Commons Sitting of 6 June 1828

ST. MARY-LE-BONE VESTRY BILL.
The report of the committee on this bill was brought up. On the motion, that the amendment be read a second time,
Mr. Astellcontended, that no case had been made out against the present Vestry. After the books for the last twenty-two years had been examined, certain gentlemen had found that more money had been expended than they were pleased to think necessary; but that fact did not at all show that the Select Vestry were unworthy of

1117
the confidence of the parish. They were now called on to put an end to a vestry that had been established, by act of parliament, sixty years ago. It had been found necessary, at that time, to have a Select Vestry, on account of the extent of the parish; but if it was necessary then, how much more was it now, when the population had increased to one hundred and twenty thousand persons. What was the nature of the proposition in this bill? Why, that each inhabitant householder rated at 25 l. should have a vote in the election of vestrymen. Now, there were in the parish ten thousand rated houses; and would not the House be going too far, in extending so largely the power of such householders? The bill went to overthrow the vested rights of the higher classes of the inhabitants. Many complaints had been made of the vestry: but none of the allegations had been proved; and the duke of Portland had petitioned against the bill. It went to take out of the hands of the present vestry the fulfilment and management of the contracts into which they had entered. They had hitherto carried on the affairs of the parish to the satisfaction of the inhabitants; and no ground had been established to call on parliament to interfere with their management. He should move, as an amendment, "That the report be taken into consideration this day six months."
Sir T. Baringsaid, that the hon. gentleman was altogether ignorant of what had passed in the committee, and could not possibly know how far a case had been made out. He was himself acquainted with many members of the Select Vestry, and entertained respect for them individually, while he refused them his confidence as a public body. Their gross extravagance was proved by the fact, that the parish under their management had incurred the enormous debt of 227,000 l., although possessed of an income of 150,000 l. per annum. But, independently of this mismanagement, he objected to the body, on constitutional grounds. The principle itself was a departure from the spirit of the English constitution. They were invested with powers not granted to any body in the state. They nominated themselves, judged their own cause, and audited their own accounts. How could the hon. member say, that such a system had received the approbation of the inhabitants, in the face of their solemn protest
1118
against it? Not to mention other facts against the management of the vestry in 1811, such as the giving of 470 l. for a dinner, the parish actually borrowed money in 1814, at the enormous discount of twenty per cent. While they were building a chapel in the parish at a vast expense, an alteration was suggested, which compelled the architect to have a considerable part of it pulled down. It was also proved, that the item of church furniture was not less than 2,000 l. For covering the pulpit, the charge was 159 l.; for covering the reading desk, 139 l.; for the churchwardens' table, and its appurtenances, 166 l.; for two chairs, 213 l.; for cushions, 100 l.; and for the clerk's desk, 261 l. They had also purchased colonel Eyre's ground for a watch-house; they paid a large sum, and yet it was not yet appropriated to that purpose. Their rates had increased fifty per cent during the last four years. They wanted to have a picture for the church, and applied to Mr. West, who painted a piece on muslin according to their directions. Although it was to have been a transparency, they made no arrangement for fixing it before the light, and it was in consequence laid aside. This they might have had for 120 l., but they gave 800 l. To Mr. Rossi, for certain figures, they paid400 l. Aggrieved by such extravagance, and oppressed by so mischievous a principle, the parish had had no alternative but to apply for the present bill.
Mr. Rosssaid, that the hon. baronet had been misinformed in many of the statements he had made. He had stated the parish debt at 227,000 l.; but he had over-looked the fact, that a great part of it consisted of annuities. He had valued those annuities at the price they cost when the money was borrowed, which was 98,000 l., when he ought to have made his estimate upon the present value, which would reduce that amount by 30,000 l. The amount of the income of the parish he had stated at 150,000 l.; but it was in reality, only 110,000 l. In one instance, a dinner had been given on a perambulation, but that was the only instance of the kind. With respect to the change from the chapel to the church, the cost to the parish only amounted to 2,000 l. If the House thought there had been some unwise expenditure, at least no corrupt motive had been proved. Out of the seventeen members who had voted for this report,

