Lords Sitting of 15 March 1831

MINUTES.
Bills. The Royal Assent given to the Calico Duties' Bill, the Mutiny Bill, and Marine Forces Bill. The Poors' Settlement Bill was read a third time, and passed. The Irish Population was committed.
Petitions presented. By Lord KING, from Bilton, and two other Parishes in Gloucestershire; from Wareham, and several Parishes in Norfolk, praying for a Commutation of Tithes; from St. Luke's, Middlesex, for the Removal of the Metropolitan Police; and from Waterford, for the Repeal of the Duty on Sea-borne Coals. For Reform, by the Earl of RADNOR, from a Parish in Lanarkshire:— By the Earl of Rosslyn, from the Borough of Dysart, Fife: —By the Duke of NORFOLK, from Leslie, in Yorkshire: By the Earl of ROSEBERY, from a Borough in Linlith-gowshire:—By the Marquis of BUTE, from Swansea. By the Earl of CHICHESTER, from the Landholders and others of the eastern Division of Sussex, complaining of the Distress of the Agricultural Classes, and praying for Relief. Against Negro Slavery, by the same noble Earl, from Brighton, Newhaven, and Lewes, and Welmington, in Sussex:—By the Marquis of DOWNSKIRE, from Car-rickfergus and Lisburne:—By Lord CARBERRY, from Congregations of Wesleyan Methodists, and of other Protestant Dissenters:—By the Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND, from the Shipowners of Newcastle, against an Alteration of the Timber Duties. By the Earl of WESTMORLAND, from the Borough of Kirkby Kendal, against the Punishment of Death for Crimes against Property.

REFORM.
Lord Suffieldpresented a Petition from a hundred in the county of Norfolk, praying, first, for a Reform in Parliament; secondly, for an alteration of' the Poor Laws; thirdly, for the adoption of the plan of Mr. Ruthven in that respect; fourthly, for a commutation of Tithes; and fifthly, for applying the Church Revenues—one third to the repair of churches, one third to the maintenance of the poor, and one third to the payment of the officiating Clergy. In this last prayer

441
he did not concur. In presenting this petition, he took the opportunity of stating, that the plan of Reform proposed by his Majesty's Ministers met with his unqualified approbation. He had heard persons who were interested in boroughs and borough influence declare, that they felt grateful to his Majesty's Ministers for having, by this measure, relieved them from the odium and obloquy to which that species of influence subjected them; and if such persons, who were to lose valuable and beneficial interests by the measure, so highly approved of it, and felt so grateful to Ministers, how much more deep was the obligation under which the rest of their Lordships lay to his Majesty's Ministers, for having freed them from that odium and obloquy which they, as part of the aristocracy, shared with those having interest in boroughs, without having any of the advantage. He himself had no such influence, and felt grateful to the Ministry for being freed from the obloquy, by a measure which could not fail to be extensively beneficial to the country. He had always been averse from that species of influence, and yet he had been subjected to his share of the discredit which it attached to the aristocracy generally.
The Marquis of Lansdownpresented a Petition in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform, from the Steward and Corporation of the borough of Calne, in Wiltshire. He did not mean at that time to enter into details of the measure, but there was one consideration personal to himself connected with this petition, on which he was desirous to say a few words. He was himself a member of that Corporation, and the petition was that of the whole of the Corporators. They stated that the measure proposed by his Majesty's Ministers met their highest approbation, as they had long been of opinion, and still retained that opinion, that the elective franchise ought to be extended to householders paying a certain rent; and that they were persuaded that the effect of this measure would be, to produce a good feeling throughout the country. It might not be out of place to observe, that this was a Corporation which, under any influence that had prevailed there, had never been sold or purchased; and, he might add, that he himself had not more than four houses in the borough which paid so much as 10 l. rent. His Lordship presented Petitions to the same effect from Glas-
442
tonbury, in Somersetshire, from Auchtergaven, in Fife, from the Incorporated Wrights, Masons, Coopers, Glaziers, &c. of Edinburgh, who stated that they were interested in the present monopoly of the Elective Franchise; but that they gladly surrendered the privilege for the benefit of their fellow-citizens.

