volved in the Wensleydale case was this / sibly be in urging that point at all if the

--that the Crown might have power to limitation was approved? But reverting create life peerages without limitation of to what he had said—he would repeat numbers or regard to qualification. He that he looked upon limitation as abso(Earl Stanhope) said then and he re- lutely essential; and he conceived that this peated now that such a power would be limitation must be of two kinds—first, as fatal to the honour and independence of to the total number of life peerages, and their Lordships' House. It would enable secondly, as to the number that might be the Government of the day, on any ques- created in any one year. In taking that tion upon which political excitement view he held that the number proposed might arise, to fill the House with nomi- by the noble Earl opposite (Earl Russell) nees, undistinguished by any particular was somewhat larger than there was ocmerits, for the purpose of carrying parti- casion for. He should have thought that cular measures. But the evil would not three life peerages in one year ought not stop there; for whenever one Govern- to be exceeded. Their Lordships must ment ceased to hold Office their successors remember that besides the life Peers, would have a pretext for pursuing a there would be hereditary Peers also; similar course, and filling the House with and the numbers not of one class only nominees of an opposite complexion, in but of both would have to be considered. order to over-rule the majority that had Then he took exception to some of the been previously created, and the conse- classes to which, as he understood, the quence must be that the House, instead noble Earl proposed to extend the priof the proud and independent position vilege of life peerage. What reason, which it now held, would become a mere for example, could

be alleged for placing shuttlecock between contending parties. Irish and Scotch Peers as one of these For this reason he dissented entirely from classes ? All the other classes assumed the concluding remarks of the noble Earl some sort of merit or service, but there the Secretary for the Colonies. He would was no merit or service in being an further say that for himself he did not Irish or Scotch Peer. However, this repent of the vote which he gave in 1856, was not the time to discuss the matter and he felt that their Lordships had no fully. They would be in a much better reason to repent of the decision to which position to do so when they had seen the they had come on that occasion. But in Bill. There was one point, however, which reflecting on the subject, he had certainly he desired to notice, and upon which he arrived at the conclusion that, although was at issue with the noble Marquess the unlimited creation of life peerages near him (the Marquess of Salisbury); would be fatal to the independence and He could not desire that their Lordships' dignity of their Lordships' House, yet House should have any thing of a more that a limited number of such Peers strictly representative character, and he might be added to their Lordships, whose quite agreed in what had been said by his presence would be an ornament and an noble and learned Friend (Lord Cairns) advantage. And here again he was not if they were called upon to decide bein unison with the noble Earl the Secretween the general constitution of the tary of State for the Colonies, who had House as it existed upon the hereditary objected to the limitation.

principle and the representative character EARL GRANVILLE: I beg the noble which the noble Marquess desired to Earl's pardon; I did not object to a limit. give it. On the whole, he thought the

a I merely said that if any objection was noble Earl opposite had brought forward to be taken, it was rather with respect his measure in a most temperate and to the extent of the proposed limitation judicious spirit, with an entire absence than otherwise.

of party feeling, and it was in the same EARL STANHOPE said, he had mis- spirit he trusted the measure would be understood the noble Earl; but had he entertained by their Lordships. He did not argued that there might be so many not wish to pledge himself to a Bill that cases of merit in the military and naval he had not seen; but he had no hesitation services, and so much need for legal as- in saying that he rejoiced that an opporsistance in that House, that in one year tunity would be given to their Lordships many more than four new creations might to express an opinion on the question of berequired, though in anotherthere might life peerages under circumstances more be fewer? What object could there pos- likely to recommend it than those under which it had been brought forward on | complaint, on account of its giving to former occasions.

