Lords Sitting of 11 October 1831

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a third time; Cotton Factories; Customs' Management; Tithes' Composition.
Petitions presented. By Lord WHARNCLIFFE, from three persons of the names of Harrison, Hood, and Jones, complaining of Hardships experienced by them in consequence of the Game Laws, and praying for an alteration in them. By the Earl of RODEN, from the Inhabitants of Coleraine (Ireland), praying for measures to relieve British Soldiers in Roman Catholic countries from the necessity of joining in Processions contrary to their conscience. By the Earl of CAMPERDOWN, from the Protestant Freemen of Galway, residing in Newtownsmith:—By the Marquis of WESTMEATH, from the Landowners and Freeholders of Clare:—By the Earl of CARNARVON, from the Catholic Inhabitants of St. Nicholas, Galway:—By Lord
468
PLUNKETT, from the Protestant Freemen of Galway residing in Ballindooley, for the extension of the Galway Franchise to Catholics. For Reform. By Lord NAPIER, from Burslem, Staffordshire:—By the Earl of RADNOR, from Mirfield, Yorkshire:—By the Marquis of DOWNSHIRE, from Lye-in-the-Waste, in Worcestershire:—By Lord KING, from Wellington, in Somersetshire; and from Nuneaton, Warwick; by the LORD CHANCELLOR, from Bradford, in Yorkshire, signed by between 6,000 and 7,000 persons:—By Lord KING, from the Rate-payers of St. Pancras, in favour of the Select Vestries Bill; and by the Earl of DARTMOUTH, from the Vicar of the same place against it.

PRESCRIPTION BILL.—TITHES.
Lord Kinghad two Petitions to present on a different subject from that of the Reform Bill. Both petitions were in favour of the Prescription Bill introduced by the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, but which was likely to be strangled in this Session as it had been in the last. One of the petitions was from the owners and occupiers of lands to the extent of 5,000 acres in the county of Suffolk; the other from the owners and occupiers of land in Lakenheath, and they prayed that the Bill might speedily pass, as otherwise they would be continually harassed with suits for tithes, as they had recently been, after an exemption for centuries. The Suffolk petitioners stated, that the lands which they held had belonged to the priory of the Isle of Ely, and as such had been exempted from the payment of tithes; and that they had remained exempt for several centuries, till suits for tithes were recently commenced against them by the Dean and Chapter of Ely, who were lords of the manor, in which lawsuits the petitioners had expended 5,000 l. The Dean and Chapter had lately granted a new lease to their own steward of the manor, and by the terms on which it was taken he was bound to prosecute these suits. The Dean and Chapter had also taken fines from them on the renewal of their leases, as if the land had been exempt from the payment of tithes, and had appointed a Vicar of the parish, who, as might be expected, was a non-resident and a pluralist. This disturbance of the ancient order of things, then, came from the clergy, who professed to be averse to all changes, and to be desirous that everything should remain unchanged, but who, when their own interests were concerned, became arch-disturbers of the peace.
Lord Ellenboroughconsidered it his duty to call the attention of the House to an expression which the noble Lord had used with respect to the clergy. The noble Lord had said that they were the arch-disturbers