1119
nine were not present when the evidence; was given, and of the remaining eight four only had attended a single meeting. He knew that they had said they did not care for the evidence, but that was not the thing he complained of. He denied that the accounts were a secret to the inhabitants. Every respectable parishioner was able to see the accounts of the parish, if he requested to do so.
Mr. Hobhousesaid, that the hon. gentlemen opposite had displayed a very earnest kind of eloquence on behalf of the select vestry, and he was not surprised at it, as they were, in fact, their own clients, being members of that body themselves. He was, however, notwithstanding all that had been said, as much opposed to the principle as ever; being well assured, that such power could never be exercised with satisfaction or advantage to the parish. It was asserted, that none of the allegations against their management were proved; But this he must deny, as several had been so far substantiated as fully to warrant a conclusion against the system generally. He was astonished to hear it asserted, that the inhabitants were satisfied, when it was known that five thousand had petitioned for the bill. Would it be affirmed that they were not parishioners? Although the duke of Portland was not a personal friend to the measure, five hundred of his tenants had given it their support. It was monstrous, that this irresponsible body, possessing a power so abhorrent from the spirit of the British constitution, should be suffered any longer to exist. The vestry said, "It was avowed that this bill, if carried, was only the first of a series of attacks against the system of select vestries generally." He, for one, avowed such an intention, and was about to give his vote in hopes of reforming the general frame of those bodies.
Colonel Baillieinsisted that the grievances complained of were wholly imaginary. The rates were less, on an average of ten years, than they had ever been, and the vestry contemplated a further reduction. The parishioners were in general satisfied with the decisions of the vestry in cases of appeals.
Sir T. Fremantlecontended that the charges against the Select Vestry were unfounded, and had originated in prejudice.
Mr. Humedenied that the annual revenue of the parish was only 100,000 l. In twenty-one years the vestry had col-
1120
lected 1,848,000 l. The last account stated the revenue at 154,000 l. in the preceding year it was 158,000 l., and in the year before that 149,000 l. This was exclusive of a debt of 227,000 l., making the actual expenditure in twenty-one years 2,075,000 l. In 1813, the parish agreed to build a church, which was to cost 19,810 l., and after it had been erected, even to the cupola, by a vote of seventy-six select vestrymen, it was ordered to be pulled down, and re-constructed at an expense of 75,000 l. He put it to the House, whether it was fit that the vast majority of a parish, hostile to such an extravagant vote, should be bound by it. It had been proved also, that 2,152 l. had been laid out upon velvet for the altar-piece, and 12,000 l. given for the site of St. Mary's church, which had been bought of individuals connected with the vestry. He did not, however, mean to bring forward any charge of corruption. The vestry had a lease of the workhouse from the duke of Portland; and from 1798, to 1827, 79,900 l. had been expended upon it. The sum of 27,000 l. had also been applied to the erection of a court-house for the meetings of the vestry. The vestry had borrowed money of one of their own body at five per cent., and had refused to take the loan from another party who offered it at only four per cent. These facts shewed that some control over the vestry was necessary. And what was the control provided by the bill? Merely that one-third of the vestry should retire every year; so that a vestryman continued in office for three years: the vacancies were to be filled up from the parishioners, and no man was entitled to vote who was not rated to the extent of 25 l. per annum.
Dr. Phillimoreobjected to the bill, as he thought such an election annually would be productive of periodical tumult and disturbance, and he did not think any blame attributable to the present vestry.
Sir E. Owencontended, that, for the sake of the peace and quiet of the parish, it was necessary that the bill should be passed.
Sir T. Baringsaid, he was as anxious as any body to avoid the evil of a popular election; and was willing to raise the qualification of a voter to 50 l., or even to 100 l.
Sir F. Burdettthought that the objection suggested by the learned doctor, on the ground that an election, such as that

1121
proposed, would disturb the peace of the parish, was wholly refuted by the practical effects of the same system in an opulent and extensive parish adjoining. They had there an example to the contrary. There was no annual tumult consequent on the election; but all their proceedings were conducted in the spirit of harmony and concord. The House ought to remember, that there was a large property at stake on the present occasion, and that if wealth, character, and rank, were entitled to consideration, they were arrayed in favour of this measure in the parish. What was the dangerous doctrine against which so much alarm had been excited? Why, a 25 l. annual qualification, and this apprehension was urged in a House of Commons as a too strong experiment of free election—a portion of whose members was returned by 40 s. freeholders. He did hope, in justice to the parish, in obedience to the dictates of common sense, and in accordance with the general desire expressed on the occasion, that the House would consent to the bill.
The House divided: For the Amendment 105; Against it 88; Majority 17. The consideration of the report was consequently put off for six months.