one party a complete monopoly of the LORD COLCHESTER expressed his representation. And in the case of Scotrepugnance to any measure for the land the further grievance exists that creation of life peerages which might not only does that one party choose the interfere in any way with the hereditary whole sixteen who shall be returned, but character of their Lordships' House. it has power to dismiss any one of these He admitted, however, that he saw a Peers if he should offend them by giving great difference between such a measure an independent vote. I believe that of and the Bill which the noble Earl had late years an understanding has existed proposed for consideration. When the among the Scotch Peers that a Peer Bill had reached another stage he hoped once placed on the list, he shall not be they would obtain from the noble Earl removed from it except for some special some clear definition of the claims and and strong reason; but such was not the kind of merit which were to make persons case formerly. A Peer who gave an ineligible for the distinction of a life peer- dependent vote, displeasing to the majoage. The Bill was one of great import- rity, was sure to be rejected at the next ance, and he hoped that at its next election; and as, from various circumstage their Lordships' would give the stances, the Crown was enabled to commeasure careful examination.

mand the votes of a large proportion of EARL RUSSELL expressed his grati- the Scotch Peers, the Government for fication at the favourable reception given the time habitually nominated these to the measure by those noble Lords who Scotch Peers, and thus exercised great had taken part in the discussion, and the influence in this House ; indeed, at about desire they had evinced not to consider the middle of the last century it was it in any party spirit. With regard to notorious that the sixteen Scotch Peers any alteration in the character of the might be counted on to vote with the constitution of their Lordships' House, Government. No doubt it was an adhe thought he had shown by the advice vantage in one sense, because it is always he had thought it his duty to give to the desirable that the Government should Crown when he had the honour to hold possess considerable weight in both the Office of First Lord of the Treasury Houses of Parliament; but even this that he approved the selection of per- incidental advantage no longer arises sons engaged in trade, if of sufficient from the objectionable mode of electing wealth and eminent merit, for heredi- the Representative Peers; because during tary peerages. So far he agreed with the greater part of the last half-century the noble Marquess. The Irish Peers the Government of the day has geneappeared to him always to have enjoyed rally been found with the Representative a privilege which had been denied others, Peers entirely opposed to them. This and one of the most prominent was their state of things has attracted considerable power to sit in the House of Commons. notice out-of-doors, and we learn from Iwo Irish Peers, since the Union, be- the Votes of the House of Commons that came Leaders of the House of Commons. a proposal has been made in that House Lord Castlereagh was still Leader of the to remedy some of the defects in the House after he became Marquess of system of electing Scotch and Irish Londonderry, and the case of Lord Pal. Peers. The first Minister of the Crown merston was well known.

is reported to have expressed an opi

nion that the grievance it was sought Bill read 1*; to be printed ; and to be to remedy was a real one, but thought read 22 on Tuesday the 27th Instant. this House was a proper place for (No. 49.)

originating the remedy. "That opinion having been expressed, I certainly ex

pected some of the right hon. gentleREPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR SCOT-man's Colleagues in this House would LAND AND IRELAND BILL.

have undertaken to deal with the quesPRESENTED. FIRST READING.

tion; and it was only because I was asEARL GREY: My Lords, during many sured the Government was not likely to years the manner of electing Repre- undertake the task that I ventured to sentative Peers for Scotland and Ireland enter upon it myself and submit a Bill in this House has been a subject of great to your Lordships. In the first place, then, my Lords, I propose, by this Bill, | the Peers shall be summoned and shall to place the Scotch Representative Peers be directed to choose three Peers, thus upon the same footing as the Irish Re- bringing up the number at the time to presentative Peers with respect to the eighteen or to thirty; and, in the choice duration of their legislative existence of those three Peers, the Bill provides that is to say, the Bill provides that they that every Peer shall have the prishall be elected for life, and not for a vilege of giving three votes, which it single Parliament. I caif hardly doubt shall be in his power either to give in that it must have been from experiencing favour of a single Peer or to divide the great evils resulting from the practice between two or three Peers, according to of electing for the Parliament alone that his discretion. The object of that is to Mr. Pitt, in bringing forward his mea- insure that every shade of opinion shall sure for the Union with Ireland, wisely have fair representation in this House. resolved to have the Irish Peers elected It is not precisely the representation of for life. I also propose that those Peers a minority, because there may be two or elected for life shall have the power, if three shades of opinion to represent. they think fit, to resign their seats; at Such are the simple provisions of the present I believe no such power exists in Bill I have now to lay on your Lordships' the case of Peers of either Scotland or table, and which I trust will receive Ireland. And I think we should go a your Lordships' support at the next little further than this, and say that any stage, which I purpose taking on the Peer who habitually absents himself same day as is fixed for the second readfrom this House without some sufficient ing of the Bill of the noble Earl (Earl cause should be considered as having Russell). resigned his seat. LORD CHELMSFORD: Is that to be

