HC Deb 19 August 1831 vol 6 cc330-1
Mr. Lefroy

moved the second reading of this Bill.

Mr. Hume

hoped the Bill would not be pressed at this hour. His hon. and learned friend (the member for Kerry) had strong objections to urge against it, and was disposed to move for the repeal of the Bill of which it was an amendment, and to take the sense of the House upon it. If it were pressed, he would move, that it be read a second time that day six months.

Mr. Lefroy

said, that the object of the Bill was only for the erection of chapels of case in places where the distance from the mother church of the parish was too great for the convenient attendance of many of the parishioners. It was to amend a former Act for that purpose, and its object was to enable Bishops to do that in adjoining dioceses which they might do in either of them separately.

Mr. Jephson

said, the old bill was so objectionable that it ought not to be amended.

Mr. Leader

objected to the Bill being brought forward for a general system. It was hard enough for Catholics to be called upon to build one church in a parish, but it was too much to call upon them to build chapels of case wherever the Bishop might direct.

Sir Robert Inglis

would not go to the question of the expediency of building this or the other church; but he would contend, that the land was liable for the erection of necessary churches, and not any particular party, Catholic or Protestant.

Mr. O' Ferrall

opposed the Bill.

Mr. Stanley

hoped the hon. and learned Member would withdraw the Bill. It made no improvement either way, and where no improvement could be made, it was better not to meddle with the law.

Mr. Lefroy

expressed his regret and astonishment at the course taken by the right hon. Gentleman as to this Bill, which was sanctioned by the Government in the other House.

Mr. Stanley

denied, that it was so sanctioned. When shown to his noble friend (the Secretary for the Home Department) his noble friend said, in which he fully concurred, that it was not a measure of importance either way; seeing, however, that the feeling of that House was against it, he thought it would be the wisest course to withdraw it.

The House divided on the motion that the Bill be now read a second time: Ayes 11: Noes 38—Majority 27.

List of the AYES.
Bankes, W. Stewart, C.
Best, Hon. W. Trevor, Hon. H.
Courtenay, T. P. Vere, H.
Hughes, H.
Maxwell, H. TELLERS.
Praed, M. Inglis, Sir R. H.
Pringle, A. Lefroy, T.
Stewart, E.
List of the.NOES.
Denman, Sir T. Power, R.
Dixon, J. Ross, H.
Doyle, Sir J. M. Rice, Right Hon. T. S.
Ellice, E. Ruthven, E. S.
French, A. Stanley, Lord
Forbes, Sir C. Stanley, Rt. Hon. E.
Gordon, R. Strickland, G.
Graham, Sir J. Tennyson, C.
Heneage, G. F. Thomson, Rt. Hn. C. P.
Hodgson, J. Torrens, Col.
Hoskins, K. Villiers, H.
Howick, Lord Warburton, H.
Johnston, A. Walker, C. A.
Killeen, Lord Waterpark, Lord
Lamb, Hon. G. Williams, A. W.
Lambert, H. Wyndham, W.
Langston, J. H. Wood, John
Leader, N.
Mullins, F. TELLERS.
O'Ferrall, M. Hume, J.
O'Grady, S. Jephson, C. O.
Ossory, Lord