BULL BAITING.
Mr. Littletonrose, for the purpose of presenting four petitions from Staffordshire, praying that a law may be enacted for the prohibition of the practice of Bull-baiting. After the late member for Galway (Mr. R. Martin) had succeeded in obtaining a bill for the better protection of cattle, magistrates, generally, for some time, acted on the impression, that a bull came within the term cattle. The court of King's Bench, however, had come to a contrary decision; and all the Judges had given it as their opinion, that bulls were not cattle, and, consequently, that they were not protected from being baited. It was decided, that cows and steers, of the age of two years, were cattle; but, that the adult male did not come within the description. This refinement of the court of law, he did not understand; and if Mr. Martin had not thought that his bill would put an end to the practice of Bull-baiting, he would have introduced a clause for the purpose, that it might never be looked upon as a matter of doubt. On the question itself, he had great doubt whether it would be wise in the legislature to put an
1122
end to Bull-baiting by positive enactment. He could not make up his mind that it was proper to deprive the poor and labouring classes of this species of amusement or sport (if sport it really was), while the rich were permitted, by the game laws, to possess an exclusive enjoyment, which, upon every principle, must be held equally cruel. Hunting, shooting, and horse-racing, might be less brutalizing in their effects; but it seemed hard that a poor man, who earned his money by the sweat of his brow, and required relaxation, should not be allowed to spend a few shillings as he thought proper upon his pleasures. It was, perhaps, wiser not to interfere, but to trust to gradual improvement and to the consequent gradual advancement of civilization— for the termination of a practice to which, unquestionably, there were objections.
Mr. W. Smithsupported the prayer of the petitioners. As even the hon. member himself had admitted that the practice was brutal and brutalizing, the sooner it was put an end to the better.
Sir James Mackintoshpresented a similar petition from West Bromwich. He entirely concurred in the prayer of the petition, and, though he was not prepared with any practical measure, he thought that the legislature might interfere with effect to prevent these barbarous and brutal sports.
Sir J. Newportconcurred in all that had been said on the subject, and cited the case of Waterford, in which the brutal practice had been terminated by the resolution of the mayor of that city.
Mr. Benettfollowed on the same side. He said, he recollected when the practice was so prevalent, that in one day there were three Bull-baits in the cathedral church-yard of Wells. No legal mode of preventing it was available; as he was told that the people had a prescriptive right to bait bulls there on one day in the year. He was happy, however, to learn, that, from the influence of public opinion, the cruel practice had ceased altogether in Wells.
Sir J. Wrottesleyconcurred in what had fallen from his hon. colleague, being quite sure that the increase of moral and religious feeling would shortly put an end to Bull-baiting, without recourse to a legislative enactment.
Ordered to lie on the table,

MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Miscellaneous Services were referred,
Mr. Dawsonsaid, that, in laying these estimates before the committee, he should be ready to give every information in his power, as to the grounds on which they were framed. There was, however, one item to which he wished more particularly to call the attention of the committee, as he thought it related to a subject in which hon. members must feel considerable interest. He alluded to an item of 7,000 l. for finishing the committee-rooms of both Houses of parliament. This was the last sum which would be required for completing those buildings. When gentlemen considered the great convenience which had arisen from the increased accommodation afforded for the committees of that House, and the still greater convenience that would be afforded by the addition of a good library, he thought they would not think the expense too great. They had a room of very handsome proportions, a room possessing every convenience for a library, with the exception of books; and he thought it would be a reflection on the House, if hereafter any person went into that room and found it, as it was at present, without a single volume connected with law, history, geography, or general literature. He did not mean to propose any vote on this subject; but, in his opinion, a proper library ought to be formed, consisting of books of reference—books of general knowledge, connected, not only with the history of this country, but the history of Europe and the colonies. It was, perhaps, too late in the year to propose a grant for this purpose; but next year, if such a vote was brought forward, he trusted that it would meet with the encouragement it deserved.
Mr. S. Ricesaid, that, although when he first brought the subject of the library under the consideration of the House, his views had been misrepresented, and much sarcasm had been thrown on the project, he was convinced that it was a proper object on which to lay out a portion of the public money. He should be glad to see a sum of money voted in the present session for so desirable a purpose. He could wish the library to be open even when parliament was not sitting, for the convenience of members, who, when casually in town, might not
1124
have access to other depositories of knowledge.
Mr. Bankesthought the House of Commons ought not to be without a library. It would, however, in making a selection of books, be as well to wait until next year, because probably they might then obtain, at a moderate price, duplicates of valuable works from the British Museum.
Mr. Brightsaid, it was of very great importance to have a library to refer to.
Mr. Humeapproved of the formation of a library, and thought it ought to be kept open constantly. He was highly pleased with the conduct of Mr. Spiller, the librarian, who received only 100 l. a year for his useful and unremitted services.
The Speakersaid, he had heard with great pleasure the eulogium bestowed on Mr. Spiller. The duties imposed on the librarian were scantily remunerated. He, however, had never heard any complaint from that individual. He believed that, with the exception of a fortnight in the year, the library was open to every member.
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, that the labour of Mr. Spiller in the library had become so great, that it would be necessary for the House to grant him some assistance.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas of opinion, that a larger remuneration should be granted to the librarian, and entirely approved of the formation of a library.
On the resolution," That 80,000 l. be granted to defray the expenses of the alterations in Windsor Castle,"
Mr. Humebegged to know when there was to be an end to these alterations? 'When they were in their prosperity and had a god-send, they gave part of it, 500,000 l., to finish Windsor-castle. Then it was found that more was necessary, and the estimate was 644,500 l. Now they were asked for 80,000 l.; so that there remained 64,500 l. to be paid. He must therefore beg to know whether this was all they would be asked for?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he felt himself bound to answer the question, from the double capacity in which he stood, of commissioner and chancellor of the Exchequer. It was true, that at first, 500,000 l. was thought sufficient to carry into effect all that had been contem

1125
plated; but it was soon found that more would be necessary, and the expense was then estimated at 644,500 l. He was bound also, in candour, to add, that it was supposed that 50,000 l. more will be required; making the whole nearly 700,000 l. It must be recollected, that the original data on which the estimate was founded were extremely uncertain. Windsor-castle was not a building that was to be raised from the ground, the expense of which might be easily estimated; but it was an old building that was to be repaired. However, an estimate was made, but on examination it was found that the timbers were in that state of actual rottenness, that it was wonderful the building stood at all. The replacing of these timbers enhanced the expenses beyond any thing that could have been contemplated. The foundations, too, in many parts of the building, were in such a condition, that perpetual additions were made to the expense. But this was one of the cases in which, though the expenses were great, they were extremely satisfactory. Windsor-castle had been not only made one of the most convenient and elegant palaces for the monarch of this kingdom, but it was among that rank of buildings which would be the pride of the country, and attract the admiration of foreigners. He believed the money not only to have been well laid out, but that the country had money's worth for its money.
Sir M. W. Ridleyconfirmed the statement of his right hon. friend. Not a single shilling had been wastefully expended; not a stone had been placed which was afterwards withdrawn. Every thing had gone steadily and regularly forward, and in the best possible manner. It was the unexpected rottenness of some of the timbers which had so much enhanced the expense. On one occasion, a ceiling of one of the rooms had given way; and had there not fortunately been workmen on the spot, the whole north side would, in all probability, have come down. There was every reason to suppose that no further sum would be required for furniture than that stated in the estimate. There must undoubtedly have been a much greater outlay on that account, had not all the ornamental furniture, the candelabra, &c, been removed from Carlton-house, and carried to Windsor. The 50,000 l. additional, which it might be necessary to call for hereafter, would be for the purpose of
1126
completing works not originally contemplated, because not considered at that period to be absolutely necessary, but which on further survey were found to be indispensable to the completion of what had been begun. It would be the last money called for, for the present purpose; but he must state it honestly to be his opinion, that Windsor-castle would not be what it ought to be, unless, at some future period, an additional sum of money should be laid out upon it.
Mr. F. Lewissaid, the fact was, that Windsor-castle had been left too long without repair. Nothing could be more gratifying than the sight of what had been done. He could not adequately express his admiration of the identity of effect which had been produced between the old and the new part of the structure. It was quite surprising that so much had been accomplished with the means. The money that had been already voted, however, was not, in his opinion, sufficient to do what ought to be done. Looking at the fair degree of splendor which ought to belong to the principal palace of the Sovereign of this country, he hoped parliament would not abandon the undertaking until it should be completed. No one could say that the money hitherto granted had not been well applied.
Mr. Humecould not permit the hon. gentleman's statement to pass without entering his protest against it. It was mighty well for an hon. member to talk of a splendid residence for the king of the country. The hon. member had said, that no one would object to the expense that had been incurred. There were millions who would object to it. At a time when bread could scarcely be found for a large portion of our population, it was unjustifiable to lavish such sums upon such purposes. The expense, within the last four years, of Buckingham-palace and Windsor-castle would not be paid with 1,200,000 l.; and yet the hon. gentleman talked of going on, until the castle was made to suit his taste. It now appeared, notwithstanding the chancellor of the Exchequer's statement, that a further grant of 50,000 l. beyond the sums comprehended in the estimate would be sufficient, that a million of money would hardly be adequate. He wished to ask the right hon. gentleman, why he did not convert various useless royal edifices to purposes of public benefit? For instance, there was Hampton-court,

