LORDS' AMENDMENTS. (Hansard, 21 August 1857)

§ SIR GEORGE GREY
said, that in moving that the Lords' Amendments be considered and agreed to, he wished to explain that as the Bill had reached the other House so late as to come within the rule which their Lordships had laid down not to read any Bill a second time after a certain day, their Lordships had not entered into a consideration of it, but had struck out all the new clauses, and had reduced it to a mere continuance Bill. There were some points in these new clauses to which it was perhaps not altogether inexpedient that further consideration should be given, such, for instance, as to the provision fixing the incomes of the Bishops by assigning them lands, and that relating to the mode in which the accounts of deans and chapters were to be made out. The provision relating to terms of enfranchisement only gave a legislative sanction to that which was now the actual practice of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. It was founded on the recommendation of the Select Committee, and the Commissioners had ever since felt it their duty to act upon that recommendation. It would, perhaps, however, be more satisfactory to the lessees if the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Walpole) would state that it was the intention to continue to act upon that rule.

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, that as the right hon. Baronet had appealed to him, he would repeat what he had stated before, that the Commissioners had felt it their duty to act upon the recommendation of the Select Committee in regard to the terms of enfranchisement, and would continue to do so. He hoped the lessees would rest satisfied with that assurance. He extremely regretted that the measure which had been sent up to the other House had not passed into law. It was of great importance that Parliament should settle the manner in which the incomes of the Bishops should be permanently paid, and also that it should settle the form in which the accounts of the deans and chapters should be drawn up. He should adhere to the principles contained in the Bill from a conviction that they were calculated to put the question of Church property upon the best footing.

MR. RIDLEY
said, he must also express his great regret that the Bill, as sent up to the other House, had not passed into law. 2001 The declaration just made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite on behalf of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners was calculated to give great satisfaction to the parties interested.

LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, he too regretted that the Bill had not passed in its integrity, but this regret was much lessened by the fact that the clause introduced into the Bill by the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was among the clauses struck out by the other House.