutely waste paper. If those statutes were still further expurgated, and if the work recommended by the Statute Law Commission were proceeded with in a proper manner, it was manifest that those twenty-three volumes might be reduced to three; and those three, smaller in bulk than any of the twenty-three which now existed, would comprise the whole of the operative statute law of the kingdom, from the year 1800 to the present time. Although the Government had not proceeded with the Bills prepared by the Statute Law Commission, they had availed themselves largely of the expurgatorial index upon which Mr. Wood was engaged. In the last Session they had not only passed the Criminal Consolidation Acts, but they had passed one single Act, which by a clause of four or five lines repealed no less than 1,000 old Acts of Parliament passed at various times, and many of which, though not before repealed, had become entirely obsolete. But the statute-book still remained the same, still consisted of forty-two volumes, still contained those Acts in extenso; and it became necessary for persons who wished to know the state of the law to find their way through forty-two volumes, and by the aid of the Repealing Act to see what laws were repealed and what were still in force. Now, if he were to stop there and put it to his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General whether it was fit that the Government, having done so much, should hold their hands and do no more, the House would expect some insuperable difficulties to be suggested to justify the delay which had occurred in proceeding with this work. But he must remind his hon. and learned Friend that under the same auspices and sanctioned by the same authority which had justified the submission to Parliament of the seven consolidated statutes, no less than ninety Bills were now in existence requiring only the revision of some competent person to bring them into such a condition that they might be fearlessly laid by any lawyer upon the table of that House. During the time that the Statute Law Commission was in existence, from the beginning of 1856 to the end of 1859, in addition to the Criminal Acts of Parliament, those ninety Bills were framed upon almost all the most important subjects affecting the community. Were there any such formidable obstacles now existing as would prevent those Bills from being proceeded with, and thus having a great and important progress made in the consolidation of the statute law? If those ninety Bills were passed, that circumstance, taken in conjunction with what had been already done in the way of consolidation and repeal, would enable the statute book to be reduced from forty-two volumes to at most seven or eight. He was aware of the difficulty arising out of the question as to what tribunal or authority should be selected for the execution of the task; but if the creation of a Minister of Justice should be thought doubtful or impracticable, a Board, consisting of three or four lawyers of eminence, might be appointed to undertake the revision of those ninety Bills, and then to proceed to the consolidation of the remaining part of the statute law. If expense were suggested as an objection to the adoption of such a system, he might mention that a calculation had been made showing that, were the suggestion of the Commissioners adopted with regard to the framing of Bills, no less than £ 60,000 a year might, in all probability, be saved in printing in relation to Bills and Acts of Parliament. He would, therefore, solicit the attention of Her Majesty's Attorney General to the expediency of giving effect to what had already been done in respect to the expurgatorial index of Mr. Wood and his colleague, and of proceeding with it and carrying it back at least to the time of Elizabeth or Henry VIII. He also wished to entreat the attention of his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General to the ninety Bills already in existence. In conclusion, he would call the attention of the House and the Government to the last Report made to Her Majesty by the Statute Law Commission, in which it was stated—

"The time in which the whole work may be completed must depend on the number of hands employed; but assuming, as our experience enables us to do, that ten or twelve gentlemen may be constantly employed, we think it fair to anticipate that the whole work may be completed in about three years; and if at the end of that time we are able to present to your Majesty the whole of the Statutes coming under the class of General Laws, filling only about three volumes, but comprising all, or nearly all, the Statutes of a general nature now scattered in about forty volumes, we venture to think that our labours will not have been in vain."