Bill to amend the Law relating to the confined to the Scotch Peers ?

Election of Representative Peers for EARL GREY: Your Lordships will Scotland and Ireland presented.—(The

Earl Grey). perceive that if a British Peer does not attend it makes no difference—that is to

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE say, his absence affects only himself; said, he was rejoiced that the subject but in the case of the Scotch Peers had been taken in hand, and he would habitual absence reduces the number only offer one suggestion, which was of Scotch Representative Peers, and that those who sat in that House as makes them too few. I would suggest English Peers, and who were also Irish that a Representative Peer who shall Peers, should not vote in the election of absent himself for two consecutive Representative Peers. He hoped the Sessions without leave of the House noble Earl would consider the propriety should be deemed to have resigned of introducing a provision to give effect his seat. I further propose that the to that suggestion. Peers of Scotland, instead of being sixteen, should be not less than sixteen, Bill read 1«; to be printed ; and to be and not more than eighteen; and, in the read 24 on Tuesday, the 27th Instant. same manner, the Irish Peers, instead of (No. 50). being twenty-eight, should be not less

House adjourned at a Quarter past than twenty-eight, and not more than

Seven o'clock, to Monday thirty. I propose this with a view of

next, Eleven o'clock. introducing the further provision that no election for a representative Peer of either Scotland or Ireland should occur until the number of those Peers shall have fallen by death or resignation HOUSE OF COMMONS, below sixteen or twenty-eight respectively. Whenever the number of Peers Friday, 9th April, 1869. shall have fallen below the present established number of Peers for the two MINUTES.]–New WRIT Issued-For Sussex countries, then a Writ shall issue for the (Western Division), v. the Hon. Henry Wyndelection of three Peers; so that, when

ham, called up to the House of Peers.

SUPPLY—considered in Committee-On Account ever the Scotch Peers shall fall below

of Civil Service. sixteen, or the Irish below twenty-eight, WAYS AND MEANs-Resolutions [ April 8] reported.

-.

PUBLIC BILLS-Ordered-First Reading-Trades | sergeant acted under the authority, not Unions, &c.* [68]; Post Office Savings Banks* [69]; Government Annuities, &c.* [70]. Considered as amended-Sea Birds Preservation [59].

of any rule or order given by the Commissioner of Police, but under the authority of the Metropolitan Police Act of

Third Reading-Inclosure of Lands [31], debate 1839 (2 & 3 Vic. c. 47), the 64th section adjourned. of which enacts

POLICE INTERFERENCE.-QUESTION.

MR. EATON said, in the absence of his noble Friend Lord George Lennox, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true that on Monday 29th March a person named Macdonald, who was engaged in his occupation of delivering Treasury circulars to the Members of the House, was stopped by a policeman at the corner of Stratton Street, in Piccadilly, and called upon to state his name and address; whether, on his declining to do so, he was seized by the constable on a charge of "loitering," and taken through the streets to the police station, where he was detained for some time, until the officers on duty could verify his account of himself; whether any report on the occurrence had been made by the officials which explained the action of the police; and, whether the instructions issued to the police authorities, authorizing such conduct, can be laid be

"It shall be lawful for any constable belonging to the metropolitan police to take into custody without a warrant [among other suspicious persons] all persons whom he shall find between sunset and the hour of eight in the morning lying and not giving a satisfactory account of themor loitering in any highway, yard, or other place, selves."

