MICROFILMED 1992 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK as part of the "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not lie made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEKffiNT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. . . Columbia Universit}' Librar>^ resen^es the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law^ AUTHOR: LYNDHURST, JOHN SINGLETON COPLEY TITLE : SUMMARY OF THE SESSIONS PLACE: LONDON DA TE : COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROEORM TARGET Original Material as Filmed - Exisling Bibliographic Record Master Negative # A 4- 2, Lyndhur3t| j-Jobn Singleton Copleyj, lord. 1772- Summary of the session^ speech delivered in the Fouse of lords. . .August 18 ^ 1856. 3d ed. London, no date, D. 21p. No. 5 of a vol./''"^''- of paniphlets. Restrictions on Use: FILM SIZE:„_Zi.ni:i._^.^^ REDUCTION RATIO:„/Aa IMAGE PLACEMENT: lAfllA/ ID IIB ^ DATE FILMED: ^2yi^±^ ^ INITIALS ^A^i FILMED BY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS, INC WOODBRIDGE. CT D Association for information and image Management 1 1 00 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1 1 00 Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter IIU mil 2 3 rrr I I TT Inches 4 I 12 13 14 15 mm ill M^Mp 1.0 I.I 1.25 ■■■>ili|iiliii|lllilllllll|Ml|llll!l|l| t& 2.8 2.5 tii Im 3.2 2.2 |6^ 3.6 u: ^ II 1— 1 4.0 2.0 14 *- u tiili.U. 1.8 1.4 m 1.6 MnNUFflCTURED TO flllM STRNDfiRDS BY fiPPLIED IMRGE. INC. iLc . t-» SUMMARY OF THE SESSION. V SPEECH OF THE RIGHT HON. LORD LYNDHURST, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, OK Thursday, August 18, 1836. THIRD EDITION. LONDON: JAMES FRASER, 215, REGENT-STREET. Price 3d. each, or 2s. 6d, per dozen ,- or 20s, per hundred /or distribution. ■ . J. L. Cox and Sons, Printers, 75. Great Queen Street, LuicolnVIon Fields. SPEECH. My Lords ; — I am anxious to call your attention to the motion, of which I gave notice on a former night. It is with extreme reluctance and with real diffidence that I rise to address you on this occasion ; but I am compelled to pursue this course ; I am driven to it in consequence of the attack made upon me and my noble friends around me, but more pointedly upon myself by the noble Baron opposite* on a former night. My Lords, the noble Baron has accused us of having misconducted ourselves in the discharge of our duty in this house. lie has charged me, in particular, with having " mutilated" bills laid on your Lordships' table by his Majesty's Government, or which have come up from the other House of Parliament. He has stated, in distinct terms, that the course which I have indi- • Lord Holland. a2 vidually pursued has been calculated to alienate from your Lordships' house the regard and the respect of the country. The terms that the noble Baron used were I believe even stronger than those which I have mentioned. The noble Baron said, our conduct was calculated to excite " disgust" in the country. Now, my Lords, if these charges had been confined to this house, I should have reposed under them in silence, because all that has passed, has passed in your presence, and I should not have feared, under such circum- stances, your judgment with respect to my conduct. But it was obvious, that these charges were intended to take a wider range, and to embrace a much more extensive sphere, and it is therefore that I have felt myself called upon to rise, for the purpose of entering on a vindication of my conduct, and, however unequal the contest may be between the noble Baron and myself, to justify to your Lordships and the coun- try the part which I have taken in these proceedings. My Lords, it does appear to me that those who sit on this side of the house have been most moderate and forbearing towards his Majesty's Government. We have made no motion for papers, none for enquiry ; we have passed no resolutions of distrust or censure. We have not used the ordinary weapons of those usually engaged in opposition in this and the other house of Parliament, and which must be so familiar to the noble lords opposite. Our conduct through- out the Session has been entirely defensive. When a bil has been laid on the table by any of his Majesty's Govern- ment, or when it has come up from the other house of Parliament, we have examined it with care, with industry, and attention. If we have found it vicious in principle, we have proposed its rejection ; while if it has occurred to us, on a careful investigation, that it might be so modelled as to answer the purposes for which it was intended, we have carefully directed our efforts and perseverance to the accom- plishment of that object. I am justified then in saying, that during the whole of this Session, adverting to the course that we have pursued, our conduct has been purely defensive, and that we have exercised towards his Majesty's Government as much moderation and forbearance as was consistent with the duty which we owed to the country. My Lords, it is impossible to enter into a consideration, however general, of the subjects to which I am about to direct your attention, without referring to his iMajesty's Speech at the commencement of the present Session, and without contrasting the brilliant anticipations contained in that speech, with the sad reality that has since occurred ; a result as disproportioned in execution to the expectations that were held out, as the lofty position of the noble Viscount at that period, with what he will allow me to style his hum- ble condition at the present moment. Gazing on these two pictures, one is tempted to apply to the noble Viscount that which was said of a predecessor of the noble Viscount in the high office of first minister of the crown, who in the careless confidence of his character, I cannot