said, it was extremely gratifying to hear from his hon. and learned Friend that the work of consolidation was, in point of fact, all but completed. The largest result, in the opinion of his hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Suffolk, that could possibly be expected was the reduction of the volumes of the statute law to four; and it appeared that owing to the labours already bestowed upon the work the number might be reduced to seven, as no less than ninety Bills were in existence, consolidating all the existing Acts upon as many different subject. It cer- tainly seemed very extraordinary that those ninety Bills, prepared at such a great expense, should have been for so long a time allowed to remain in abeyance. In point of fact, if Her Majesty's Government were only to avail themselves of what was already made to hand, the laws of the land were consolidated. He begged to ask his learned Friend the Attorney General whether he intended so vast a mine of wealth to remain useless to the country? With respect to what had been accomplished during the last Session, he found from his own experience that the work was not quite so beneficial as his hon. and learned Friend opposite seemed to imagine. He referred to the cousolidation of the criminal law which then took place; or, in other words, to the consolidation of what was known as Peel's Acts, and certain Irish Acts, with portions of other Acts. The consolidation of parts of Acts was a most objectionable mode of procedure, because, as was natural to suppose, every one having anything to do with criminal statutes would infinitely prefer having to consult only one Act of Parliament instead of two. He would take, for instance, the 14 & 15 Vict., c. 100—one of Lord Campbell's Acts. Suppose it became necessary to refer to that Act, it would also be necessary to refer to the Criminal Statutes Repeal Act of last Session to ascertain whether any particular section in Lord Campbell's Act had been repealed in whole or in part, or not repealed at all. Lord Campbell's Act contained thirty-two sections, of which nine were wholly repealed, two partly repealed, and the rest left altogether un-repealed. As had already been admitted by the hon. and learned Attorney General, it would be requisite to introduce another Bill upon the subject of criminal law consolidation—namely, a Procedure Bill. His main object, however, was to impress upon his hon. and learned Friend the necessity of utilizing the ninety Bills already in existence. If the whole of them could not at once be passed into law, at least a selection could be made, and even then most valuable results would be attained.

