Page images

which should induce them to change their opinions ; and he was sure that they would not so readily induce the other House to abandon their opinions on this subject. With respect to the differences that had existed between the two right rev. Prelates, he would only say that he regretted that it had taken place; but "Non nostrum inter nos tantos componere lites." He would only add, that lie thought before the learned judge to whom he had so often alluded recommended the Legislature to pass this bill, he should go before his colleagues in the first instance, and propose to them to change their opinions; for he had not yet given any satisfactory reason or authority that could justify his abandoning the report and adopting the bill. Indeed, he was convinced that it was utterly impossible for him to give any such reasons. He must also observe, that he should tell his excellent and learned Friend (Sir John Nicholl) that if he at any time hereafter found his learned Friend's name to a report of a commission, and if he found him the strong and able advocate of the recommendations of that commission, and if he at the same time asked him (Lord Brougham) to bring in a bill founded on such report, he should say to him, " I shall pause, Sir John; for you again within a twelve-month will tell me that you and your colleague were altogether in the wrong, and that you arrived at conclusions directly opposite to those which you should have adopted; no, good Sir John; you must get somebody else to propose your measures." He trusted, in conclusion, that they would not proceed with that bill, but would adopt the amendment of the right reverend Prelate.

The Bishop of Lincoln was understood to declare that, as one of the commissioners, he felt not the slightest hesitation in giving his support to this bill. He was as anxious to maintain the rights and privileges of the Anglican Church as any of his right reverend brethren; but he was convinced that this measure would not produce the slightest injury to any of those rights. He doubted much whether the second clause of this bill would be attended with any of those inconveniences which had been descanted on with so much eloquence by his right rev. Friend (the Bishop of Exeter), or that it would prevent a diocesan having recourse to the forum domesticum.

Lord Wynford recommended, under all the circumstances, the withdrawal of the bill for the present Session. The great grievance pointed out by the commissioners and complained of by the Court of Chancery itself was, that vivd voce evidence was not taken in the courts of Doctors' Commons. The alteration which the commissioners had recommended in this respect was the very best that could be made, and he was at a loss to know why that recommendation should be given up. The present course was most expensive to the litigating parties, and inconvenient to the progress of public justice. In regard to appeals, he did not think that nine out often cases which came before the courts would be appealed, while the expenses of sending a commission into Cornwall or other distant counties would be, to many, ruinous. As to the shortening of time in the trial of those cases, the most rev. Prelate stated, that any question at issue would be settled in six months, but he feared such a period would be found much too short for Doctors' Commons. He was persuaded, that there would be neither a saving of time nor of expense by the plan proposed, and if the bill passed he made no doubt that he should hear of cases remaining five years unsettled. He was unwilling to trespass upon the time of their Lordships, but there was one clause of the bill to which he felt bound to call their attention. If sentence of deprivation was passed, it was provided by one of the clauses of the bill that the expense should be paid out of the living. To such a provision he decidedly objected, and if their Lordships were to sanction such a clause, he would ask what answer they could give if they were again asked to pass a measure for the abolition of Church-rates, and placing the maintenance of the fabric of the Church as a burden upon the property of the Church itself? He considered this a most objectionable interference with church property, and if they allowed the poor livings to be taxed for the purposes of this bill, it would be impossible to refuse to tax the property of the Church for the support of the fabric of the Church. What pretence was there for such a scheme, or on what principle could it be sanctioned? He thought it was most unjust to make the succeeding incumbent pay for the faults of others, and he could see no principle upon which a clause containing such enactments could be supported, and lie was persuaded, that if the bill containing such a clause passed, the results would be most injurious to the Church.


