with sufficient distinctness, induced any of liable to the trader's creditor; but that their Lordships to vote against the second was a very different thing from making a reading of this Bill, which had been in- man liable to not only the full amount troduced for the purpose of freeing the which he had lent to a trader, but to the law of partnership from an anomaly last farthing which he possessed in the founded upon an erroneous decision pro- world. Under the ruling of Lord Mansnounced many years ago, and which had field, acted on by the Judges, the law inled to the most mischievous consequences. vented a contract which did not exist, and It was a principle of almost every system then made the parties to that supposed conof jurisprudence that partnership depend- tract liable for the fulfilment of engageed on the conduct and intention of the ments which they had never intended to parties, and that where there was a con- undertake. The ratio decidendi was extract and agreement between the parties pressed in a judgment given in 1784: the law should declare the existence of a it was in the case of "Grace v. Smith.” partnership, but that where there was no The Lord Chief Justice said the only such contract and agreement the law question was what constituted a secret should not force a partnership upon par- partnership: every man who had a share ties. There was one exception-where of the profits of trade ought to bear his the parties had held themselves out to the share of the loss, and if any one took a public to be partners, the law held them part of the profits he took a part of the to be partners, whether they had con- fund on which the creditor trader relied tracted to be so or not. But the principle for payment. Now, in the present day, of the law of England, as construed by the absurdity of this was obvious to a a decision given nearly 100 years ago, child in a national school, for he would went to the extent of declaring that in know enough political economy to underany case where individuals shared the stand that the profit or loss was realized profits of an undertaking they should be after the creditors had been paid. Nor partners in the eye of the law, notwith- could fraud arise; the law of England had standing any agreement to the contrary taken care to prevent fraud. If one which they might have entered into among man handed over his money or his goods themselves. This was in consequence of by way of loan to a trader, so that he an imported contract under which a person had the visible possession of the money or receiving in any form any portion of the the goods, the creditor of the trader had profits was held to be liable to his last a right to seize the goods or money so shilling. Such was the extraordinary rule handed over. But to show the erroneous of law to which the patience of the Eng- principles to which the present state of lish people had submitted so long, solely the law gave rise he would read part of from reverence for what was hallowed by judgment of the noble and learned Lord ancient precedent. That principle was a (Lord Wensleydale) in which he laid down most unjust one, and it was repugnant to that the person who shared the gross profits the principles of English law. It had, was not a partner; and the however, taken its rise from the natural shared the net profits was a partner. Such tendency of our courts to give validity to was the offspring of the old erroneous a contract if they could possibly do so. principle which was about to be swept A case came before Lord Mansfield in away. If this distinction was read to which he found he could not do so in con- any City man, he would toss up his head, sequence of the very large rate of interest and ask what was the difference between which would have rendered the contract gross profits and net profits. But there was void under the then existing usury laws. another absurdity. Now, where was the In order, therefore, to uphold the agree- difference between the two cases? Again, ment between the parties, Lord Mansfield if a person in trade said to his clerk "I ruled that it should be upheld as a part- shall give you £500, which you nership. By general consent the usury out of the profits," the clerk at once belaws, the parent of the principle of part-came a partner; but if the employer said nership against which this Bill was direct- to him "I shall give you £500 a year ed, had been done away, and it was time I make £1,000," not adding words stating now to get rid of their mischievous off- that the £500 was to come out of profits, spring. In other cases the law of Eng- the clerk was not a partner. Such were land had taken great care to prevent fraud. the artifices which lawyers were obliged If a man handed over money or goods to a to make use of in order to apply this trader, that money or those goods were principle of partnership. They were obliged

person

who

shall take

if

-

Kings

Ordered Local Government Supplemental recently paid a visit to a French prison, (No. 5); Pier and Harbour Orders Confir- where prisoners were confined under sentences similar to our own-periods of one to seven years. There was no solitary or separate confinement; the diet was 1lb. of brown bread per diem, a pint of good soup of carrots and other vegetables every day, and with meat on Sunday. The pri soners were employed in productive labour, and were permitted one quarter of their earnings day by day, on the purchase of 2d., receiving another fourth on leaving some little indulgence, amounting to about the prison. Prisoners worked together,

mation; Ulster Canal Transfer.* First Reading Local Government Supplemental (No. 5) [209]; Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 3)* [210]; Ulster Canal Transfer * [211]. Second Reading-Theatres, &c. [64]; town Harbour [185]. Committec-Greenwich Hospital [179]. Report Greenwich Hospital [179]; Navy and Marines (Wills) [188]; Navy and Marines (Property of Deceased) [189]; Naval and Marine Pay and Pensions [190]; Colonial Laws Validity [183]; Colonial Marriages Lunatic Asylum Act

#

Validity [184]. Considered as amended

(1853), &c. Amendment* [196]. Third Reading-Prisons [141].

and took their meals in common; but no conversation was allowed. The prisoners did not sleep separately, but the monitorial

The House met at Twelve of the clock. system was employed for the purpose of

PRISONS BILL-[BILL 141.]

