It may

this House-I have no wish that the respect to any proposal which may be hereditary character of this House should made by the noble and learned Lord on be altered. In my view the hereditary the Woolsack with reference to the apcharacter is essential to the House of pellate jurisdiction. The noble Earl who Lords and essential to the Constitution, first addressed the House (the Earl of and I, for one, see no good reason for Derby), while raising many objections desiring to alter it. It is plain that the to the measure, admitted that there analogy attempted to be drawn from the might be cases in which, owing to Bishops and the Irish and Scotch Peers peculiar circumstances, persons would is only partially applicable to this Bill. not wish to accept hereditary peerages, The Bill does not deal with the creation of although they might be perfectly qualiPeers, but with the right to a seat in this fied in other respects to occupy a seat in House. An Irish or a Scotch Peer is at this House. It was also admitted by the present moment perfectly aware that the noble Earl that persons had already his son will not succeed to his seat in been elevated to the peerage by the the House of Lords, and that there must Crown from every one of the classes be another act of election before he can which I named in reference to life peersit in this assembly. The right rev. Pre- ages on introducing the measure. I lates are also well aware that their sons wish for no further admission from the will not succeed to a seat in the House noble Earl than that. I have paid very of Lords, and that they will be suc- great attention to what has been said as ceeded by other Prelates appointed by the to a person objecting to being appointed Crown. Therefore, I maintain that, in an hereditary Peer, and yet being wilproposing to add to the number of Peers ling to accept a life peerage.

be who now sit in this House not by here that a man possesses only personal proditary right, I am not altering the gene- perty, which he wishes to divide equally ral character of the House of Lords. In among all his children; or he may

thin! reply to a question put to me by the noble it desirable that his eldest son should and learned Lord (Lord Cairns) when assume some profession for which he this subject was last under considera- would be most probably disqualified if tion, I may state that I have no desire he became a Peer. These and other to interfere with the character of this reasons may lead men to decline an hereHouse with respect to its appellate juris- ditary peerage.

It has been alleged diction, with which I am perfectly satis- that no sufficient reasons have been fied. On this point I will call your shown for making the proposed innoLordships' attention to what Lord Cran- vation ; but the truth is that, in recent worth said on introducing his Bill on times, circumstances have changed with the 30th of May, 1856. There had been regard to the honours and rewards bea large Committee appointed, and his stowed by the Crown. In former times, Lordship said

the Sovereign had the power to grant “ That Committee—which was a very full one considerable landed estates out of the - consisting of between twenty and thirty mem- Crown domains; but this power no bers, examined a great number of persons con- longer exists. The House of Commons nected with the administration of justice in your has also changed; indeed, it is totally Lordships' House, the most eminent practitioners at the Bar, two distinguished Judges from Scot- different from what it was when I first land, and other witnesses. The object of their entered it. At that time there were inquiry was to ascertain how far the conduct of many persons, Members of the House judicial business in your Lordships' House, as the of Commons, who could not stand ultimate court of appeal, was or was not satis- the excessive wear and tear of the factory to the suitors and to the bulk of Her Ma. jesty's subjects. Now, my Lords, I think I am present day. They represented small entitled to say, as the result of that investigation, boroughs—these seats no longer exist. that the general—I might almost say the uni- It has been stated in the public prints versal— feeling was that, although there were that I propose to give peerages to matters which avowedly required emendation, get the administration of justice by your Lord: superannuated Members of the Lower ships was an administration by a tribunal for House. Now a man may be elected which no substitute would, in the eyes of the pub- as I was myself — to a seat in the lic, be equally satisfactory." —[3 Hansard, cxlii. House of Commons at the 781.]

twenty-one, and it can hardly be said Now I perfectly concur in that state that after ten years' service, that is at ment; but I shall, of course, listen with the age of thirty-one, he could be

age of

properly termed superannuated. There that office there occurred the terrible are many men who are not equal to the massacre of the Protestants at Piedmont. excessive labour of the House of Com- John Milton naturally felt strong indigmons at the present day. A man, whom nation; but his prudence induced him to we all regretted to lose—the late Sir write a private letter to Cardinal Mazarin, William Follett, who was very eminent asking for the intervention of the French at the Bar-would, if he could have ac- Court in the matter; by that means an cepted a life peerage, have been a valu- end was put to the massacre which was able accession to this House. Referring then going on.