This Act has been enforced for some large and somewhat formidable powers thirty years. It confers, no doubt, very

on

that during these thirty years very few the police, and it is to their credit cases appear to have occurred where they have exercised this discretion injudiciously. It so happens that on that very night, under the authority of the turned out to be notorious thieves, and Act, three persons were taken up, who have since been committed to gaol. There is no doubt that in this case a mistake was committed, partly from the fault of the man himself, who might have relieved himself from all suspicion by fair that when the police have a very saying who he was; and it seems only difficult duty to perform they should

cial Statement of the Chancellor of the missions of Customs duty should be car-
Exchequer upon a point which had ried into effect immediately, it is clear
given rise to considerable misapprehen- that this course cannot be taken in the
sion. The Question was, Whether the present instance until the House have
Papers now issued for the Assessment definitely decided that the corn duty
for the year 1870 on Articles kept be- should be abandoned.
tween April, 1868-9, are to be filled up
as issued ; if so, whether the whole

SUPPLY.
amount now assessed was to be levied,
and at what period; and when the happy

Order for Committee read. period would arrive at which we should Motion made, and Question proposed, be exempt for nine months from any “ That Mr. Speaker do now leave the payment of Assessed Taxes ?

Chair." MR. AYRTON said, in reply, that the Resolutions proposed by the Chan

CIVIL AND DIPLOMATIC APPOINT. cellor of the Exchequer would be con

MENTS.-RESOLUTION. sidered in Committee of Ways and Means on Monday, and that would be a

MR. FAWCETT said, the question convenient opportunity for any hon. he should raise by the Motion which Member to ask for an explanation. he was about to make, was whether ap

pointments in the Civil and Diplomatic

Services should be obtained by personal THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT_THE favouritism and political patronage, or CORN DUTY.- QUESTION.

by merit and moral worth.

This was MR. MACFIE said, he had received no party question, for eminent men on a telegram asking whether the Corn both sides of the House supported the Duty was not to be remitted at once; principle of open competition. In 1853, he would, therefore, beg to ask the First a Commission, on which the right hon. Lord of the Treasury, If he would answer Baronet the Member for North Devon that Question ?

(Sir Stafford Northcote) and Sir Charles MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, inasmuch Trevelyan served, reported unreservedly as there must be some delay before the in its favour, and the system of open House can pass judgment upon the Bill competition was admitted on all hands to to be introduced for altering the time have been eminently successful. A few for the collection of certain taxes, I con- years after the Report of the Commission ceived that it was understood in Com- a Select Committee of that House was mittee of Ways and Means that it might appointed to inquire into the subject. be for the convenience of all parties that It was presided over by the noble Lord we should take in the meantime the pre- the Member for King's Lynn (Lord liminary stages upon the other Resolu- Stanley), and the whole tone of their tions relating to the reduction and re- Report, and of the evidence was in famission of duty; but it was also dis- vour of open competition. It was true tinctly stated that if we asked that these that the Committee did not recommend stages should be gone through, it was the immediate adoption of that system, on the understanding that no such Votes because they thought that it had not had should be considered as decisive, and sufficient trial, and that its adoption that substantially the judgment of the would give too rude a shock to political House should only be taken after it had patronage. Since then ten years had had an opportunity of considering the elapsed, and experience conclusive in Bill for the collection of taxes on which favour of open competition had been these remissions depend. It is, there- obtained; and, as for political patronage, fore, obvious that the payment of duty he did not think that any precious prinon corn cannot be dispensed with until ciple worth preserving was involved in we reach that stage in the financial mea- that matter. The exercise of political sures of the Government when the sub- patronage was a source of general corstantial judgment of the House can be ruption. It might be said that there given respecting them. It is right that now existed a system of qualified comthis should be clearly understood out-of-petition, as when an appointment was doors. Although the common, but not vacant it was usual for two or three the invariable practice, has been that re- persons to be nominated, and the best of