HC Deb 26 June 1837 vol 38 cc1623-9

The House in a Committee of Supply, on the Miscellaneous Estimates.

Mr. Goulburn

took the opportunity of calling attention to the fact of all the large trees at the Bayswater side of Kensington-gardens having been cut down. These gardens were a place of recreation to the inhabitants of London, and although the young trees which had been substituted might appear very pleasing in the eyes of a planter, they did not at all so in those of the public. He had been told they were old—old they were, no doubt, but they were not decayed. Unless some restraint were put upon those who had the management of these gardens all the large and majestic trees which remained might be cut down for the same reason, namely, that they were old.

Mr. Methuen

said, that before these trees had been cut down last year, out of about 100, there was not, he believed, one which, if not absolutely dead, was not in a dying state. Some of them, too, had been blown down by the wind.

Mr. Hobhouse

observed, that when he was at the head of the Woods and Forests, he was assured by the gentleman who had the charge of these gardens, that it was essentially necessary that the greater part of these trees should be removed.

Several votes were agreed to.

On the question that a grant of 100,389l. to defray the charge of the salaries of her Majesty's consuls-general, consuls, and vice-consuls, and of the superintendents of trade at Canton; also of the contingent expenses connected with their public duties, be made to her Majesty.

Mr. Hume

objected to that part of the grant apportioned to defray a moiety of the expenses for chaplains and chapels for British subjects abroad.

Sir R. H. Inglis

held, that it was the duty of the Queen to provide for the means of religious instruction for all her subjects, into whatever part of her dominions they were sent on the public service.

Lord Sandon

wished to call the attention of her Majesty's Ministers to the manner in which the consuls abroad attended to their duties. He wished also that they would take means to put the navigation and commerce of the country on a better footing than it now stood with regard to Spain, where such high duties were levied, that they amounted almost to a prohibition of our trade with that country.

Mr. Poulett Thomson

, in reference to the first topic, replied, that the matter was under consideration. With regard to the second question, there had long existed just grounds of complaint, and he had hoped that our navigation and commerce would have been relieved from the difficulties referred to by the noble Lord long before this. It was in that hope that the Government of this country had hitherto refrained from having recourse to any retaliatory measures. He could only say now, what had been stated before by the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Foreign Department, that negotiations were going on, which, he believed, would lead to a satisfactory result.

Mr. G. F. Young

complained, that this question, which was one of vital importance to British trade, had remained unsettled so long. Three or four years had elapsed since he brought it under the attention of the House, and things remained in the same state still. It was then said, that the political state of the country was so distracted, that nothing could be done. Her Majesty's Ministers might go on in that way till doomsday. He thought it would be better for them to name some definite period, say two or three months, and if, at the end of that time, their negotiations had not the desired effect, then let them have recourse to measures of retaliation. Such a declaration would materially quicken the disposition of the Spanish Government to fulfil the hopes entertained by the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade. The high discriminating duties imposed by the Spanish Government had almost destroyed the British trade to that country.

Vote agreed to.

A grant of 9,953l. for the charges of the salaries, &c., of the inspectors and superintendents of factories, appointed under the Act of 3d and 4th William 4th.

A grant of 5,800l. to defray the salaries and expenses of the inspectors of prisons, appointed under the Act of 5th and 6th William 4th, cap. 38.

Some conversation arose on the report of the inspectors.

Mr. Hawes

said, the alterations which had been made in Newgate were not considered by the inspectors to be improvements.

Lord John Russell

said, the most gratifying part of the report was that which stated that an alteration was proposed to be made, so that all untried prisoners could be kept in separate cells. He feared, however, that it could not be carried into effect, unless the present building were pulled down, and a new one erected.

Mr. Alderman Wood

defended the conduct of the city authorities. He thought they had done every thing that could be done; and he expressed his surprise that the hon. Member for Lambeth, who was himself a citizen and the son of a citizen, should be continually attacking the government of Newgate, while he never ventured to say anything of Horsemonger-lane gaol, with which he was more immediately connected. He recommended his hon. Friend to turn his attention to that quarter.

The following votes were then agreed to:—

A grant of 51,840l. to defray the expenditure for the several branches of the Mint.