said, that he need not follow his hon. and learned Friend through the history he had given of statute law consolidation for the last thirty years; but if he were to do so, he should not be at variance with him. He entirely agreed in what had been said as to the importance of the expurgation and abridgment of the statute-book. He was happy to add, that for the purpose of carrying forward and finally accomplishing that most desirable work, persons of skill, and whose ability had been tested—he meant Mr. "Wood and his colleague, Mr. Reilly—had been for some time past busily and zealously, and he had no doubt efficiently, continuing their labours. The Statute Law Commission, as the House were aware, was appointed in 1854. It proceeded with its work during the following years down to 1859. It engaged the assistance of gentlemen of experience in drawing bills, and these gentlemen, of course, required payment for their services. Session after session, a Vote was taken for the Statute Law Commission; but in 1859, the present Government being then in power, Lord Campbell announced in the House of Lords that it was not intended further to continue the commission: and the usual Vote, subsequently brought forward by accident, was opposed and negatived. Of course, the funds failing, the Commission fell to the ground. Mr. Wood and Mr. Reilly, who had been engaged in the preparation of that most admirable register to which allusion had been made by his hon. and learned Friend, were, however, instructed by the Government to proceed, and to take the proper steps for bringing out an expurgated edition of the statutes, containing only the acts in force, and omitting such as were only of a local and personal nature. The register of obsolete Acts had no doubt been found of great value in the preparation of the Repeal Act of last Session (the first of an intended series), which, on that account, had gone upwards from its date, instead of commencing with the earliest portion of the statute-book. But the register went no further back than to the commencement of the present century, and only included Acts of whose repeal there could be no doubt. The Repeal Act referred to occupied the same period as the register, but it proceeded thirty years higher up; and by that single enactment nearly a thousand Acts or parts of Acts had been rescinded, which, though manifestly obsolete, had not till then been formally repealed. There was a class of Acts which could not find its way into the Register, but which must be taken cognizance of for the purposes of the expur- gated edition, inasmuch as they could not be said to be without legal force, although they might have grown somewhat inapplicable and obsolete. These Acts, which required to be repealed by Act of Parliament to make it perfectly clear that they no longer formed part of the statute-book, were—Acts repealed in general terms; Acts virtually repealed, as where an earlier enactment was inconsistent with or rendered nugatory by a later one; superseded Acts, as where a later enactment was to the same effect as an earlier one; and Acts which had become obsolete, either because the state of things contemplated by the enactment had ceased to exist, or because the enactment was of such a nature as to be no longer capable of being enforced. These were the classes of Acts with which the gentlemen whom he had mentioned had to deal, and, as he had said, an Act had been already passed whereby about 1,000 of these spent, repealed, and obsolete statutes were removed from the statute-book. The learned gentlemen who were engaged in that important work were continuing their labours. Another Bill had been laid on the table of the other House of Parliament towards the close of the last Session, carrying the work of expurgation from the earliest period to the end of the reign of Edward III. The Bill was not on that occasion further proceeded with; but it had been again taken up, and would be immediately continued to the end of the reign of Henry VII. A Bill so extended would, he hoped, become law during the present Session The two volumes which contained the statutes of that period consisted of 1,092 pages; of these the forthcoming Bill would repeal 476, leaving 616, of which there would be excluded from the expurgated edition about 347, leaving to be printed only 269. He had received a communication from these two gentlemen stating their belief that an equal or greater reduction might be made in the reign of Henry VIII and subsequent reigns. In that manner an effectual expurgation of the statutes would be accomplished. Thus far he believed he was in perfect accord with his hon. and learned Friend. But his hon. and learned Friend had further asked, whether it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the statutes prepared under the direction of the late Statute Law Commission. He presumed that his hon. and learned Friend was referring to the ninety Bills which were prepared under the direction of the Commission. Now, he found, on reference to the last report of the Commission, dated in February 1859, a statement that the Bills had been prepared before the Commissioners had the advantage of the register which had been prepared. In consequence of that, they reported that some further change might be necessary; but they considered that some of the Bills were in a state in which they might properly be submitted to Parliament. Four of them, if he remembered rightly, had been laid on the table of the House of Lords; but in introducing them Lord Cranworth said, that they were produced merely as specimens, and not for the purpose of being passed through the House. Now he had seen the Bills, and whilst he would be the last man to disparage the labours of the Commission or of the learned gentlemen employed by it, he trusted he should not be misunderstood when he said, that the bulk of the Bills, he might say the Bills generally, were not in a condition to be laid before Parliament. He had no doubt that these bills contained a great mass of matter which would prove very valuable; and besides the construction of the Register, which was a very useful work, he believed none of the labours of the Commission would be unattended with advantage; but it was not the present intention of the Government to proceed with the Bills as they stood. He trusted, however, that they might see the work of expurgating the statute-book speedily accomplished.