PRESCRIPTION.
Lord Tenterden, pursuant to notice, introduced his Bill for shortening the period of Prescription in respect of claims for tithes, and certain other cases, and to lessen the impediments to the transfer of real property created by outstanding terms and judgments. His Lordship observed that their Lordships were aware that the time of legal memory or prescription extended so far back as the reign of Richard the 1st, but it was often impossible to trace a right or a title so far back and the Judges were often obliged to tell Juries that they might presume that it existed as early as that period, because there was proof of its extending so far back as to afford some ground for the presumption. But this was an uncertain method, liable to mistakes and abuses, for different opinions might prevail among the Judges, as to what were good grounds for the presumption. In truth, the presumption might be defeated by matter of fact, and by a legal opinion, which made it open to many doubts. Sometimes, when things were claimed by grant, and the law generally held, that prescription was founded on some grant, and that grant could not be established, it was customary to presume the existence of the grant. This was another source of doubt. It seemed to him, therefore, much better to fix by law a much more limited period, to the extent of which distinct proof must be given. This would be more reasonable and less uncertain. The Bill which he introduced was divided into distinct parts. The first part related to claims of profits arising out of land, such as rights of common; and as to such rights, his Lordship proposed that they should not be defeated where uninterrupted enjoyment for sixty years could be proved, even where the right could be established only for thirty years, and its commencement could be shewn; he meant, that it should not be defeated merely by proving the commencement, unless it was also proved that the commencement was illegal. The second part related to what in law were entitled easements, by usage

443
enjoyed by one over the lands of another; and as to these, he proposed that they should not be effectually challenged where an uninterrupted enjoyment for forty years could be proved. The third part related to ancient lights and their obstruction. As to these, also, Judges were often obliged to leave it to Juries, to presume that they were ancient lights. It was, in his opinion, preferable to fix the period of twenty years by law; for which period, if uninterruptedly enjoyed, they were to be secure from challenge unless originally enjoyed by contract or agreement. The fourth part, and what perhaps would be reckoned the most important part, was that which related to tithes. At present, under the maxim of nullum tempus occurrit ecclesiœ, moduses in lieu of tithes could be challenged and set aside, unless they could be proved to have existed or presumed to have existed so far back as the time of legal memory. But there again the doctrine of presumption was resorted to; and it was much better that some reasonable time should be fixed, up to which positive proof of the existence of the modus should be required, and at which, if the proof was given, the modus should be unchallengeable. He proposed to apply to modusses the principle he had first stated, and he would make evidence of the enjoyment of land for thirty-years without the payment of tithes sufficient to establish the right to exemption, or to pay a modus as the case might be, unless a contrary practice could be distinctly proved at some antecedent time, and he proposed, where the evidence extended to the enjoyment for sixty-years, to make the right absolute and indefeasible unless contract or agreement, as in the other cases, could be established. He was himself most sincerely attached to the Clergy of the Church of England, and should be very ungrateful if he were not; but it was better for them as well as for others, that some reasonable time should be fixed by law as to these matters. He had felt much difficulty in settling, to his satisfaction, the time at which the prescription should begin to run against the different persons interested, and some might think the end of three years from the passing of the Act too short a period, and others might think it too long. He had, however, fixed on three years, and the Act was not to extend to any action or suit already depending, or which might be begun within three years. He had in-
444
troduced provisions to save the rights of persons non compos, of infants, married women, persons absent beyond the seas, &c, during the period of their incompetency to urge their claims. The Bill also made some beneficial alterations in the mode of setting out the claims on the record. Another subject to which the Bill applied was what were called terms for years in conveyances, and it was proposed that a certain period should be fixed—two years, for instance—from the time after they should be satisfied, at which period they should be held in law to be passed and gone, without any formal surrender; and as to terms attending the inheritance, and which the owner of the inheritance might at any time call on the termors to surrender, it was proposed that the owner should hold the inheritance perfectly purged of them. He had availed himself of the suggestions of the late Law Commissioners, where he thought them suitable to his purpose.
The Bishop of Bristolwas anxious that the contest about moduses should be put an end to, but it was of the last consequence that full notice should be given to parochial incumbents as to the time in which the prescription began to run, and that ample time should also be afforded them to assert their claims. The clerical incumbent stood in a different situation in this respect from the lay impropriator, for the former was often negligent in the prosecution of his claims, from a desire to avoid differences with his parishioners, and especially with those to whose patronage he might have been indebted for his living.
The Archbishop of Canterburywas satisfied that the noble and learned Lord was actuated by no unfriendly disposition towards the Clergy of the Established Church, and that he would take care to avoid any violation of their property. He should have been more alarmed if such a Bill had come from less high authority, and begged to be understood as not pledging himself either one way or the other till he saw the details. He agreed with his right reverend brother, that it was desirable that the clerical incumbent should have ample notice and time to prosecute his rights. He suggested to the noble and learned Lord also, to consider if a more summary mode of proceeding might not be adopted in regard to the claims for tithes.
Lord Tenterdenonly wished the Bill to