help think- ing, bore some resemblance to his noble successor, " His promises were, as he then was, mighty, His performance as he is now — nothing." My Lords, in referring to the speech from the throne, we shall find that one of the prominent subjects to which our attention was called, and with respect to which great expectations were entertained, was a Rkform of the Law, and more particularly of the Court of Chancery. No sooner was that announcement made than in the profession to which I formerly had the honour of belonging, as well as in the minds of tlie public, the most eager expectations were awakened. Week after week and month after montli passed away, but those expectations were not gratified. At length, and after a long delay, a bill was produced by my noble and learned friend,* which 1 have too great a respect for his underst mding, to suppose could be his own pro- duction. It must, I think, have been forced upon him by some other person, and hastily and unadvisedly adopted by him. I said this measure was produced; yes, it appeared for a moment, and in a moment it fell from my noble and learned friend's arms, still-born on your Lordships' table. The measure met with no support in this House ; it met with no support from any party, or any section or fragment of any party, out of it. Neither Whig nor Tory, Radical nor Conservative, defended it; it met with no support from any portion of the public press, whether in the pay of Go- vernment, or espousing the party in opposition ; no single voice in any quarter has been raised in its favour. Even the noble lords who usually support the Government, ap- pear by anticipation to have condemned it; for a more scanty attendance, considering the importance of the ques- tion, never has, I think, occurred during the present session of Parliament. I pass therefore over this measure — Re- quiescat in pace ; I will not disturb its ashes. * The Lord Chancellor. 1 i My Lords, the next great branch of this promised Reform OF THE Law, was the consolidation and reconstruction of the Ecclesiastical Courts ; let us see what course his Majesty's Government have pursued on this important subject. My noble friend, the noble Duke near me, when in office, issued a commission for the purpose of inquiring into this extensive subject. That commission made a report, which was pre- pared, I believe, by Dr. Lushington : a report distinguished for the information and learning which it contained, and which led to the preparation of a bill, handed by us to our suc- cessors in office. My noble and learned friend was, from time to time, reminded of the importance of the subject, and called upon to adopt some legislative measure with respect to it. A Bill indeed, had been introduced ; but on some parts of the measure a difference of opinion existed ; they were referred to the consideration of a Select Committee, who afterwards made a Report, which was laid upon your Lordships' table. From that time to the present the Bill has been allowed to slumber ; not the slightest attempt has been made by the Ministers of the Crown to pursue this important measure. It would almost seem, from the course pursued with respect to this Bill, as if there had been a disposition to justify the expression of '* the dormitory," supposed to have been applied in so courteous a spirit to your Lordships* House, by an officer of the Crown, a learned gentleman of great talent and experience in his profession, in a manner not very consistent with his usual prudence and caution. But upon this great topic of legal reform, let me remind your Lordships of another bill, more fortunate than the new Chancery scheme, less neglected than the Ecclesiastical aiBai 8 Court project — a bill which has passed your Lordships' House — I mean the Stannaries' Court Bill. I will not, with respect to this measure, repeat any of those objections so ably and forcibly urged against it by my noble and learned friend, the Master of the Rolls ; but, my Lords, there is one clause respecting the dependent condition of the Judge in that court, to which I must call your attention. Against that clause my noble and learned friend struggled with great force of argument, and true constitutional prin- ciple, and my noble and learned friend the late Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (Lord Wynford) expressed in the strongest terms his disapprobation of it ; but this opposition was all in vain. Let me call your Lordships' attention more particularly to this important subject. By the Act of Set- tlement, the independence of the Judges was fully and firmly established. What was the result ? The effect was immediate. That subservience of the Judges to the Crown, that pliant obedience to the will of the Court which had before in so many instances disgraced the Bench, and defiled the administration of justice, at once, and as if by a spell, disappeared. Justice has from that period flowed in a pure and unpolluted stream, and the Judges of the land have not only deserved, but enjoyed the love, esteem, and confidence of the country, (^Cheers.) Such has been the effect of that wise and salutary measure. My Lords, this principle was again reasserted and confirmed upon the accession of his Majesty King George III. It was by an Act passed in the first year of his reign declared, that the Judges should not, as before, be removeable on the demise of the Crown ; and in his first speech to Parliament, that monarch made the 9 well-known declaration, that he looked upon the indepen- dence of the Judges *^ as one of the best securities of the ri ghts and liberties of his subjects and as most conducive to the honour of the Crown." So sacred has this principle been considered, that in no instance that occurs to me has any new tribunal been