1127
What was its use, except to maintain certain individuals at the public expense? The palace at Kew he was happy to understand, was about to be removed. The right hon. gentleman ought to direct his attention to getting rid of any of these buildings which were unnecessary, he did hope that a termination would be put to the expense of Windsor-castle. When they saw thousands ruined around them by the pressure of taxation in order to complete this place in a style of unnecessary splendor, it should induce them to pause in their career. The Crown of England did not require such splendor. Foreign countries might indulge in frippery, but England ought to pride herself on her plainness and simplicity. Yet we saw our soldiers clothed in gold lace and other finery, while thousands of the people were starving. This lavish expenditure, this profusion of gilding and gold lace were probably in conformity with the taste of the Committee of Taste. He understood that some of the chairs in Windsor-castle cost 100 l. or 200 l. a piece [cries of" No ! no!"]. At any rate, 167,000 l. was put down in the estimate as the expenditure incurred and to be incurred in furnishing the castle. He trusted that the right hon. the chancellor of the Exchequer, if he remained in office, would draw in this item of the public expenditure as much as possible.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that with regard to regret for the expenditure that had been incurred, that regret would have been better expressed before the works were begun. To complain now was to complain at the wrong end of the business. He must repeat, that, of all the buildings he had ever seen, Windsor-castle was the most magnificent, and the best adapted to its purpose. It ought to be recollected, that Windsor-castle was the only palace ever erected for the king of England. Other palaces had been presented to the king of England by his subjects, or bought and improved for his use; but Windsor-castle was the only palace in this country that had ever been built as such. As to the furniture of Windsor-castle, the fact was, that there had actually been none in it. His late majesty being anxious, during the long war, to avoid increasing the pressure upon the country, had forborne to add any furniture to that already in the castle. This abstinence imposed on his late majesty's successor the necessity of
1128
incurring a heavy expense to supply the deficiency. If, therefore, the hon. member thought the estimate for furniture a large one, he must recollect for how many antecedent years the public had been exempted from expense on that score. With respect to the general question, all he was desirous of was, to finish the works in a manner suitable to that in which they had been begun; and, when that should be accomplished, to avoid, as far as was possible, any further expense.
Mr. Humesaid, he had never objected to the king's having a suitable palace. The only question was whether, after all, he would have one. The palace at Buckingham-house was disgraceful to every one connected with it. The money which had been laid out upon it, and the manner in which the money had been expended, were equally censurable. Adverting to what the right hon. gentleman had stated of the forbearance of his late majesty in furnishing Windsor-castle, he thought the moderate expense of the late reign was more suited to the simple and chaste old English character, than the course which had been since pursued.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he had merely stated, that, in consequence of a long and expensive war, his late majesty had refrained from purchases which were oven necessary, and the House had seen how the hon. gentleman had turned this expression. He was sure it was not necessary for him, in that House, to speak in defence of his sovereign; he was sure that in that country, the people entertained much juster notions of their sovereign, than the hon. member had expressed. The hon. member might charge him with keeping up unnecessary splendor, but it ought to be recollected, that his majesty had done much for the country, and that he at least deserved to be spoken of respectfully. [Cheers.] The hon. gentleman had chosen the very night on which the question of his majesty's splendid gift to the country—he meant the library of the late king—had been called to the attention of the House, to indulge in these observations. If, however, that gift, and the expenses of his majesty's palaces were set against each other, there would be found little charge upon the country.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that, he could not hear what had fallen from the hon. member for Aberdeen, without entering