445
be read now a first time, when it would be printed, and stand over till after the recess for the consideration of professional persons, and those who felt themselves interested, to see how far the provisions of the Bill were sound in principle and susceptible of execution. As to the suggestion of the very reverend Prelate, he had engagements which prevented his forming a plan of that description; but if a proper one were proposed by any other of their Lordships, he would be ready to assist and to support it.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he could not allow the question to be disposed of without expressing his great admiration at the able and luminous manner in which the noble and learned Lord had brought forward the measure, and which, he had no doubt, in that part which related to the Church, would finally receive the approbation of those among the lay and clerical orders whom it affected. He would not follow his learned friend in the details of the Bill, but he was anxious to declare that, in his opinion, a more large or substantial measure of legal reformation had seldom been propounded. It required professional knowledge to be aware of all the evils attending the present system of prescriptive rights, and it required professional knowledge to understand the great importance of the Bill, and the advantages it would bestow when substantially adopted by the Legislature, and passed into a law. The part which the most reverend Prelate, and the right reverend Prelate, commented upon was certainly the most important of all; but he could assure the House that some parts of the Bill respecting terms of years, or what were called outstanding terms, were not of much less importance. The measure, in his opinion, proposed a most salutary amendment of the existing law in that respect, and it tended to the lopping off of much chicanery, by which preferences were given or obtained in cases of encumbrances on real estates, and to the extinction of a most expensive legislation. The Bill performed a great good with respect to those outstanding terms, and to that practice known in the Court of Chancery by the name of squeezing out certain encumbrances, by one encumbrancer catching hold of another, which was, notwithstanding, a mere ghost or shadow unexpired, which had been satisfied, though not formally surrendered. This correction of the practice of squeezing
446
out encumbrances was a part of the Bill almost equally important with that which related to the property of the Church. He agreed with his excellent noble and learned friend in the principle of the Bill, and he only thought it right that time should be afforded to those whose interests were affected by it to examine it in detail, in order that the House might have the benefit of both ecclesiastical and professional opinions. Undoubtedly there were points touched on by the right reverend Prelates which called for much attention, and he agreed with them that it would be very hard to let a person suffer who had allowed his rights to slumber, not from any symoniacal consideration, but from an honourable feeling; for it was not probable that a person who had received a good living would turn round on his patron, and give notices which might have a doubtful appearance. He would not occupy their Lordships with any further observations, but he could not avoid saying thus much in order to avoid the appearance of neglect to the measure of his noble and learned friend, and he would conclude by wishing it all possible success.
The Earl of Fifeobjected to the inquisitorial powers given in bankruptcy cases, and made several observations on the tendency of Lord Wynford's Fraudulent Debtor's and Law Expenses Bills, and remarked, that under the former of these Bills, a man who was called fraudulent because he was unfortunate, might be, coffined up in a narrow cell of a prison, till nothing remained but bones, and till the flesh was rotten. He was proceeding with these observations, when he was called to order by
The Lord Chancellor, who observed, that it was a rule in law that there must be an end to litigation, and it was a rule in legislation that there was an end of debating when a measure was passed. The bills to which the noble Earl alluded were not then before the House, and it was therefore, manifestly irregular to debate them at that time.
The Earl of Fifethen said, that he would take another opportunity of calling their Lordships' attention to the subject.
The Bill read a first time.

SUB-LETTING ACT.
Lord Melbourngave notice, that he meant on Friday to present a Bill to their Lordships to Repeal the Sub-letting Act.
Lord Carberryasked, whether it was the intention to repeal the whole Bill or only a part?
Lord Melbourn: It was intended to repeal the whole Bill, but by no means to depart from the principle. The intention was, merely to make some alterations in the mode of accomplishing the object of the Bill.
Lord Carberyreplied that the explanation was perfectly satisfactory.