THIRD READING.

Order for Third Reading read.

keeping order during the night-one prisoner of better conduct than the rest was placed over a cell in which several slept ; and of course the warders paid frequent visits. The prisoners had also the liberty of seeing their friends three times a week. MR. NEATE said, he hoped he should This might to some seem ridiculous lenity. be allowed to urge against this measure It might be said that we were fitter to give those objections which he had not had an lessons to the French than the French opportunity of offering before. He object- were to teach the English; but, in his ed to the Bill, in the first place, because opinion, it was more desirable to move he deemed it to be an unnecessary con- towards lenity than towards severity. We tinuance of a bad system; and secondly, professed to be the most Christian, the because it delegated important duties to most religious, the most moral, and the persons not the best qualified to perform most prosperous community in the world; them. The measure he thought was wrong yet while other nations were steadily purin principle. The custody of prisoners suing a more humane and gentle system, was an Imperial duty, which did not pro- our legislation was characterized of late perly belong to the magistrates. However skilfully prepared were the provisions of years by a return to greater severity of past

times.

Bill read 3o, and passed.

GREENWICH HOSPITAL (re-committed)

BILL-[BILL 179.]-COMMITTEE.
Bill considered in Committee.

the Bill, he considered that the matters of which they treated were matters rather of administration than of legislation. Another grave objection to the Bill was the appointment of Governors to gaols, which under this system was left in the hands of the magistrates. He had had many communications with Governors of prisons, and (In the Committee.) they all expressed their dissatisfaction with such an arrangement. Another great objec Clauses 1 to 19, inclusive, agreed to. tion he had to the Bill was its increased Clause 20 (Government of Hospital, &c.) severity; he thought it a great stain on MR. AYRTON said, the Committee the legislation of the country that we having now disposed of that portion of the should be employing prison labour on un- Bill which related to pensions, he desired productive works. In all other countries, to express his satisfaction that the rights and in all ages, the labour of prisoners, of merchant seamen to participate in however distasteful and disgusting in its the benefit of the funds accumulated character, was applied to some useful end. for the Hospital had been recognized Labour for the mere sake of punishment by the Admiralty; but, as there might be was a form of torture. [An hon. MEMBER: some doubt still existing upon this point The treadmill. The original purpose of from the wording of the Bill, he thought the treadmill was that the labour which it it desirable that a declaratory clause provided should be productive. He had should be inserted, to show that the

MR. LIDDELL asked, whether the members of the Naval Reserve had a right of admission into the Hospital?

Greenwich Hospital was for the benefit of for 120 years past any rights in the the merchant marine as well as of the Hospital, unless wounded in action with Royal Navy, or that the House should an enemy or with pirates. The Admiralty have some distinct understanding from the had no intention to depart from the prinAdmiralty that they were not going to ciples which they had formerly adopted maintain Greenwich Hospital for exclu- as to to the admissions into Greenwich sively Admiralty purposes. It had now Hospital; and with respect to schools, become necessary that the hospital ship, there was no intention to alter the course the Dreadnought, should be done away hitherto followed, and by which, under with, and accommodation obtained in some certain circumstances, children of seamen convenient place on shore. To effect this belonging to the merchant service had a object a sum of £660,000 would be neces- right to the school. sary, which was a large amount to raise for a class whose relations and friends were limited to the shore of any particular country. In former times the Hospital MR. CHILDERS: They have a right was recognized as a public charity, and it of admission-it is expressly reserved to was entitled to receive all the waifs and them. With reference to the use of any strays of the commercial service, such as part of the building for sick merchant seathe unclaimed property of dead seamen ; men, he could only say there was nothing but, for the sake of public convenience, in the Bill which would prevent the Adthis was afterwards yielded up to the Board miralty lending a portion of the building for of Trade, with the promise that an equi- the purposes of an hospital in lieu of the valent should be given from a fund raised Dreadnought. He used the word "lend" by a registration of tickets; but the Board advisedly, because in time of war it would of Trade shortly afterwards came to the be undesirable to deprive the navy of any conclusion that it was very desirable to space in the Hospital which might be abolish this system of registration of wanted after a naval engagement. There tickets, and the Hospital lost the whole of were two sides to the question with reference the equivalent which it was to receive. to the granting of Greenwich Hospital for The Admiralty were about to empty to a the use of the merchant service. It might large extent the Greenwich Hospital, and be very charitable and considerate in the if not converted to some more appropriate Government to give that service some adpurpose soon, he should not be surprised vantage in connection with the institution ; to find the building turned into comfortable but, on the other hand, it must be taken into residences for officers of the navy. He consideration how far the resources of prithought a portion of the building should be set apart for the reception of merchant scamen suffering from the various diseases to which they were subject, and this arrangement, he believed, would result in great benefit to the navy, as well as to the public generally. He concluded by moving Clause 20, after the word "schools," to insert the words, "whether belonging to the Royal Navy or otherwise employed in any service afloat."