established, or any old tribunal been reformed or extended, in this country, since that period, in which it has been infringed. This Bill, the bill of a re- forming and Whig Government, is I believe the first excep- tion to the rule. (Opposition cheers.) But, my Lords, by whom were the arguments of my noble and learned friends combated ? Who was the great defender of this first infringe- ment of so just a principle? Proh pudor ! Would your Lordships have believed it, if you had not witnessed the scene ? Will it be believed upon mere rumour in the other House of Parliament, or throughout that urban population to which the noble Viscount told us on a former night he looked asthe firmest and best support of his Government ? It was, my Lords, the noble Baron opposite (Lord Holland) ; he whom I have always been accustomed to regard as a sort of concentration of Whig liberty and constitutional prin- ciple; he it was that stepped forward to vindicate this clause, and to combat the arguments of my noble and learned friends. {Opposition cheers.) True it is, that this part of his argu- ment was delivered in a subdued tone of voice, not very audible in this part of the house — scarcely audible below the bar — or above the bar {Hear, hear! and a lavgh.) But it was urged with vigour, with skill, with address, and all those aids so familiar to the noble Baron, and in which he so much excels, and which, had he lived in the days of ancient Greece, would have entitled him to a high rank a3 10 among the fraternity of '' sophists" of that celebrated period. (Hear! and laughter.) And in what case is this principle to be abandoned? In a case where the judge may be called upon to sit in judgment between the Duke of Cornwall, upon whom his appointment is in future to depend, and his tenants on the one side, and those who are interested in the mines and in the soil on the other. (Hear, hear !) So much, then, as to this part of the speech from the throne. There is, in the first place, so far as the Court of Chancery is con- cerned, a measure that has })roved a miserable abortion. With respect to the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, a measure abandoned ; and as to this last Bill, a violation of an impor- tant principle which for more than a century has been con- sidered sacred. (Opposition cheers,) My Lords, I now come to another prominent point in the speech from the Throne, but upon which I do not mean to detain you at any length. I allude to the Irish Corporation Bill. We have heard it asserted over and over again, that our ground of proceeding was founded upon the acknow- ledged abuses and corruptions in those corporations. My Lords, we have always stated that we never did proceed upon any such assumption. We should not have been jus- tified in so doing without hearing evidence at the bar for the purpose of examining into the truth of the charge; but we said— and that was the ground of our proceeding— we said, *' These corporations are in their character exclusive : they are administered by Protestants, and by Protestants alone, and on that ground we agree that a change ought to be made." What was the change intended by the Bill ? That they should be so constituted as to retain the same exclusive cha- 11 racter, with this difference only, that as they are now exclu- sively in the hands of Protestants, they should henceforward be exclusively in the hands of Roman Catholics. (Opposi- tim cheers,) There was to be a transfer of power from the one party to the other ; and when we know in what manner the power so transferred would have been used, that it would have greatly added to the strength and confidence of the agitators of Ireland, we should, I should think, Iiave disgracefully abandoned our duty, if we had not vigorously opposed the measure of the noble Viscount. In doing so, however, we at the same time stated our wil- lingness to put an end to the grievance complained of, by dissolving the existing corporations, and proposed a measure for that purpose with the assent of the corporations themselves. There is yet another measure which your Lordships ven- tured to mutilate — I shall leave your Lordships to consider whether our conduct in this instance was calculated to alienate or disgust the country. I allude to the Newspaper Stamps Bill. After that measure was complete, two clauses were added, at the suggestion of the supporters of the Government, unnecessary in themselves, and of a character most arbitrary, inquisitorial, and vexatious ; directly, too, at variance with what the Whig party, when in opposition, had formerly struggled against with great earnestness and zeal. When it was suggested that these clauses would be struck out in your Lordships* House, the supposition was met with taunts, as if you would not dare to venture upon such a proceeding. When it w^as afterwards proposed here to omit these clauses, we were assailed with a torrent of 12 invective and passion from the noble Viscount. As soon, however, as this whirlwind had passed away, and reason and good-humour had in some degree returned, we found the noble Viscount prepared to adopt our suggestions, and to pursue the course which we had recommended ; which, happily, was not followed by any of those awful conse- quences which had been predicted, and which the noble Viscount had painted with such a broad pencil and in such dark and gloomy colours. The noble Viscount was even facetious upon the occasion; he styled his new bill an ediiio ex-purgata ; thereby aptly and in the strongest manner marking his opinion of those offensive and scandalous passages which had been forced upon him by his support- ers, and whom by this allusion he dragged through the mire, and held up as a spectacle to the scorn and derision of the country. We