Motion agreed to, and amendments of the Lords adopted.

LIGHTHOUSES AND PILOTAGE.] Mr. W. Attwood called the attention of the House to several petitions which had been presented on Wednesday respecting lighthouses and pilots. They complained of the charges for lights, amounting to 11. per ton on steam vessels conducting the coasting trade of the country, and dues for pilotage, which in some instances amounted to 10%. per cent. on the receipts. He believed the President of the Board of Trade had paid considerable attention to the subject, and he hoped during the recess some measure of relief would be adopted. He would not then enter further into particulars, but move for the returns connected with the subject of which he had given notice.

manner, with the underhand view of ex-|cessary to insist on a disagreement to the cluding him from a seat in that House. Lord's amendment in that respect, the subWhat reason had the right hon. and learned ject would very likely be brought forward Gentleman for believing that he or the again next Session. Government with which he was connected would shrink from the introduction of a clause to that effect if he or they considered that such a clause would conduce to the more speedy and effective administration of justice? He could assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman that he would not for an instant shrink from that duty if he felt called on to perform it. His object in the clause he had brought in was to prevent the chance of an accumulation of prisoners in Newgate, Dublin, one of the worst ordered prisons in the empire. In one month last year there were 210 prisoners in that gaol, of whom 106 were females. It was therefore of the utmost importance that such accumulations should as far as possible, be prevented in future. It was on that ground, looking to a great public object, and not to anything personally affecting the right hon. and learned Gentle- Mr. A. Chapman said, that a commission man, that he had taken the course to which of inquiry had been instituted some years the right hon. Gentleman objected, and to ago, and all the recommendations of the the propriety of that course he still adhered. committee had been attended to, and the Mr. Shaw in explanation, repeated his duties reduced as far as possible. He denied statement as to what had been objected by that the charge for lighting fell onerously the right hon. Baronet the Member for on the vessels alluded to, and he was sure Tamworth, in 1837, on the absurdity of that no establishment could be better conomitting a provision for the administration ducted than the Trinity House, to which of justice in Dublin. On that statement he had the honour to belong. By their Mr. Woulfe, then Attorney-general under-exertions in placing proper lights the voyage took to introduce the clause. That clause from Scotland was rendered secure, and was brought in without his being consulted on it, and all that had been done in the Lords was to reinstate it as it had been introduced by Mr. Woulfe. As to the accumulation of prisoners in Dublin gaol, he did not deny that there might be such a circumstance at times, but he would repeat that he had held a court of Sessions once in each month for many years, and that at the close of each sessions he had not left one person or one cause untried which was ready for trial, and that he considered was fully sufficient for all the purposes of justice.

Viscount Morpeth considered it preposterous to contend that there had been anything indirect or covert in the introduction of that provision to which reference had been made. It formed part of the bill, and was openly discussed in committee by the right hon. and learned Gentleman himself. It was introduced with a single view to the interests of the population of Dublin;

the charge on steamers, whose safety was thereby insured, was only 14s. Since the introduction of the Bude light, the insurance on steamers, which used formerly to be at the rate of 7s. per cent., was now reduced to 5s. per cent., and in some instances to 3s. 9d. The steam-boat proprietors therefore were also gainers in this way.

Mr. Labouchere agreed in all that had fallen from the hon. Member with respect to the efficient management of the Trinityhouse. He promised during the recess to direct his attention to the charges for lights but his impression was, as far as the Trinity-house lights were concerned, that the present system was equally economical and efficient. He was aware that the consideration of the present state of the pilotage laws was important to the commerce of the country, and the reason why he had not attempted to place them on a better footing was, not that he was insensible to the evils of the system, but because after

Mr. P. Thomson, he was aware of the ex- 1 John Thorogood would be enabled to avail treme difficulty of carrying any measure himself of the bill in that respect, for he founded on general principles through Par- had been more than three times six liament, on account of the opposition months in prison. He much regretted the stirred up by ports and other places en- other amendment which made the disjoying local privileges. He would, how-charge dependent upon payment of the ever, during the recess, direct his attention debt and costs; it was a shame that a to the subject, and endeavour to introduce bill which went to establish a good prinnext Session a bill founded on principles ciple should be made dependent on a similar to those of the measure brought for-question of pounds, shillings, and pence— ward by Mr. P. Thompson.

Motion agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Saturday, August 8, 1840.

a matter of filthy lucre. Yet, even as it was, he looked upon the bill as a matter of triumph for John Thorogood and those who concurred with him on the principle of church-rate. It did indeed give a "heavy blow and great discouragement" to the collection of church-rate.

He

Mr. Warburton, in seconding the motion, bore testimony to the great improvement that had been made by Mr. Gurney's plan, which was beyond all comparison superior to the light of candles; it tended also greatly to improve the ventilation, be- Petitions presented. By Lord Portman, from Somersetcause it facilitated the creation of a down current of air in the house, which it would be impossible to have as long as it was lighted with candles.