said, that in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to provide further accommodation for the Courts of Justice, he wished to premise that the measure was founded on the recommendations of the Commission which sat in 1860. He need not detain the House by dwelling on the insufficient accommodation at present provided for conducting legal proceedings in the Courts of the Metropolis. Any one who would look at Westminster Hall would see that the buildings adjacent were very unfit for the purposes for which they were originally intended. As the population, the wealth, and the commerce of the country increased, so had the accommodation diminished, and the buildings which formerly might have been adequate were now become inconvenient. The present Courts were built between the years 1820 and 1825, and though the architect, Sir John Soane, had displayed great ingenuity in putting to advantage the space at his disposal, and in placing each Court between the buttresses of Westminster Hall, yet there was not sufficient accommodation for the persons frequenting the spot. There was no waiting-room for the jury or witnesses, no library for the barristers, and, with the exception of two consultation-rooms, there was no place where the opposing parties could meet; and it occasionally happened that a barrister and solicitor were discussing their cause in one corner of a small room, and the adverse barrister and solicitor discussing the other side of the question in the same room. Then the single entrance was so narrow that the order and decorum of the Courts were often interfered with, and that tone of propriety which ought to prevail could not be maintained. The Probate Registries also, which were separate from the Court, were utterly insufficient for their present purposes, and the utmost inconvenience was often felt in consequence of the remoteness of the registry from the Courts. The buildings near Doctors' Commons oc- cupied by the Registrars were well fitted for temporary purposes, but would not be sufficient to hold the documents necessary to enable the increased business to be carried on. Then the Courts which were held in Lincoln's Inn were placed in buildings which were never intended for the purpose, two of the Vice Chancellors' Courts having been run up in a great hurry, and there were universal complaints that they were too hot in summer, too cold in winter, and exposed to many other inconveniences. The chambers in which the Vice Chancellors had to sit to hear parties might be well suited for barristers, but were utterly unfit for judicial business. From that brief survey of the manner in which the different Courts and offices were lodged, it would be seen that a considerable sum of money would be required, and that was the time to consider whether some comprehensive plan ought not to be adopted which should provide, not only for the pressing wants of the moment, but also afford means of future extension, and give those advantages which all the legal profession acknowledged would arise from concentration under one roof or in one neighbourhood of all the Courts. The matter was well considered by the Royal Commission, which reported in 1860; they gave very strong reasons for concentration, and recommended the site which the Bill on the table proposed to provide. That site lay between Carey Street on the north, the Strand on the south, Bell Yard on the east, and Clement's Inn on the west, and seemed to be the best that could be found for the purpose in the Metropolis. It was in what was called the legal district, being inhabited by barristers and solicitors, and being the place where the legal business was mostly carried on. The plan had another advantage, which was that the site proposed consisted of a series of courts, alleys, and small streets, which were in an unwholesome and discreditable condition, and which ought to be removed. There was no carriage thoroughfare through the whole site; the inhabitants consisted partly of persons who lived by the law, and partly of persons who lived by breaches of the law, and appeared oftener in the dock than as hangers-on of the Courts. The Royal Commission, having unanimously recommended the site, then proceeded to show whence the funds for the purchase might be procured. It fortunately happened that there was vested in the Accountant General of the Court of Chancery a sum amounting to about £ 1,400,000, consisting of two separate investments of stock—one called the Surplus Interest Fund amounting to £ 1,290,000, and the other the Surplus Suitors' Fee Fund amounting to £ 200,000. The history of those two funds was somewhat complicated. They were the produce of investments made from time to time by the Accountant General, under orders of the Court of Chancery. It was the custom of the Court of Chancery to require that any money which was the subject of a suit should be paid into Court at the commencement of the case, to be kept ready for distribution to such of the parties as might prove they were entitled to it. There were many cases in which, from the smallness of the sum, the negligence of the parties, or other causes, no order was obtained for the investment of the cash, and it was therefore carried to the account of the general balance of cash held by the Accountant General, and he was simply bound to repay the amount if called for. Previously to the year 1725 it was customary for the Masters and ushers of. the Court of Chancery to invest the money for their own advantage; but some defalcations having taken place when the South Sea bubble burst, an Act of Parliament was passed having for its object to indemnify the suitors, and accordingly certain fees were levied on writs and processes for that purpose. The Act also provided that after all claims were paid the remainder should be reserved for the benefit of the public in such a way as Parliament might direct, and that was the commencement of the fund under consideration. About ten Acts were passed in succession, enabling the Accountant General to invest certain sums, and authorizing him to carry the proceeds to his general balance. Finally an Act was passed which empowered the Lord Chancellor to give orders for such investments in all cases. The result was that a sum of £ 1,290,000 had accumulated. The money might be said to belong to nobody. Former suitors were not entitled to it, it did not belong to suitors at the present moment, and the fund was, in fact, created by virtue of the Act of Parliament authorizing the Accountant General of the Court of Chancery to invest the money. There had been various occasions in the past and present century where, in compliance with Acts of Parliament and decrees of the Court of Chancery, sums had been paid out of the fund for purposes similar to the present. In Ireland, also, funds which had accrued from payments by suitors were employed in enlarging the Four Courts at Dublin; so that there were precedents for the course he proposed to take of appropriating the money to the erection of courts of law and justice. As the fund had originally proceeded from duties levied in the common law courts, no distinction between the propriety of its application to courts of law and courts of equity could well be maintained. The Suitor's Fee Fund had no claim upon it, because it resulted from the surplus of unappropriated fees. Both these funds occupied very much the same position as the reserve kept by a banker to meet any demands which might possibly, though by no means probably, be made. These two funds, now invested in Consols, if sold would realize about £ 1,400,000. But, as they at present formed a guarantee for certain charges, it would be necessary that the Consolidated Fund should be substituted for them. It was scarcely possible, at the same time, that any real liability would attach, because the Suitors' Fund could be called in only in the very improbable contingency of the Court of Chancery being wound up and the stock sold. The money, moreover, having been invested, on the average, at a price below eighty-six, it followed that a deficiency could only arise in case the whole of the fund had to be converted into money at less than that rate. The fact that the surplus interest fund had gone on accumulating for a number of years sufficiently showed that no apprehensions need be entertained on that score. The employment of those funds would necessitate the abstraction of the dividends at present received, which were carried to the Suitors' Fee Fund. From that fund £ 90,000 was paid in charges for pensions, salaries, and relieving allowances. As he proposed to diminish the fund by £ 35,000 a year, he had to consider how any detriment arising to the fund from that abstraction should be provided for. There was a charge upon the fund of £ 69,000 a year for compensation allowances, which would terminate with the lives of the existing parties.