were advised, my Lords, also, in the speech from the Throne, to adopt a measure for the settlement of the important question of Irish Tithes, for the purpose of restoring " harmony and peace," (I think those were the expressions) to Ireland. My Lords, we acted in the spirit of that advice. We did mature a measure for the purpose of extinguishing the present system of tithes in that country. Not a single objection was or could be urged against any clause in that Bill. Nay more, we engrafted on it another salutary measure, for the purpose of removing the inequality which exists in some of the benefices of Ireland. That Bill, so important in its character, so well calculated to answer the purposes to which I have referred, was rejected by his Ma- jesty's Government, because it did not contain the assertion is T 13 of an abstract principle intended to be used at some future period for the purpose of plundering the Church of Ireland {Umd cries of << Hear !" from the Marquis of Westmeath and other noble lords near him) ; and which, it was admitted in distinct terms by its advocates, could not for a long series of years be attended with any practical benefit. The next subject to which I shall call your attention is the Bill for the appointment of Charitable Trustees. That Bill was rejected by your Lordships, and it was rejected on account of the viciousness of its principle. By that Bill the election of the trustees was so contrived as to render them necessarily political partisans: and we were of opinion— an opinion which I then entertained, and still continue to maintain- that nothing could be more objectionable than the adminis- tration of charities upon principles of this description. Nay more, my Lords, we objected to this bill upon another ground, no less material that the former, and it was this, that a large proportion of the charities to which the bill ap- plied were charities founded, and declared by the deeds of the founders, to be intended for the benefit of members of the Established Church. fHeary hear !) Now, the Bill proposed a mode for selecting trustees which was calculated to place the management of those trusts in the hands oi Dissenters. (Heary hear !) I do not mean, for a mo- ment, to insinuate any thing against that class of persons ; but I am sure that your Lordships must think, and the country, I am sure, will think with you, that nothing could be more inconsistent with a due desire to maintain the interests of the Established Church, than that charities of this description, and more particularly so as many of them 14 are school foundations, should be administered by the de- scription of persons to whom I have referred. (Hear, hear!) If it were necessary to proceed further, I might add, that it has over and over again been publicly declared by the ])artizans of reform, that their object is to remodel those schools, disregarding the will of the founders, and to form them upon a plan and system of education, more congenial to their own views and opinions. (Hear, hear!) These are a few (and I state them merely as a sample) of those measures which the noble Baron has denounced, and upon which he appeals to the country. I join him in such appeal, and look to the issue with anticipated triumph. As a part of the great council of the nation, as representing its best interests, and as accountable to it for the manner in which we discharge our high duties, we accept his chal- lenge. We have not slumbered at our post. Neither led astray by the allurements of pleasure, nor seduced by the love of ease or the softness of indolence ; but vigilant, ac- tive, fearless, we have fought the battle of the Constitution, acting up to our high calling, and to the great duties which it has imposed upon us. We may have erred, but our aim at least has been just, and great, and noble, and correspond- ing to the position which I trust we shall long hold in the hearts of the nation. But, my Lords, there are other measures to which I must call your attention, with a different view. A bill was brought in by the most reverend Prelate, upon the subject of Plu- ralities. It was by far the best measure which had ever been submitted to Parliament upon this delicate and difficult 15 question. IMany persons had before directed their attention to it, but had failed in producing anything satisfactory as the result of their labours. The Bill was supported in this House bv the Ministers of the Crown, as it was their dutv to have done ; it was supported and adopted by them, as it was their duty to do, in the other House of Parliament. It was allowed to proceed for a time, and through the earlier stages, but the moment at length arrived when a period was to be ])ut to its progress. Certain supporters of the Government determined that it should proceed no further. Resistance, on the part of the Government, was at first attempted, but they soon gave way, and submitted to this dictation on the part of their supporters, and thereby sacrificed a measure, which they themselves had, by their conduct, and in terms, declared to be of great value to the interests of the Established Church, and of great importance to the interests of the country* (Hear, hear! J There was, my Lords, another measure, a bill framed under the direction of the Government, to carrv into effect the Fourth Report of the Church Commissioners — a commission and report to which several members of the cabinet were parties. The report which I hold in my hand, I see, was signed by the noble Viscount ; by the noble Mar- quis the President of the Council ; it was signed by the Noble Lord, the leader in the other House of Parliament, and other members of the cabinet. (Hear, hear! ) It re- commended very extensive regulations and reforms in apart of the church