A grant of 79,334l. for allowances or compensations to persons formerly employed in the public offices or departments, or in the public provisions of the Acts.

The following votes were agreed to without observation:—

10,000l. for relief to Toulonese and Corsican emigrants, Dutch naval officers, St. Domingo sufferers, American loyalists, and others, who have hitherto received allowances for services performed or losses sustained in the British service.

1,850l. to defray the expense of the national vaccine establishment.

3,000l. in aid of the Refuge for the Destitute.

3,073l. for confining and maintaining criminal lunatics in the buildings attached to Bethlehem hospital, for the year 1837.

On 4,600l. being proposed to pay the usual allowance to the Protestant Dissenting ministers in England, poor French refugee clergy, &c.,

Mr. Baines

objected to that part of the grant which applied to the Dissenting clergy, upon the ground that it was not acceptable to the persons who received it. Many of the petitions sent up to that House praying for the abolition of Church-rates, had prayed at the same time that this grant might be discontinued, though the parties petitioning were Protestant Dissenters themselves. The Dissenters objected to the vote, upon the ground that if they deemed it unreasonable, that they should be called upon to pay Church-rates, because those Church-rates were applied to the support of an establishment of which they did not altogether approve, it was not very consistent that they themselves should be receiving the benefit of a grant which came in a great degree from the members of the Church. Upon that ground, he believed, it would be more acceptable to the Protestant Dissenters generally, if the grant were wholly discontinued. It was true, that Dr. Pye Smith, an eminent Dissenting divine, approved of the grant, and desired to see it continued; but he did so, because it came originally out of the privy purse of George 1st. Now it came out of the Consolidated Fund. Therefore, if the grant were put to the vote, he should oppose it, not from any distrust of the persons in whose hands it was placed, and by whom it had always been admirably administered, but because it was not consistent with the principles generally maintained by those in whose behalf it was continued.

Sir Robert Inglis

contended, that there was no connexion whatever between the question of Church-rates and the vote now under consideration. The hon. Member for Leeds wanted a little gentle violence to be applied by some hon. Member on that side of the House proposing to negative this vote; but they understood his tactics too well to be likely to assist him in that manner. He did not think there was any reluctance in the Protestant Dissenting ministers, or in the body generally receiving this grant, and he, for one, was in favour of its continuance.

Mr. Baines

assured the hon. Baronet that he was mistaken; the ministers of the three denominations did not approve of it.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

believed, that the Dissenters were very much divided in opinion upon the subject. He certainly did not see why it should be discontinued as long as it was found to afford a substantial and welcome relief to many aged and respectable men. If there were any conscientious objection to the grant, the remedy lay with the Dissenters themselves, since it was not compulsory upon any man to receive a fraction of the bounty, unless he were fully disposed to do so.

Mr. Hindley

thought that the vote rested upon a wrong principle, and ought, therefore, to be discontinued. If the Dissenting clergy needed relief, the Dissenting body were rich enough to support them.

Sir Edward Knatchbull

supported the vote. He did not think that the hon. Member for Leeds (Mr. Baines) was authorised in stating that the grant was objected to by the majority of the Dissenting body. In the part of the country with which he was connected, he knew that it was gratefully received by many most excellent and respectable men.

Mr. Samuel O'Brien

only wished that the feeling which prompted this vote were extended to Ireland, and that something of the same kind might be done for the poor clergy of the Roman Catholic church in that country.

Vote agreed to.

On a vote of 8,928l. for the Roman Catholic College being proposed,

Colonel Perceval

protested against such a perversion of the public funds, and de- nounced the grant as a premium upon sedition and agitation.

Sir Robert Bateson

protested against the grant, and attributed the disorders of Ireland for the most part to the fatal system of education which prevailed in Maynooth. Constituted as that college was at present, such a grant would be worse than a waste of the public money.

Mr. S. O'Brien

considered that the principal objection to the grant was, that it was so small. It was disgraceful that so miserable a pittance should be doled out to the Catholic priesthood, and he thought that the Catholics, as free subjects of this empire, had an equal right with their Protestant brethren to the support and protection of the state for their clergy.