The Duke of Wellington was not at all astonished that the most rev. Prelate should press their Lordships to pass the bill now under their consideration during the present Session. It was above ten years since the subject to which this bill related was under consideration by a committee of their Lordships' House, and since the report on which the bill was founded had been given in, and he was not therefore surprised that the most rev. Prelate, after having seen several attempts made to pass a measure on this subject, and after having seen the failure of all those attempts—he was not, he said, under those circumstances, surprised that the most rev. Prelate should have thought it expedient to attempt to prevail upon their Lordships to pass the bill under consideration, or that he should have requested the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack to prepare and bring in such a bill. He must confess, however, that considering the importance of the subject, and the lateness of the period at which the measure had been brought forward— considering, too, that this was the first occasion on which the House had had an opportunity of deliberating on the bill, and considering also the difference of JBrjf!" upon the right

rev. Bench, he was most anxious, keeping all these circumstances in view, that their Lordships should postpone the measure till some future time. Having listened with the greatest attention to the discussion which had that evening taken place, he was obliged to confess that he had heard no answer to some of the most important objections which had been urged against the bill by the right rev. Prelate who had moved that the third reading should be postponed for six months. In the first place, he did not think it was quite clear that the forum domesticum, which the whole of the right rev. Prelates admitted should still continue to exist, could exist were the bill passed, and the sixth clause remain unaltered. The right rev. Prelate who had last spoken, had said, that he doubted whether the sixth clause did not deprive the bishops of their authority in this particular court. The right rev. Prelate said, there might be i

doubts upon the subject; but surely, if such doubts existed on a point of so much importance, they ought to be cleared up, and it ought fully to be understood what authority would remain to the bishops should the bill pass. That, then, was an argument for delay, and for more mature deliberation. The right rev. Prelate had read a letter from the principal commissioner, who was stated to have framed the report on which the bill was founded, and whose opinions were entitled to the highest respect, and it appeared that he also thought that the forum domesticum ought to be preserved. It appeared also, that in the first bill which had been introduced on this subject, certain words were inserted which tended to secure the authority of the bishops and the continuance of those courts, but for some reason, which had not yet been explained, those words had been omitted in the present bill, and he could not but doubt the propriety of that omission. He, therefore, thought that their Lordships ought to pause before proceeding further with the measure, which in his estimation required more mature deliberation than it had yet received. Then he must confess, also, that he had great objections to the clause which had been alluded to by the noble and learned Lord near him (Lord Wynford). He could see no reason for the extraordinary provisions of that clause, nor could he approve of the principle upon which it was framed. It might be proper to provide for the payment of costs, but it was only when all other means had been tried, and every other source exhausted, and not till then, that they should make the costs fall upon the property of another, on the property of persons who were innocent—namely, the patron of the living, or the incumbent succeeding the delinquent. He never could consent to the bill without a material alteration in the clause to which he alluded. But, considering that that objection was a mere trifle compared with others that had been urged, and considering that by far the most important provisions of the bill were contained in the first aud second clauses, to which their Lordships' attention had scarcely been directed, he would decidedly recommend the postponement of the measure till a future period of the present Session, or till the next Session of Parliament.

The Lord Chancellor said, that the question whether this bill should pass into a law ilite Kessioo, was one of very considerable tmuortMiMX, because another uaeanue, wbkm ti»e House bad before it in the year 1*36, had been necessarily postponed vatd sotue caeaswe of die kiod should be iabroduoed. In that year thei* Lordships appointed a Select Couutiiutee, to inquire into the general question of Ecclesiastical Courts, and resolutions were adopted which were embodied to a bill which would nave taken its regular course, »f it had not been found that it was Impossible to proceed until a 'bill -of the description of that now before the Bouse should be agreed upon. In order to meet the difficulty, lie with the | approbation of a portion of the rigii; i reverend Bench of Bishops, for he must confess they did not all concur in his views, submitted to their Lordships a bili for the purpose cf establishing a jurisdiction to meet the difficulties which were in existence, and to provide for the leginaiion of | that description of property mentioned in | the present bill. When he pioposecl that | measure, he had entertained great hopes | that it would have passed into a law, for { it appeared to be a scheme which would | remedv many of the evils which had existed, and would efieclually provide for the discipline of the Church. When its object became generally known, however, { various difficulties were started by those who were most interested in it. It became j exceedingly unpopular among the clergy, it received no countenance in the House, and it appeared that it was never likely to pass into a law. He had always held himself ready to give every assistance to remove any acknowledged evil, and to adord a proper tribunal, bin the last Session and the early part of the present Session of Parliament passed away without anything being suggested which would Temedy the evils complained of, and then the most rev. Prelate devised the present plaB, which was acced"<l to by some of the right rev. Bishops, and which, besides, it was admitted, was most likely to be beneficial in reference to the subiect now before the House. It appeared to him that the bill would be most likelv to succeed, and to secure the desired object; it did no possible injury to any man, and it provided a jurisdiction less expensive and more effectual than any which had hitherto i, and it changed that which it was universally admitted wanted im— the Ecclesiastical Courts, it was, that be did commit that