here moved that the House be counted; but notice being taken that there were forty Members present,

said, he would not trouble the House with further details of a matter which seemed to be disagreeable to hon. Gentlemen opposite, and therefore it would be enough to state that the maximum charge which could be thrown on the public Exchequer would be £ 35,000, and it by no means followed that that sum would be thrown on the public taxation. The Exchequer during the last year had received from fees in the common law courts and Court of Probate no less a sum than £ 34,000.

said, he rose to order. He wished to ask whether the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman did not fall within the scope of the standing order which required that any Motion for public aid or charge upon the people should be brought in in Committee of the Whole House.

This, being money of the Court of Chancery, does not come under the description of public money. But if there be a guarantee on the part of the public—as I understand will be the case—the clause embodying such guarantee will have to pass through a Committee of the Whole House.

said, the objection of the hon. Gentleman would not prevail, because the monies which would be expended under the Bill would be voted by the House, and the guarantee would be added to the Bill in Committee. As he had said, there might be thrown upon the public a charge equivalent to the amount received from fees, but the result of the employment of the two funds—the Surplus Interest Fund and the Suitors' Fee Fund—in building these courts would lead to a great saving in the public Exchequer; for by capitalizing the rent saved, calculating the value of the sites of certain buildings now used for offices and courts of justice, and taking into account other expenditure which would be dispensed with, a total of probably £ 500,000 would go to the credit of the State. If it were found possible to do all that was required for concentrating the courts and legal offices and providing accommodation for the transaction of legal business, for the sum which the present Bill intended to appropriate, £ 1,400,000, there would be no further charge thrown on the State. It might be, that when Parliament came to vote the necessary money, it would be thought desirable to add an additional sum to carry the principle of concentra- tion further; but that would be a matter for future consideration, and was not embraced by the present proposition. There existed a large sum of money, which was not appropriated for any purpose, which belonged to nobody, and he believed that it could be employed in no better manner than in the way he proposed. It would not be correct to take the money and employ it for the purpose of relieving the general taxation of the country; but it was not wrong to follow the precedent already established, and to employ the fund for the object which he now explained; and the Commission of 1860 were of opinion that there was no way in which suitors could be so much benefited as by preserving them from the vexations and delays arising from the scattered position of these courts of justice. He would therefore conclude by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to supply means towards defraying the expenses of providing courts of justice and offices belonging to the same.

said, he was of opinion, notwithstanding the assertion of the right hon. Gentleman that the money belonged to nobody, that it belonged to the suitors in the Court of Chancery. Demands were being constantly made on these funds, and since the agitation upon this question of building law courts, fresh demands had been made on them last year. The Bill substantially laid upon the public funds a charge of £ 35,000, and therefore he trusted, when the clauses on the point were proposed, that the matter would be carefully considered in a fuller House than the present.