I do not believe that to the classes of men the most eminent of even my noble Friend the present Fowhom might be advantageously created reign Secretary-who could not, I think Peers for life, I mentioned on å former have written Paradise Lost-could have occasion persons distinguished in science shown in such a case greater business and literature. Now, I suppose no one aptitude or more practical prudence than will contend that men like Mr. Hallam did the author of that great poem. or Sir William Blackstone would not be I should, for my part, be very, glad to fit persons to sit in the House of Lords. see men of that class in the House. But the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) With regard to the suggestion which remarks that we already received into has been made to me, I need only say the House Lord Macaulay and two that my object is attained by having Barons who are at present Members indicated the several classes from which of the House who have attained great I think that life Peers ought to be seeminence in literature. That is quite lected. I shall be quite ready to leave true; but why should you require that the matter entirely to the discretion of men of this class should only be created the Crown, and to omit in Committee . Peers if they have large landed estates the whole of that part of the Bill; only to maintain their dignity, or if they are trusting, as I hope I may do, that there

I unmarried, and consequently unlikely is not one of those classes or categories to have any descendants on whom the which would be excluded from a fair dignity would devolve? For my own consideration. Seeing that the times part, I do not see why an eminent have so much changed-seeing that the literary or scientific man with a number Crown has no longer the power which it of children and no landed estates should formerly possessed of granting estates or be precluded from accepting a life peer- pensions, except by Act of Parliament, to age. In considering this part of the distinguished generals or admirals question, I cannot help thinking that seeing that there are now many persons there have been men in former times-capable of taking part in public affairs I wish to mention none in our own times—who, from ill health or other reasons, who would not only have added strength would not venture to go into the House to the House of Lords by their great of Commons, because there is such a knowledge and distinguished character, severe censorship kept over the Membut would have been of great use in its bers of that House that a man hardly deliberations. For instance, a question dares to be absent from any division of which was much discussed at the end of importance—I cannot but think it would the 17th century was the debasement be both a great advantage to this House of the currency; and I do not think and a satisfaction to themselves that that if Sir Isaac Newton (afterwards they should participate in the deliberaMaster of the Mint) and John Locke tions of Parliament, although they would had been Members of this House they scarcely feel equal, physically, to the would have been incapable of adding labours of the House of Commons. to the information of this assembly. These then are the grounds upon which Another man, whom a late editor has I ask your Lordships to read this Bill represented to have been entirely re- a second time. I do not propose in any moved from practical business, was way to interfere with this House as a John Milton ; yet he was Latin Se- court of appeal. That is a separate cretary - in fact, the equivalent of question which will, no doubt, be Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs brought before your Lordships by au-to the Protector Cromwell, and in that thorities vastly more competent to deal capacity displayed a remarkably good with it than I can be. I propose the judgment. During the time he held Bill only as a political measure—as &

measure that will not impair the here- ships not to add in any way to the ditary character of this House, which I power of the Crown, but to supply a wish to see maintained. I hold that want that the change of time and cir. this House is fully competent to perform cumstances has produced ; and in my all the duties which devolve upon it. opinion the measure would tend to inWhen noble Lords talk of adding to the crease the strength and uphold the chapower of the Crown, I must really re- racter of this House. mind them that there is a power in the LORD CAIRNS: I certainly had inCrown now, which can be exerted, of tended to ask your Lordships' attenadding hereditary Peers to this House in tion for a few moments on this occasufficient numbers to secure a majority sion, but we have other business still for the Government of the day. We all before us to-night, and inasmuch as know that when there was a question there appears to be on all sides of the between the Ministers of the Crown and House a strongly manifested disposition this House whether the Peace of Utrecht that this Bill should pass a second readshould be made, or whether the coun- ing, I think I shall best consult your try should continue the Succession War, convenience by postponing, until a later twelve Peers were added to this House, an stage of the measure, the remarks which addition which at once changed the majo- I should wish to make upon it. I think, rity. Swift in one of his letters wrote that, upon further consideration, that this Bill happily, the Queen had given a majority will be found to be one mainly depend. to the Ministers in the House of Lords; ing upon its details. If those details and Lord Bolingbroke said that if one are arranged in a manner which shall dozen new Peers should not be sufficient, be safe and satisfactory, your Lordships there would be another dozen made, and may possibly be willing to see it pass thus a majority would be obtained. We into law. But I desire for myself and for know also—it is in our own memory, many of those around me to keep ourthat at the time when the noble Earl selves entirely unpledged as to the course (the Earl of Derby) and I sat together we shall take on the third reading of the in the Cabinet, the Cabinet, with the Bill, supposing that after it emerges sole exception of the Duke of Rich- from Committee it should not appear to mond, proposed to the Crown that a be satisfactory to your Lordships. I number of Peers should be made ; and it undertake before we go into Committee appears by letters published on the au- to lay on the table the Amendment that thority of my noble Friend on the cross- I would suggest in the Bill; and I think Benches (Earl Grey) that on that oc- the more convenient time to explain that casion Lord Grey proposed to recommend Amendment and to state my reasons for William IV. to make fifty Peers in or- proposing it will be when we are going der to carry that Bill. Well, those into Committee. must all have been hereditary Peers, LORD DENMAN felt strongly that and, therefore, it is idle to tell me that I the measure was wrong in principle. A am now seeking to add to the power of Member who had been in the House of the Crown. We know that in the reign Commons ten years might, like a certain of William IV. those who proposed that distinguished person in Dublin, have large creation of Peers, being supported lost his election, and might thereupon by public opinion out-of-doors, and be appointed to a life peerage under this having the nation with them, were suc- Bill. He hoped that all who had the cessful in obtaining the object they Constitution of this country at heart sought. The fifty Peers, it is true, were would join with him when he should not made; the Peers chose to take ano- move, as he did now, that the Bill be ther course, which, it appears to me, was read a second time that day six months. less dignified—they absented themselves from the House. That was the only rea

