HL Deb 12 July 1832 vol 14 cc259-60

On the Order of the Day for the Third Reading of this Bill being moved.

The Marquess of Westmeath

opposed the further progress of this Bill, from a conviction that it was not only a useless, and, therefore, a needless, exertion of legislative power, but that it was also highly dissatisfactory to those who understood its nature, and altogether delusive to those who had not studied its details.

The Lord Chancellor

said, that the Court of Delegates, to which this Bill referred, had certainly been constituted originally by the issue of a mere Commission from the King, under which their juridical and appellate judicial functions were exercised; but it had existed for so long a period, ever since the middle of the sixteenth century, in fact, that the abolition of a Court which had existed for so long a time, demanded somewhat more formality than the mere cessation of the issue of a Commission from the Crown, and for that reason it had been deemed proper that an Act of the Legislature should sanction that act of abolition. It was for this purpose that the Bill was framed.

Lord Wynford

begged to call the attention of his noble and learned friend on the Woolsack, particularly to one improvement recommended by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. It was well known that at present Bishops were subjected to great expense and delay in bringing clergymen to account for any misconduct of which they might be guilty, and that, in consequence of such expense and delay, individuals, who were really a disgrace to the church, had been enabled to retain their situation for a length of time. Such cases, he was delighted to say, were very few; but, at the same time, he hoped that the recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners Would be attended to; and that another Court would be constituted for the purpose, which would be productive of less expense and delay than the present.

The Marquess of Westmeath

said, that as this Bill was not to come into operation until February, there was ample time to prepare a really efficient measure; and he, therefore, saw no advantage to be gained by sending the Bill to the Commons in its present loose and slovenly state.

The Lord Chancellor

said, that the Bill was neither loose nor slovenly, but, on the contrary, was very ably and carefully drawn, and very efficient for its purpose. It was necessary to pass the Bill now, in order that parties might be spared the expenses to which they would otherwise be subject, and that the Privy Council, by having notice previous to the operation of the Bill, might be enabled to make the necessary preparations for its administration.

Bill read a third time, and passed.