said, that if it was true that the fees of the Court of Chancery went into the Exchequer, this Bill would in effect take money out of the national funds. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would give the House his opinion upon the subject. The fund it was proposed to employ had, he thought, accumulated mainly because of the protracted delays that used to take place in the Court of Chancery, leaving suitors to die before they could make out their claims.

said, if those hon. Members who were not able to make up their minds on this subject would read the evidence of the Commissioners for concentrating the Courts, which he had read from beginning to end half a dozen times, they would see clearly how this fund had arisen. The fund was formed, not from the money belonging to any particular suit, but from the profits which had been made out of the investment of the loose cash of the suitors, and which had accumulated for 120 or 130 years. It was of the nature of the profit which a banker made from investing the deposits of his customers. The subject was very intricate and complicated, and ought to be well considered.

observed, that the measure was one of such importance as to render it desirable that hon. Members should have their attention closely directed to its provisions, even in its earliest stages. The history of many great works undertaken by the public, and especially of the magnificent building in which they 'were housed, had not been satisfactory. Parliament had commenced that work with a somewhat inadequate consideration of the cost, and the impression made upon the community by the quadrupling and quintupling of the original Estimates was a feeling that the next time the outside cost of the works ought to be stated in the first instance. The proposal of his right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works, however, distinctly showed that in the view of the Government the concentration of our law courts was a scheme of practical improvement, which was worthy of being prosecuted, even at the hazard of a considerable public charge. That being 80, they found at their disposal in the Court of Chancery funds which, on every ground of public and private justice, they deemed to be applicable to the attainment of that object, and on the soundness of that view he had no doubt hon. Members generally would concur. So far as he had been able to form a judgment on the matter, it was pretty clear that the funds to which he referred would supply the greater portion of the expense of the undertaking in question; but it was, at the same time, evident from the computation which had been made by the Commissioners, that there was a margin which might render it necessary, first of all, that the public credit, and secondly the public purse, should be called into requisition. The precise extent to which that might be the case he was unable to predict; but the worst aspect of the question had been laid before the House, and hon. Members would have the fullest opportunity of ex- amining all its details for themselves. It was, at all events, but right to state that, according to the computation of the Commissioners, it was plain there would be a certain amount of public charge in connection with the proposed buildings, and that he believed that charge would be even greater than the amount at which they had fixed it; for there was one fund in particular, that which related to the proceeds of the fees of the common law courts, which was at the present moment part of the public property. It was quite plain, therefore, that the proposal of his right hon. Friend presented features which were well deserving of the careful consideration of the House; but for his own part he must say, that although he should be exceedingly reluctant to contemplate the imposition of any additional charge on the public, he felt the advantages of economy and despatch in the administration of justice, which would be likely to be brought about by the concentration of our courts of law, were so great that he had no hesitation in recommending the Bill under discussion to the approval of Parliament.

said, he felt bound, after the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from which it was evident that the right hon. Gentleman contemplated that some portion of the expense of the proposed buildings would fall on the public, again to appeal to the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Speaker) to know whether the First Commissioner of "Works had not failed to comply with the principle laid down in the Standing Order in not introducing his Bill in Committee of the whole House?

As far as I understand the matter, the Bill as presented to the House proposes to deal with the monies accruing from funds in the Court of Chancery. If anything is contained in the Bill itself which imposes a charge on the public, the suggestion of the hon. Member that it should have originated in a Committee of the whole House is perfectly well founded. I do not, however, understand that the Bill contains a provision of the sort; but if it should prove otherwise, then its introduction, save in Committee of the whole House, would be out of order.

asked, whether the present measure was the same as that of last year?

said, that the Bill en- acted that, when Parliament voted a sum of money for this purpose, the amount should be taken from the funds belonging to the Court of Chancery.

objected to the composition of the Committee.