Amendment moved to leave out son why the fifty peerages were not cre

(“now”) and insert (“this day six ated; for if the Peers who resisted the months.")-(Lord Denman.)

. Bill had attended, Lord Grey had the THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM said, he promise of the King, and would have entertained so strong an opinion with proposed, with success, that fifty, sixty, respect to the impolicy of this measure,

eventy Peers should be made. I that he felt bound to reserve to himself now propose, therefore, to your Lord- the right on any future occasion to take

a

or

such a course with respect to it as his for the Parliament to which they were judgment might dictate. There was no elected, should, like the Irish Represendoubt that by this measure their Lord- {tative Peers, sit for the period of their ships were asked to change some of the natural lives. That would make a very most important principles which were considerable difference in the position of inherent in the Constitution of this coun- each Scotch Peer, because, under such try. Though it was proposed at present an arrangement, the other members of to carry out the principle of the Bill to that Peerage would have a much less a very small extent, when they had once chance of becoming one of the Repreestablished that principle what security sentative Peers than at present. In 1707, was there that it might not be extended, at the time of the Union when the numor that it might not be made use of for ber of Representative Peers was fixed at the purpose of creating Ministerial ma- sixteen, there were 154 Scotch Peers on jorities ? Considering the very slight the roll, to whom nine had been afteradvantages which would be produced by wards added, making a total of 163. carrying this measure, was it worth Deducting the peerages which had bewhile to break through a great constitu- come extinct through want of heirs, tional principle ? He could not think attainder, and other ways, and which so. Neither could he agree with the amounted to seventy-seven, there were noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salis- now existing in Scotland just eighty-six bury), who wished to give their Lord- peerages, of which five were vested in ships' House a representative character. females. But of this number there were If they made the House representative forty-six Scotch Peers who had seats in in any sense, they would destroy its cha- that House, either as Peers of England, racter altogether. It was by a system of Great Britain, or of the United Kingof balances—it was by creating a variety dom; and as there were at this moment of interests—that they would best carry five Peeresses, there would remain thirtyout the idea of the Constitution, not by five, who, if this Bill became law, would assimilating all its parts, and bringing be without prospect, in the ordinary everything down to one uniform level. course of human life, of becoming ReOn Question, That ("now”) stand part Union there was great difference of opi

presentative Peers. At the time of the of the Motion ? Resolved in the Affirma- nion between the Commissioners of Scottive. Bill read 24 accordingly, and com- land and the Commissioners of England mitted to a Committee of the Whole

as to the proportion of Members to sit House on Tuesday the 11th of May next. in the House of Commons and also in REPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR SCOT- Commissioners proposed

their Lordships' House. The English

thirty-eight LAND AND IRELAND BILL-(No. 50.)

Scotch Members for the other House ; (The Earl Grey.)

but the Scotch Commissioners objected

so strongly to that limitation that the Order of the Day for the Second English gave way and forty-five was Reading, read.

the number agreed upon.

