measure, and how did he meet those objections? By introducing something which on the face of it was most objectionable a clause giving power to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to authorise persons to enter upon such interference. Why, if the Secretary of State gave his signature to every deputation on behalf of the Madiai or other persecuted people in other countries-and there were persecutions of Roman Catholics in Sweden, as well as persecutions of Protestants in Italy-he would take the whole responsibility on himself, and immediately make the individuals whom he authorised the representatives of this country, and they would then stand in a totally different position to what they would otherwise have done. What would be the great convemence of that? When those persons stood in that authorised position, they would naturally bring the Government into difficulties, at the same time that they would lose much of their own individual influence. It was clear that they would make their communications more freely, and with less reserve, and with, perhaps, a better chance of a happy result, in their unauthorised capacity, than if they had obtained the formal sanction of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Instead of the Bill carrying out, as alleged, the law of nations, it actually violated that law. Another objection raised to the Bill, in which he perfectly concurred, related to communications between members of the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope of Rome. If the Romish religion was to be conducted in its full force in England, it was absolutely necessary to keep up a constant communication with that foreign Potentate. But the noble and learned Lord said he did not intend to interfere with that kind of communication; and, if so, he must make so large an exception as to render the Bill useless. He could not pretend to assert that the Bill would not apply to matters of religion connected with the Roman Catholics, because the religious and political element was so mixed up at Rome, that he (Lord Beaumont) defied any one to separate the two. If such a Bill as the present had been in operation some time ago, the noble and learned Lord himself would have been one of the greatest offenders, because he was honoured with a long interview with another Sovereign, who not only wore one but three crowns, and with whom he entered into a long conversation on all the VOL. CXXXIII. [THIRD SERIES.]

great questions of the day-education, Queen's colleges, and Heaven knows what else. That was no doubt an interview between a private individual and a foreign Potentate, from which great advantages were derived, that individual representing so large a portion of the legal body in this country; but if this Bill had been then in operation, he did not see how such an advantage could have been conferred on that Potentate.

THE EARL OF ABERDEEN said, that, although he had a great respect for the noble and learned Lord who had moved the second reading of this Bill, and should be most unwilling to vote against the second reading, he thought that the noble and learned Lord must perceive that objections so weighty and so numerous had been stated against his measure that it was quite impossible that it could pass without very great and extensive alterations. His noble and learned friend opposite (Lord Lyndhurst) had suggested that the Bill should be read a second time, and then that it be referred to a Select Committee, with the view to making such alterations in it as may be agreed upon. [Lord LYNDHURST said, it was not his suggestion; it was the noble and learned Lord who introduced the measure who made that proposition.] He should be excessively unwilling, for the respect he had for his noble and learned Friend (Lord Campbell), to object to the second reading; but, at the same time, he thought that the objections which had been taken to his measure were such as to raise difficulties in the way of removing the evils complained of, even if the Bill were referred to a Select Committee. If, however, his noble and learned Friend persevered in his wish to read the Bill a second time, upon the clear understanding that these alterations, so extensive and so fundamental, should be assented to before a Select Committee, he would not oppose the second reading. But if he might venture, without offence or without presumption, to recommend any course to his noble and learned Friend-seeing that the prospect of effecting his end was so small-he would recommend him not to persevere in the second reading of the Bill.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE joined in the recommendation of the withdrawal of the Bill. The noble and learned Lord who introduced it had mentioned a ridiculous instance, in which a deputation from the City of London, headed by the then Lord Mayor, went to the illustrious

с

Prince who was now the Emperor of the French; but he forgot to mention that, at the same time, there was a deputation to Paris for a very different object--the accomplishment of a vast design, which would be of the greatest use to the commerce of the whole world. He meant an effective passage across the Isthmus of Panama. That was a deputation, headed by Sir Charles Forbes and other remarkable men -men remarkable in skill, science, and industry-from this and other countries in Europe; but that deputation came distinctly under the present Bill, for the object of the parties was to apply for certain acts to be done by the French Government. He thought that no obstacle should be interposed to negotiations with, or representations to, foreign Governments for purposes of that description. The noble and learned Lord said he did not intend to impose any check on the liberty of the subject; but he had failed to show any single case of grievance which rendered the Bill necessary. Take the most recent case -Mr. Smith O'Brien's deputation to Lamartine. It was a deputation of a most mischievous nature unquestionably; but the only result of it was, to dispel the idea that Ireland could obtain any assistance from any respectable Government in France on behalf of such a dangerous project as was then contemplated.

LORD BROUGHAM said, he was under the impression that many of their Lordships had not attended to the provisions of this Bill. Communication with a potentate, such as a conference of his noble and learned Friend with the Pope, did not come under the operation of the measure. It was only when persons professed to represent persons or bodies of persons in this country, and went as their representatives to a foreign Prince, that they came under the provisions of the Bill. He would recommend his noble and learned Friend to take into consideration the many difficulties that had been started. It was quite certain that very considerable changes must be made in the Bill; for example, it would be necessary to provide that the owners of property should not be liable on account of representations to foreign Governments relative to property. The joint owners of a vessel, for example, which might be seized by the act of a foreign Government, ought not to be prevented from making any representations to such Government. It might be said that they might write home and obtain the warrant of the Secretary of The Marquess of Clanricarde

State; but valuable time would be lost by such a delay, where immediate representation would be most necessary. He thought, besides, that an authorisation of that kind would somewhat commit the Government to the matter in discussion, and such a step ought to be avoided, and the consequence would be, that in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred the Secretary of State would refuse to interfere. At the next stage his noble and learned Friend might be able to suggest remedies for these difficulties. With respect to the objections urged by the noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury), he was one of those who would rather see representations upon so delicate and exciting a matter as religion in the hands of the Government than in the hands of individuals. In dealing with matters so exciting and so delicate as those involving religious feeling, he thought it much more expedient to let them pass through the regular and constitutional channel.