establishment. The bill founded on that re- port was brought into the other House of Parliament. It had scarcely appeared, when the party to whom I have al- 16 already referred, compelled the Noble Lord to stop his proceedings. A mutiny broke out in the camp, and he found it necessary to comply. A conference was announced — it was held somewhere in the neighbourhood of Downing- street or of Whitehall. (Laughter.) According to public ru- mour, it was not carried on in those well-bred whispers which sometimes mark the free conferences between the Lords and Commons. {Laughter.) What was the result ? It was insisted, in terms of a very decisive character, that Ministers must abandon their measure. They were compelled to yield ; and the other Bill respecting the sees throughout England and Wales, as we are told, nearly shared the same fate. Here, then, is a second instance in which a measure of great importance to the interests of the church and of the public, recommended, after long enquiry, by the Ministers, pre- pared, brought forward, and supported by them, was aban- doned, after a feeble resistance, at the dictation of that section of their supporters to whom I have referred. (Hear, hear!) But this is not all. There is a third measure to which I beg for a moment to call your Lordships' attention, the Bill for the Registration of Voters. What is tlie history of that bill ? It originated in a committee appointed by Government, and over which a member of the Government presided. After long enquiry and deliberation, they came to certain conclusions upon the subject; in consequence of which a Bill was prepared, under the direction of Govern- ment, and was brought into the other House of Parliament. Upon the back of that Bill I see the names of Lord John Rus- sell, the Attorney-General, and the Solicitor-General. It was, therefore, emphatically a measure of Government, and, I must I 17 say, with one or two exceptions, an extremely good Bill, and whichought to have been adopted, and beenpassedinto a law But what, my Lords, was the result? The party to whom I have already referred, opposed the progress of it; they re modelled most of its regulations, and though it appears that some resistance was made to these changes, they were at length acquiesced in, and the Bill thus changed, was brought up to your Lordships' house. I really thought that we were entitled to the gratitude of the Noble Viscount for the course we thought it right to pursue. My noble friend (Lord Wharncliffe) applied his vigorous and manly mind to the consideration of this bill-he noticed the alterations which had been made in it, and determined at last to get rid of those interpolations, and to restore, as nearly as possible the text of the noble Viscount's Bill to its original purity' Were we not justified, then, in considering ourselves entitled to the thanks of the noble Viscount, supporting as we did his own measure, prepared after so much consideration and care by the Government? Instead of this, to our infinite sur- prise, we were again visited with one of those tempests of invective and of passion so familiar to the Noble Vis- count, and so frequently directed against those noble Lords who sit on this side of the House. And what was the result? This bill of the Government, their own measure was abandoned by the noble Viscount, who in a careless tone, stated across the table, that he should proceed no fur- ther with it,_and for what reason ? obviously because it restored the Ministerial measure to its original purity. (Hear, hear!) I„ a friendly whisper across the table the Noble Viscount said, " I'U abandon my own bill." (Hear .') He dreaded the opposition and resentment of that 18 class of his supporters by whom in the other House of Parliament the bill had been so completely altered and de- formed. And this, my Lords, is a Government ! Was there ever, in the history of this country, a body of men who would have condescended so low as to attempt to carry on the go- vernment under such circumstances ! {Hear, hear ! from Lord Holland J and cheers from the Opposition Peers,) In this House they are utterly powerless — they can effect nothing (Hear!) We on this side of the House are obliged to per- form the duties of the Government for them. (Hear !) In the other House of Parliament, measures which they themselves have advised, and prepared, and brought forward, involving, as they tell us, the most important interests of the country, they without scruple Umely abandon at the dictation of any section of their supporters. (Hear!) Yet, thus disgraced and trampled upon, they still condescend to hold the reins of Government. — Proud men, eminent statesmen, distin- guished and high-minded rulers ! But is this description of their domestic policy counter- vailed by the splendour of their foreign administration ? Is the gloomy and wretched state of the one side of Downing- street relieved by the brilliant glories of the other ? My Lords, this is a fruitful topic for consideration and discus- sion, but too extensive for the present occasion. I will imitate the prudence and reserve of my noble friend, the noble Duke, and leave it to each of your Lordships to con- sider whether the measures and policy pursued by his Ma- jesty's Government have been such as to ensure the confi- t 19 flence atul command the respect of other nations. Whether they have been calculated to induce them to court or to shun our alhance_to lead them to regard us with feelings of tavour, or of distrust and aversion. But, my Lords, it is impossible not to pause for a moment in considering their policy with respect to Spain. By their intervention, so much •n opposition to their former p,inciples,-by their measures with respect to this country, they have wasted between