1129
his decided protest against the introduction of the name of the sovereign into the debates of that House. If the hon. member thought that a greater expense had been incurred than was justifiable, he ought to bring forward a charge against his majesty's confidential advisers. To introduce the name of the sovereign in discussions in that House was contrary to the doctrine and practice of the constitution. The hon. member must know that the Crown could not incur any expense, except on the advice of its ministers. It was, therefore, most irregular and unconstitutional, to introduce the name of the sovereign into the discussion. If introduced at all, it ought to have been introduced as the name of the patron of every liberal institution; the warm friend of the arts and sciences; the ardent and anxious supporter of the best interests of the country.
Mr. R. Colbornesaid, he was the last man to sanction any unnecessary expense; but he must express his admiration of the solid and excellent manner in which the repairs of Windsor-castle had been e fleeted.
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, that the structure of Buckingham-palace, which the hon. gentleman had called a disgrace to all who were concerned in the erection of it, had nevertheless found admirers. He would venture to say, that when it was completed, it would be pronounced any thing but a disgrace to those who had superintended its erection. The same thing had been said of Regent-street; but what did people say of it now? As to the site of the palace, it was not the best possible, but it was chosen because it would not interfere with the conveniences of the people. It was at first proposed to build at Kensington-gardens, but that would have encroached on the comforts of the public. The same objection was thought fatal to the proposal to build the palace at the edge of the Green-park.
Colonel Daviessaid, that when he looked at the square towers at the side, and at the wretched inverted egg-cup, at the top of Buckingham-palace, he must concur with his hon. friend, that it was a disgrace to all who were concerned in it.
Mr. Humesaid, he had intended to speak of the king with no disrespect, but only to regret the taste which he had displayed. If, however, he had said any thing which could be construed into dis
1130
respect, he was sorry for it. He had intended merely to declare his sorrow, that the taste of his majesty was not of that simple, chaste, and solid English kind, which he thought most suitable to the character of the people. He was not aware that he had done more than that, and did not think that the right hon. gentleman had any occasion to read him a lecture on the subject. If, when he was called upon to vote away hundreds of thousands of pounds, regard for any individual was to prevent him from expressing what he honestly felt, there was an end to all deliberation.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, that 15,000 l. be granted for the establishment of the Penitentiary at Milbank, from June, to December, 1828,
Mr. Humeasked, whether that establishment was intended to be given up. It had been admitted last year, that it had not answered the purpose for which it was built.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, there had undoubtedly been a considerable expenditure with respect to the Penitentiary, but the building being now completed, he thought it would be improper to abandon it. In proportion as capital punishment was mitigated, it became necessary to find the means of secondary punishment. The Penitentiary afforded one of those means. The establishment was conducted on the most economical principles. It was superintended by a committee of twenty-one gentlemen, who devoted their time to that purpose gratuitously.
Mr. Maberlysaid, that 500,000 l. had been laid out on this place, and the expense now required to maintain it was greater than would be wanted for supporting in the hulks an equal number of men. There was, besides, this objection, that in the latter place the labour was unprofitable, while in the hulks the labour of the convicts produced 80 l. a-head.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that all prisoners could not be sent to the hulks, but only those who were strong enough to work. He thought it would be as erroneous to abandon altogether the hope of reforming prisoners, as it was to attach too much importance to it. As affording an opportunity of steering a middle course between the two extremes, the Penitentiary was highly useful.
The resolution was agreed to. On the