great offence which had brought down upon hiin all the vitupeiatiou of the right rev. Prelate, of helping to bring Id this measure, and therefore it was, dial lie had also been guilty of having assisted in passing the bill through its former stages, and aow of proceeding \ui,h it to its third reading. The right rev. frulate knew well what part he had taken in the mailer, and ht knew quite Wq|1 from what quarter the bill proceeded; but knowing this, und moved by some passion which might be agreeable in some, but not in others, to exercise, he made an attack upon him in reiercuct to the mailer. Now, these things tiad not the slightest effect upon him, and it the right rev. Prelate thought that he was like some other men he was much mistaken, for he could assure the right rev. Prelate that he had no feeliugs at all upon Hit subject, and he would not be led away by the lemptation which had been !ilhi out lo huu t j say one word in answer to those reinaiks which had been made. Now, leawin; vituperation of the light rev. Prelate, he would address himself shortly to the subject matter of complaint before the House. The noble Duke had said very rightly and properly, that this was not only a matter of great importance, but also of great difficulty. He held in his hand the Report which had been made to their Lordships in the year 1832, and the nobic and learned Lord had said that, considering the great name that was attached to that report, it must be received with great respect. If anything, however, would detract from the weight to be attached to that report, it was, that he was not aware of any one member of the commission who now adhered to the opinions which he had there expressed, and to the proposition which had been made. He could name a mapt ily of those whose names were appended to t'le Report who had so altered their \ iews, and he believed that there was only one individual who retained the opinions he had expressed. He had stated, that there was no member who had signed the Report whose present opinion could be quoted in favour of it. No doubt it proposed great improvements in the system which had formerly existed; btit the House must remember the very gra**'" nience and expense which I* to the ecclesiastical courts, < which there could be no cxa, was a grievance which all at

to which all were agreed, some remedy should be applied, the only question being how it was to be done. Now, he repeated that this was a preliminary measure only, and the real question was, whether matters should be allowed to continue as they were, or whether the plan proposed would not be a material improvement? He had no hesitation in saying, that the effect of it would be a great saving of the expense and delay which were now necessarily incurred, for the very proposition which it made was neither more nor less than that, instead of the parties going to the Bishop's Court first, they should go at once to the Arches Court, all the intermediate proceedings and consequent costs being therefore saved. Yet this was the clause at which the bishops were alarmed, and which they opposed, as detracting from the importance of their office, and as taking away their authority. It was said, that it was too late in the Session for the other House to take up this bill. This might be a very good reason for the other House not to proceed with the bill when they received it; but it appeared to him, that it was no ground for their Lordships not to proceed with it. There was another measure of extreme importance connected with the Church which could not be proceeded with till this was passed; and he very much feared, owing to the tardy proceedings of the House in the early part of the Session, both these measures ran a great risk of being delayed another year. On these considerations, he hoped their Lordships would not postpone the passing of this measure.