LORD CAMPBELL agreed with his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) that several noble Lords who had spoken on the subject of this Bill had not very studiously considered the phrases in which it was couched. The principle of the Bill was to prevent unauthorised communications between English subjects, who pretended to represent the English nation, or a portion of it, with foreign Governments, respecting political and national affairs. He wished to go no further than this; and, if this principle were not carried out in the Bill, he was perfectly willing to agree to any alterations which should have that effect. The conference which he had had with a foreign Potentate was perfectly innocent. His noble Friend (Lord Beaumont) was right in saying that he had had a long conference with His Holiness the Pope. He did discuss with the Pope a number of political topics, and he most certainly hoped with some success, because he had convinced the Pope that he had been misinformed respecting what were called the "Godless Colleges;" and that the Government had most anxiously provided in them for the integrity of the Roman Catholic faith, and for the morals and creed of the Roman Catholic_pupils who were to be instructed there. He believed that some good had arisen from that interview; but was that an interference with the Government? And would it have been affected by this Bill? Did he go to Rome as a deputation from persons in England?

Liverpool; and whether the house of Scott Russell did not offer to provide in a few weeks the craft wanted; and had not the Admiralty refused to provide iron boats; had it not ordered wooden boats to be built and bought, which wooden boats would draw twelve feet of water, instead of five, like the iron boats; had the Government ascertained whether any gunboats had been, or were being built in the Finland Harbour of the Gulf of Bothnia, and, if so, what number, by the latest accounts; and had the Government taken the necessary steps to efficiently protect the British mercantile flag navigating the Gulf of Bothnia on the Swedish coast?

SIR JAMES GRAHAM said, he really hoped the House would pardon him if he exercised some discretion in answering these questions. He did not think it would be possible to conduct a war, if the Government were called upon to lay before the House the requisitions they might have received from the Admirals on foreign stations with respect to what was necessary for the forces. He was much less inclined to answer a question with regard to the propositions which might have been made by any particular house, and the reasons for which a certain contract had not been entered into. Certainly, the strength of Russia in gunboats in the Baltic was formidable, and Her Majesty's Ministers had taken every precaution that appeared to them to be necessary and expedient to meet that formidable force, and the commerce of Great Britain in the Gulf of Bothnia would be protected by adequate means.

WAYS AND MEANS-THE MALT TAX. MR. BOUVERIE brought up the Report of the Committee of Ways and Means, and the first four Resolutions were put from the Chair.

MR. CRAUFURD said, he would beg to ask if this proceeding were merely formal, and if Members would have the opportunity of opposing the Resolutions hereafter. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, there could not be the smallest doubt as to the meaning of the vote hon. Members were called upon to give. It was a vote simply to enable the revenue officers to act with full authority, and, therefore, to prevent any evasion of the intentions of the House, in case it should, on deliberate consideration, adopt the proposition of the Government. It had no effect whatever in committing the judgment of the House.

Mr. Kennedy

Four first Resolutions agreed to. On the fifth Resolution for the augmentation of the malt duty being read,

MR. E. BALL said, he begged permission, if he were not out of order, to offer a few observations which he hoped would have the effect of inducing the House at once to reject the proposition of Ministers.

MR. SPEAKER said, the hon. Member had better move an Amendment to strike out the Resolution regarding the malt tax, after all the Resolutions should have been read by the clerk.

This having been done,

MR. E. BALL again rose, and said he wished to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and of the House to a circumstance which had occurred in the course of the last Session.

MR. T. DUNCOMBE said, he rose to order. This was not a Government night, and, as he understood, the arrangement made last night was that this Report should now be brought up pro formá, not for the purpose of being discussed. Now, the hon. Gentleman opposite apparently meant to go into the whole question, and when malt was once begun, there was no knowing when or how it would end. had a notice of Motion on the paper for this evening, but if this question were gone into he should have no chance of bringing it forward. The Government was bound to postpone this discussion, and the hon. Gentleman ought not to commence it.

He

MR. SPEAKER said, that the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire was perfectly in order. The House had determined yesterday that this Order of the Day should be read at half-past four o'clock; and the Order of the Day having been read, if the hon. Gentleman chose to take the sense of the House upon it, there was no doubt as to his being in order.

MR. T. DUNCOMBE said, that the House had consented that the Report should be brought up that evening upon the understanding that no discussion should take place upon it. It was a violation of good faith, therefore, upon the part of the Government, to permit that discussion to proceed.

MR. E. BALL said, he preferred taking the decision of Mr. Speaker rather than that of the hon. Member for Finsbury. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would, of course, recollect that for many years a conflict had been carried on upon the question of whether free trade should