1131
resolution that 16,182 l. be granted for the expense of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in certain of the colonies,
Mr. Humeobjected to the grant. The Society had been a long time established, and for years used to receive a small grant from government, for the support of missionary clergy of the Church of England, but of late years it got this large sum, and had received altogether 145,000 l. Now, he wished to know how this large sum had been applied. From the account of a Mr. Griffin, who had been employed in Canada on the mission, it appeared that the episcopalians formed but a small portion of the inhabitants in Lower Canada, they did not form one sixteenth, and in Nova Scotia about one tenth. The great mass of the people did not wish for this grant, and ten thousand had petitioned against the application of the money of the public in this way. He would therefore propose, that one half the grant be reduced this year, and next year he would move that the whole be discontinued.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that this was not a new grant; a sum was formerly granted by government for the support of the clergy of the Church of England in Canada, but it had of late years been transferred to this society, who applied large funds of their own to the same purpose. In Nova Scotia twenty-eight thousand of the inhabitants, were members of the Church of England, which was a greater number than any one body of dissenters in that colony, He considered the assistance rendered in this way by government, for their instruction, well applied.
Mr. Moncksaid, he wished well to the society, and hoped it would increase, but he did not think that it required any addition from government for the object mentioned. It was clear the members of the Church of England in these colonies were the minority, and he did not see why they should not pay for their own religious instruction, as well as other bodies of Christians.
Sir R. Inglissaid, it did not appear that the money had been misapplied. He would therefore support the grant.
Sir T. D. Aclandobserved, that it would be great injustice to a very useful body to have this grant withheld, and that it would be unfair to take the House by surprise on this vote.
Mr. Humedenied that he took the House by surprise, for he had given notice of his objection last year.
Mr. Moncksaid, if he thought that the withdrawal of half the grant would leave the clergy of the Church of England destitute, he would not support the amendment, but he could not think that the members of that Church would refuse to provide for their clergy if left to themselves.
Mr. O'Neilsaid, he would support the grant, as he was unwilling to leave the clergy to the generosity of the public.
Mr. Laboucheresupported the original motion, but did not mean thereby to make the episcopal church the dominant party in the colony.
Mr. Hobhousesaid, that, unless he could get some assurance that the grant would be reduced next year, he must support the amendment.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he could not give any assurance of that kind.
Mr. Stuart Wortleysaid, he had great doubts as to the policy of continuing this grant, which was applied exclusively to the ministry of the Church of England. A large majority of the North American colonists were dissenters, and it had lately been resolved by one of the legislative assemblies, by a majority of thirty-five votes, that the Church of England was not the predominant religion. He therefore thought it should be submitted to a committee of that House, to decide whether the vote should be continued, and if continued, whether the money should not be distributed according to the religious circumstances of the population of the colonies.
Mr. Humethought this a fit subject for the consideration of the Finance-committee, or some other that might be appointed for the purpose. He would therefore move, that the vote be postponed for fourteen days, to allow time to have it examined.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerremarked, that the hon. gentleman, as a member of the Finance-committee, must know how inconvenient it would be to have the course they had chalked out for themselves broken in upon, for the purpose of discussing the employment of the public money for religious missions in North America. The subject in itself was very important, but it could not be usefully undertaken by the Finance-committee; nor

1133
by the Canada committee; for their inquiries were too general and extensive to admit of their devoting sufficient attention to this subject.
The committee divided: For the Postponement 28; Against it 107; Majority 79. The original resolution was then agreed to.

List of the Minority.

Abercromby, r. hon. J.

Palmer, Fysche

Benett, J.

Pendarvis, F. W.

Brougham, H.

Ponsonby, hon. G.

Cave, Otway

Russell, J.

Davies, col.

Smith, Wm.

Dawson, A.

Waithman, alderman

Grattan, H.

Wilbraham, G.

Grattan, J.

Wilson, sir R.

Guest, J. J.

Webb, col.

Hobhouse, J. C.

Warburton, H.

Lumley, S.

Wrottesley, sir J.

Maberly, J.

Wood, alderman

Martin, J.

Wood, John

Monck, J. B.

TELLER.

Normanby, lord

Hume, Joseph

The other resolutions were agreed to, and the House resumed.