The Archbishop of Canterbury said, that although he had not, in the course of this debate, heard anything to shake his opinion of the desirableness of passing the present measure, yet as it seemed to him that the general feeling of the House was against proceeding with it, he was not disposed to press it at the present time.

The amendment agreed to, and bill put off.

Prisons (scotlaxd).] On the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Prisons (Scotland) Bill,

Lord Brougham thought it was high time that some improvement should be effected in the prisons of Scotland; but although he was anxious that a measure with such a tendency should be passed, lie did not think the present bill by any

means likely to answer the object for which it was intended. No one could, for a moment, hesitate to admit the necessity of introducing something like discipline into the gaols; but he was at a loss to know how a bill so preposterous, so monstrous as the present, could have been swallowed wholesale by another House, for which he had the highest respect, although the bills emanating from that House were sent up to their Lordships rather late in the Session. It was his intention to propose many alterations in this bill, if their Lordships went into Committee upon it. He had strong objections to the extraordinary powers given to the Central Board of Commissioners, who were irresponsible for their acts, and could not be removed without a special act of Parliament.

The Duke of Buccleuch said, that since the bill had been read a second time, he had devoted the greatest attention to a subject of so much importance. He resided in Scotland, and had ample opportunities of knowing the state of the prisons there, which certainly reflected disgrace on the country: he agreed, however, with the noble and learned Lord, that the present bill was not likely to remedy the evil. Had it been sent up earlier in the Session, he should have recommended its being referred to a select committee; but under existing circumstances, he felt himself reluctantly bound to oppose the measure in all its future stages. He agreed with the noble and learned Lord as to the indiscretion of giving such extraordinary powers to irresponsible commissioners. It was said, that if the present bill were not passed, it would be impossible to improve the prisons in Scotland. He was not satisfied as to the correctness of that assertion; for by an Act passed some time since, new prisons might be erected in that country, and a bill might be introduced during the present Session, making such a step compulsory, not optional. The noble Duke concluded by moving, that the bill be committed that day three months.

The Duke of Richmond regretted extremely the course taken by the noble and learned Lord, and by the noble Duke, who admitted the present disgraceful state of the prisons in Scotland. A great deal had been said about the extraordinary powers given to the Central Board of Commissioners; but it would be easy in Committee to introduce amendments to check that power. The state of the gaols in Scotland (with the exception of those in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen) was such, that rather than the present measure should not pass, he would wish to see a bill introduced preventing imprisonment altogether for the next twelve months, as felons came out of the gaols much more depraved than they were on their committal. He still thought, that there was abundance of time left within which to mature a useful bill, and it really was a matter of the highest necessity, that their Lordships should immediately apply themselves to the accomplishment of that object. He believed, that he need not then more urgently press upon their attention the great degree in which an uniform system was demanded in Scotland; for example, what could be more unjust than that judges should inflict the same length of imprisonment in different gaols for similar offences, seeing that no two prisons were alike in their system of discipline? He felt persuaded that the people of Scotland would not complain at having to pay 30,000/. a-year for the improvement of their prisons, and lie hoped, that the noble Duke, though he might not consent to their going into a Committee of the whole House, might still agree to refer the measure to a Select Committee, which certainly could report before the Session was brought to a close.

Lord Wharncliffe objected to the bill altogether. There was not the least use in appointing a board, for the inspector and the secretary would really do the whole of the duty, and he thought, that if the bill did go into Committee, they ought to strike out the whole of that part which related to penitentiaries.

The Earl of Minto said, that Scottish gaols, both the buildings and the management were of the very worst description, and he felt satisfied, that to prolong the prison system of Scotland for six months would be a much greater evil than could result from the most ill-devised measure that Parliament could possibly adopt. He therefore recommended the House to refer the bill to a Select Committee.

The Earl of Haddington said, that according to the bill itself, as it stood, the proposed enactments could not come into operation before a yeur and a half; if they waited till next Session, they might

[merged small][table][merged small][table]
« PreviousContinue »