Viscount Sandon

concurred with the last speaker in thinking some general provision for the Roman Catholic clergy advisable, but the question at present was this particular grant. It was admitted on all hands that the system pursued at Maynooth was extremely bad. However, though he objected to the system, he did not think that under present circumstances we ought to abandon the grant, and he should therefore, not oppose the Motion. He could not, however, but feel astonished at seeing no opposition to this vote upon the other side of the House. He should have expected to see whole benches of hon. Members starting up and declaring that they could not think of wounding Protestant consciences, by subjecting them to a payment for Catholic priests, inasmuch as they loudly protested, on the part of the Catholics, against being burthened with any payments for the support of a Protestant clergy. He repeated, that he was surprised at the torpor which seemed to have overpowered hon. Members opposite upon this occasion. If their senses had not been steeped in forgetfulness, he felt confident that they would have rushed forward to protest with one voice against such an invasion of the rights of conscience.

Mr. Hume

expressed his wish that the vote should be withdrawn, as it had met with so much opposition from the members of the Church of Scotland.

Dr. Bowring

expressed his opinion that the House should not contaminate itself with any grants for religious purposes.

Lord Clements

said, that if claims were founded on antiquity, those of the Roman Catholics would be the most valid. He did not mean to say that the Roman Catholics of Ireland would refuse the as- sistance which the House was about to offer them; but he would say, that it was indeed a pity that a sum so trivial should appear for such a purpose on the estimates of the House—a sum which, in his opinion, amounted to no more than a mock liberality.

Sir George Sinclair

remarked, that it was in consequence of the enormities which had been perpetrated in Scotland by the adherents of the Popish faith that that country had been induced to consider the prevalence of that creed its curse and bane; and he hoped that the voice of the country would always be raised against such a system of religious belief.

Mr. Callaghan

stated, that the clergy of the Church of Ireland were as sincere in their love of their country as any hon. Gentlemen opposite. Let hon. Gentlemen bring forward the subject on a broad basis, and then they would see if the exclusive system was or was not supported in Ireland.

Mr. Borthwick

observed, that he knew nothing of the opinions entertained by the clergy of Ireland but through the newspapers. He would, however, affirm, that the conduct of the clergy of England in political matters was quite irreproachable.

Mr. Plumptre

declared, that he could not reconcile himself to the voting away of public money, for the support of religion the principles of which he believed to be erroneous; he should therefore divide on the Question.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 52; Noes 12: Majority 40.

List of the AYES.
Baines, E. Jackson, Serg.
Bernal, R. Lambton, H.
Bowes, W. Lemon, Sir C.
Bowring, Dr. Macleod, R.
Brabazon, Sir. W. Morpeth, Visct.
Brotherton, J. Murray, J. A.
Callaghan, D. Musgrave, Sir R.
Chalmers, P. O'Brien, W. S.
Chichester, J. P. Ord, W.
Clements, Visc. Parker, J.
Colborne, N. W. Pechell, Capt.
Dennistoun, J. Pinney, W.
Ebrington, Visct. Ponsonby, J.
Elphinstone, H. Potter, R.
Ferguson, Sir R. Power, J.
Gordon, R. Rice, T. S.
Grey, Sir G. Russell, Lord J.
Harland, W. C. Seymour, Lord
Hawes, B. Smith, R. V.
Hay, Sir A. L. Stanley, E. J.
Howick, Visct. Stuart, R.
Hume, J. Thomson, C. P.
Thompson, Col. Wood, Ald.
Thornley, T. Young, G. F.
Tooke, W.
Willbraham, G. TELLERS.
Williams, W. Baring, F. T.
Williams, W. A. Woulfe, Serg.
List of the NOES.
Bateson, Sir R. Perceval, Col.
Bell, M. Rushbrooke, R.
Egerton, Sir P. Sinclair, Sir G.
Gladstone, W. Tyrrell, Sir J.
Hamilton, G.
Hinde, J. TELLERS.
Inglis, Sir R. Plumptre, J.
Mackenzie, T. Borthwick, P.

The other items were agreed to. House resumed,

Report to be received.