ably excited. The despatch of 1833 di-, tion. Government were most anxious to rected that that custom should be wholly put an end to the customs of which the abolished; and all that the petitioners petitioners complained; and, so far as who had come before their Lordships re-related to the pilgrim-tax, that object had quired was, that the instructions contained been effected. As to the attendance of in that despatch should be fully and fairly the Company's troops at these ceremonies. carried out. Till a very late period, how it was not meant to do honour to the idol, ever, nothing had been done in accordance but to the individual prince who proceeded with those instructions. In Bengal the to the worship. The respect, he repeated, system had now been put an end to, but was entirely paid to the prince, or Rajah, in the presidency of Madras nothing had about to attend the ceremony, and not to yet been done. Christian troops were the ceremony itself. The troops paid no not only obliged to attend the idolatrous attention to the ceremony which was in ceremonies of the Hindoos, but to appear the course of being performed; they bore also at Mahometan festivals. He then no share whatsoever in it, and could not had in his possession a letter from an therefore be considered as in any degree officer in the Company's service, com- paying respect to the idol, but merely and plaining that on a recent occasion he had solely to the native prince. And it was been obliged, on the requisition of the evident, having a due regard to the situacollector of the district, to attend at one tion of those individuals, that whenever of those idolatrous exhibitions. Many they appeared in public a certain degree Mahometan soldiers had refused, he un- of respect and attention should be paid to derstood, to attend at these Hindoo idol- them. With respect to the care of the atrous ceremonies, as being contrary to pagodas, it was to observed that they their religious feelings. Why should not were in many instances connected with the same freedom of refusal be allowed to large and extensive property; that they Christians? All he and the petitioners were in fact charitable endowments, granted asked was, that our Government should for religious purposes, and, had those trusts forbear from any interference on these been handed over to the natives, there was occasions; that, on the one hand, they great danger that they would have been should not suffer the natives to be inter- dilapidated, and perverted from their orirupted in the performance of their reli- ginal purposes. Therefore it was that the gious ceremonies; but that, on the other Indian Government had taken charge of hand, they should not compel those who the funds, without the smallest idea that were of a different religion to pay homage they were thereby encouraging idolatry. at the ceremonies of a religion which they As to the delay which had taken place at condemned. He had not the least doubt Madras in carrying those reforms into that the Government at home were desir-effect it was impossible, in consequence ous to carry into effect the instructions of the peculiar circumstances of that present out in 1833; but those who were sidency, that they could be so immediateanxious to see the custom complained of ly and so speedily introduced there as in entirely abolished, and who knew that Bengal. He was certain, however, that until last year nothing at all had been his noble Friend the Governor of Madras done to reform it, had a right to demand would endeavour to carry into effect, with what were the reasons which prevented as much expedition as possible, the inthe Government from carrying those instructions which had been sent out on structions (which it was admitted had been neglected) into full effect? The right rev. Prelate concluded by moving for a copy of the order of the Governor-general of India for the abolition of the pilgrim tax; for a copy of the papers laid before the Indian Government relative to the grant of 50,000 rupees per annum, on account of the temple at Juggernaut; and for several other papers bearing on the same subject.

this subject. He understood that letters had lately been received from the Governor of Madras, stating that he was about to proceed to carry the instructions of 1833 into effect. There was no indisposition; on the contrary, there was every anxiety to act upon them, and it only arose from the peculiar circumstances of the two presidencies that as much progress had not been made in the one as in the other.

The Bishop of London admitted that Viscount Melbourne had no objection there were circumstances of difference be

Papers ordered to be laid on the table.

think them such as to justify the distinction | it, sitting in his chambers, upon an exwhich had been made with reference to parte statement? Supposing he did so, the execution of the orders sent out by and should then refuse to enter upon the the Board of Directors. However, after defence, what would be the consequence? the explanation which had been given by The door would be opened to the possithe noble Viscount, he should not think it bility of a refusal being given to be counnecessary to carry the matter further at sel in a case, and if a man had a right present, to refuse to act in one case, the same right might be exercised in others. If once a barrister were to be allowed to refuse a brief, and to say he would not defend a man because he was in the wrong, many would be found who would refuse to defend men, not on account of the case, but because they were weak men, under the pressure of unpopularity, against whom power had set its mark, because they were the victims of oppression, or were about to be made so, or because it would not be convenient for parties at all times to beard power on behalf of individuals, in the situation of prisoners.

COUNSEL IN CRIMINAL CASES.] The Bishop of London presented a petition from the inhabitants of London, complaining of an alterationwhich had taken place of late years, by which prisoners charged with felony were allowed to employ counsel for their defence. That was a principle of exceedingly questionable propriety, and from what had occurred on a late most melancholy and remarkable occasion, he hoped the Government would see the propriety of referring the question to the Commisioners of Criminal Law Inquiry, in order to ascertain whether some change should not be made in the present practice. He disclaimed everything like imputation on any member of the learned profession, to whom the country was in many respects greatly indebted. The question really concerned the character of the community at large. He did not venture to give a positive opinion upon it, but this he would say, there were passages of God's word which he could not reconcile with the propriety of any man taking a reward to prove that to be otherwise which the accused himself had distinctly confessed.

Lord Brougham was at some loss to understand the grounds upon which the petitioners rested their prayer. The pri vilege of the exercise of which they complained was not that of the counsel, but of the prisoner; it was a privilege upon which the elucidation of truth, the prevention of injustice depended, and the life, liberties, and property of the subject were not worth an hour's purchase if the freest scope, he would say more, the most unrestrained license was not given to the bar. Whether in a case which was right or wrong this was the rule, the sacred rule of the profession, and it was one upon which the safety of the administration of justice depended. With regard to the judgment of counsel, as to the propriety or impropriety of taking any case in hand, how, he would ask, could any man know a case to be a bad one before it was tried?

The Bishop of London said, the noble and learned Lord had admirably demolished the phantom of his own creation, for he had said nothing which called for the observations made by the noble Lord. It was not competent for a counsel to refuse a brief, but he lamented the hardship of the law, which, since the recent alteration which had been made in its provisions, might compel a man to do that which was against his own conscience, namely, defend by a speech a man whom he knew to be guilty.

Petition laid on the table.