MR. CHILDERS said, he would ask his hon. Friend not to press for the insertion of these words, because they would be misunderstood, and would really add nothing to what Government meant in the existing words, which were almost identical. On some of the points mentioned by the hon. Member, there was little to say. One of these was how far Greenwich Hospital was originally intended for this or that class of seamen; and this could only be settled by documents of the reign of Queen Anne. One thing, however, was certain-that merchant seamen had not

vate charity would be curtailed by the fact of this Government aid. The Governors of the Dreadnought hospital would, therefore, do well to see how far their support from private resources would be affected by its becoming known that they were receiving assistance from the public funds. He was afraid there were many of those by whom the charity was now supported who might say, "Government have taken charge of the institution, and there is no necessity for continuing our donations.' The admission of these patients into Greenwich Hospital was a question which the Admiralty might fairly consider when it came before them. There was no intention on the part of the Admiralty to take away any of the rights which the merchant seamen now possessed.

MR. AYRTON said, after the distinct statement of the hon. Gentleman, he thought it would be unnecessary to press the introduction of the words of which he had given notice. He therefore withdrew the Amendment.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT concurred in what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Childers) as to the difficulties which would attend the admission of merchant seamen into the Greenwich Hospital. Amendment withdrawn. Clause agreed to.

Clauses 21 to 42, inclusive, agreed to. Clause 43 (Devises, &c., for Hospital.) MR. LIDDELL said, he trusted the Committee would excuse him if he adverted to a matter that was personal to himself. He had to complain of some imperfect reporting of the observations which he had made on a former occasion in relation to this Bill. He was the more anxious to explain, inasmuch as the Report to which he had alluded had occasioned some pain and dissatisfaction to the naval chaplains. Now, he wished to guard himself from being supposed to utter any reproach against a class of gentlemen who, he believed, discharged their duties in a manner most creditable to themselves and advantageous to their respective cures. He had simply viewed the question in the abstract, and observed that a man who had passed a great portion of his life at sea was not, in his opinion, the most competent person to discharge important clerical duties on shore.

MR. CHILDERS agreed with the hon. Member that it was much better to give these officers a retiring allowance than appoint them to livings in the country. But he, at the same time, wished to say that the hon. Member had used on the previous occasion no words which could cause pain to the present incumbents.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 45 to 50, inclusive, agreed to. Clause 51 (Repayment to Consolidated Fund.)

MR. LIDDELL moved, as an Amendment, to leave out in line 31, from "relates to the end of the clause, his object being to guard against any attempt of the Treasury to lay its hands upon the funds belonging to the Hospital.

MR. CHILDERS said, it was only fair that the Bill which offered inducements to the inmates to go out of the Hospital, thus creating a charge upon the grants of Parliament, should transfer this extra charge to the Hospital funds.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK said, he could not see the justice of the arrangement, nor yet the advantage of it. The inducements given to live out of the Hospital

should not be at the expense of that institution, and he hoped the Admiralty would re-consider the matter. He had the honour of being asked to present a petition from the Captains of Greenwich Hospital, praying the Admiralty, when depriving them of their position in the Hospital, to restore them to that position in the active list of officers which they would have occupied if they had not accepted of the appointment to Greenwich Hospital. He heartily concurred in the claims of those officers, which he believed were founded upon the most obvious principles of justice. There were three officers entitled to the flag if they had been on the active list, and he hoped the Admiralty would give their cases a favourable consideration.

ADMIRAL WALCOTT also warmly advocated the claims of those officers to be placed upon the active list, and said he should consider it to be an act of the grossest injustice if the Admiralty were to reject their petition. Those officers asked for no increase of pay, or pecuniary consideration. They only prayed to be reinstated in that honourable rank which they had been induced to surrender when they accepted the appointment in Greenwich Hospital-an appointment which they at the time believed to be one for the whole of their lives.

MR. CORRY also bore testimony to the justice of the claims of those officers. He had received a letter from one of those captains, stating that inasmuch as commanders, lieutenants, and others, were to be allowed this boon, he could not understand why the Captains should be excluded from participating in it. With reference to the case of Sir James Gordon, he considered it only fair that he should not only be restored to the active list, but he urged upon the Admiralty the justice of appointing him an Admiral of the Fleet.

MR. CHILDERS said, it appeared to him that the Committee had wandered a little from the subject of the clause under consideration. It was the wish of the Admiralty to do every justice to these gallant officers alluded to; at the same time it must be remembered that what they now asked was not a claim founded upon justice, but a boon of considerable importance. After the Act passed these officers would be in the same position as now, except that they would have nothing to do. When the time came for the preparation of the necessary Orders in Council to carry the Act into effect the claims of the officers would be considered. On the real ques