At the same

time the Scotch Commissioners argued Mored, " That the Bill be now read 22.” that if Scotland was to have forty-five -(The Earl Grey.)

representatives in the House of Commons The DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH rose to it ought to have more than sixteen in move as an Amendment that a Select their Lordships' House. On that point, Committee be appointed to consider the however, the English Commissioners state of the Representative Peerage of would not yield; and the Commissioners Scotland and Ireland, and the laws re- of Scotland, sooner than lose the union lating thereto. It was known to their of the two countries, gave way; but the Lordships that by the Act of Union result was great dissatisfaction in the Scotland was represented in that House Scottish Parliament, and some very strong from Parliament to Parliament. As each protests were made by the Scotch Peers Parliament was summoned the Scotch at the time. The English Peerage at Peers were called upon to return sixteen that period was somewhere about 180, Representatives, and it was proposed by the Peerage of Scotland numbering, as this Bill that the Scotch Representative he had stated, 154. The Peerage of the Peers, instead of sitting in that House United Kingdom had been greatly aug

SECOND READING.

mented since then, and one would have from it-objectionable as it was in prinsupposed that the Scotch Peerage would ciple—since it was the means of giving have received a corresponding increase weight in that House to the Governof its representatives; but that was not ment of the day, which it was desirable so. There were many deficiencies at pre- it should possess. But for many years sent in the management of the election the system had ceased to be attended of Scotch Peers, which called more ur- even by this advantage, since it was no gently for amendment than for such an longer the Government but a party arrangement as that proposed by the which nominated these Peers, and that noble Earl (Earl Grey). His noble Friend party of late had generally been in proposed to make eighteen Representa- Opposition. He believed that Mr. Pitt tive Peers, but he would do that by a was principally induced to adopt the peculiar process-namely, when by death system of life representative peerages the representation fell below sixteen, for Ireland at the time of the Union then three Peers were to be elected, and from the experience that had been every Scotch Peer should have not only gained of the ill consequences of the a vote for each of the three, but a cu- other system in the case of Scotland. mulative vote, so as to be able to give The inconvenience, if not the scandal, three votes to one Peer if he chose, and arising from this system had induced the not merely two to one and one to ano- Scotch Peers of late to agree among ther. That was introducing certainly a themselves that a Peer once returned very novel system of voting, and one should continue to be returned, unless not at all contemplated at the time of extraordinary circumstances arose to justhe Union. If noble Lords took the tify a contrary course. The title of his trouble to look into the record of the measure simply described it to be a “Bill debates at the time, they would find that to amend the Law relating to the nothing of the kind was contemplated, Election of Representative Peers"; it and he thought it very important that would consequently permit of clauses an investigation should be had into the being added to meet the noble Duke's manner in which the proposed changes views; and, as the noble Duke bad would affect the Peerage in question, offered no arguments against the Bill, and for this purpose he would move the he submitted that the proper Parliaappointment of a Select Committee. mentary course would be to agree to

read the Bill a second time, and then to Amendment moved to leave out from (" that”) to the end of the Motion and refer it to a Select Committee, if their insert (““ a Select Committee be appointed Lordships wished, which committee to consider the state of the Representa- the election of Peers of Scotland and

could also consider the laws relating to tive Peerage of Scotland and Ireland, and the laws relating thereto.")—(The

Ireland, and introduce such Amendments

as it deemed desirable. Duke of Buccleuch.)

THE EARL OF PORTARLINGTON EARL GREY said, that he had failed supported the proposition to read the to discover any reason for the appoint- Bill the second time and then refer it to ment of this Committee, because, while a Select Committee. He thought, howhe admitted that the Bill proposed to ever, that the most desirable course make an important change in the repre- would be that some process should be sentation of the Scotch Peers, that change devised which would establish only one was one that could be better considered Peerage for the whole of the three Kingby the Whole House than by a Select doms. Committee. Under the system of voting THE DUKE OF ARGYLL was strongly now existing the Scotch Peers were in favour of the second reading of the practically compelled to vote in favour Bill, and then that it should be referred of the policy of the party to which to a Select Committee to consider the they owed their nomination. The least clauses in detail. He agreed with the display of independence on their part statement that every Member of that might be visited upon them at the House should be an independent Memnext dissolution, and might cost them ber, and the manner in which, at a recent their seats. Formerly, when this power election, the majority of Scotch Peers was exercised by the Ministers of the exercised their power showed that it was Crown, some incidental advantage arose expedient to change the right of Scotch

a