469
when their own interests were concerned, although under other circumstances they were adverse to all change. But the more he saw of the conduct of the clergy, the more he was convinced there was the grossest injustice in making such a charge against them. Even they themselves had lately come forward with measures of improvement and amendment. He knew the abilities and kindness and excellent disposition of his noble friend, but really these constant attacks on the clergy had a tendency to detract from the position which his noble friend ought to hold in that House, and very much disparaged him.
Lord King: If the noble Lord had waited to hear the petition read, he would admit that the charge I made was fully borne out by the facts of it, and that in all respects it was well founded. The petitioners complained that the property they held had been for centuries exempted from tithe, but that the Dean and Chapter of Ely had introduced a claim, and subjected them to great and unnecessary litigation. It was for that reason I said that the members of the Church, however unwilling they were to disturb settled institutions, or to agree to such a change as the late great measure would have effected, are very ready to disturb the settled order of things when it is their interest to do so. Such is the case in the district from whence the petition comes; and if the Bill of the noble and learned Lord does not pass this Session, and if the clergy persevere in their obnoxious claim; I believe they will not be able to resist the odium which in a short time will be raised generally against tithes.
Petitions to lie on the Table.
Lord Kingpresented the Petition of the inhabitants of Knockbreda against the payment of tithes.
Lord Suffield: My Lords, I feel myself called on to make an apology to my noble friend at this side of the House for the remonstrances which, some time ago, I made to the course he was pursuing with respect to the Church, for his attack on it, and the observations with which he accompanied the presentation of some petitions on the subject of tithes. But I confess, my Lords, that the events of the last few days have produced a considerable effect on my mind, and I feel that the conduct of certain of the right reverend Prelates in this House, on a late occasion, has been such as to call for some observation; and, my Lords, I will at once avow, that that con-
470
duct has made, in my mind, a considerable alteration respecting them. I speak without any preparation, as I had no idea that any thing would occur to-day to draw the expression of my sentiments from me; but I feel it due to the House, and to that right reverend bench, at once to state, candidly and openly, my feelings. My Lords, I have always looked at the existence of that body in the House as liable to one objection—I always considered that the right reverend bench were at all times ready to throw their weight into the scale in favour of the existing Government. I saw them on all occasions acting along with the Government. I saw them ready and willing to support every Administration until now; but the late events have led me to remark what sort of a Government it is, that the right reverend bench of Prelates are willing to be attached to. So long as the government of the country was arbitrary and oppresive, so long do I find the right reverend Prelates giving it their support; but, as soon as a liberal Government produces a measure for the benefit of the people at large, and for the extension and security of the liberties of the country, so soon do I find the right reverend bench deserting that Administration, and throwing all its power into action against it.
The Earl of Carnarvon: My Lords, I rise to order; and I ask whether it is consistent with the order of our proceedings that a noble Lord should, on the presentation of a petition, be permitted to arraign the conduct of any noble Lord, or noble Lords, for the vote which he or they may have given on another occasion. There would be an end to all freedom of discussion and decision if this were to be allowed.
The Lord Chancellor: As it is my duty to preserve the order of your Lordships' proceedings as far as it is in my power, and as an appeal has been made to that order, which I feel myself called upon to decide, I must at once state, that, in my opinion, to refer to any speech made in a former debate is contrary to the order of the House; and I say further, that to impute a motive to the speeches, or to pass imputations on the conduct of any noble Lord, is contrary to all usage, and perfectly irregular; and neither here nor in the other House of Parliament is such disorder to be permitted or endured. But I must also be allowed to state, that I did not know that my noble friend adopted any such course, and certainly I did not

471
hear him arraign the conduct of any member or body of members of your Lordships' House. I only heard him state—and I may be permitted to say that I know him to be what my noble friend has always shown himself to be—a warm friend of the Establishment, none of your Lordships more so—I only heard him state what the conduct of the bench of right reverend Prelates had been on former occasions, and on a late one. That the conduct, either in this House or out of it, of any noble Peer shall be exempt from observations is a proposition which I am sure none of your Lordships will propound or sustain; and I am certain that the right reverend bench will be the last among the members of your House to wish to avail themselves of any such impunity, or to evade the discussion of the consequences of their conduct on a great occasion. The right reverend Prelates have acted with the greatest disinterestedness. Good God! my Lords, the idea of imputing self interest to the right reverend Prelates is impossible! Good God, my Lords, it is the last charge which I thought any one would have brought against them. They had a right to pursue the course they did. Who can deny it? They had a right to vote against the Government; and if they thought they had the opportunity of tripping up the Government, my Lords, they had a right to do so. It could not be imputed to them that they were actuated by selfish motives when they acted against the present Government, and attempted to trip it up, and probably thought that they had tripped it up.
Lord Ellenborough: My Lords, I submit to you that it is not customary for any Peer to introduce a speech of his own on the question of order, and to supplant the noble Lord who was in possession of the House.
Earl Grey: I don't know whether I may be permitted to say a few words; but if I am, my Lords, I must submit to your consideration, that whatever latitude we occasionally take in our debates, and however far that privilege has been stretched this evening, it is totally irregular to introduce into any discussion, for the purpose of debating them, the grounds on which any Member of this House has acted or voted. I should, therefore, think my noble friend has overstepped the orders of the House by the remarks which he has made on the tendency of the votes of some of your Lordships; but, whether his observations
472
are strictly in order or not, I put it to his good judgment whether the continuance of them can be attended with any advantage, and whether it can be of any service to the end that he has in view to introduce topics which cannot lead to any result.
Lord
Suffield: My Lords, if I have been in the least out of order, I have much pleasure in submitting to the correction of my noble friends, and apologising for any unintentional violation of the rules of your Lordships' House that I may have been betrayed into. I did not come down to the House to-day prepared to say any thing on the subject which my noble friend has introduced; but I thought it right to take the opportunity which the presentation of a petition by him, relating to the Church, afforded me, to offer my excuses for having on former occasions remonstrated with him on account of the terms which he applied to the clergy of the Established Church. My Lords, in doing so, I did not mean to question the motives of the right reverend Prelates in the vote which they gave the other night; but I did allude to it, though I have no doubt their motives were most excellent, and I only stated that which is naturally a matter of fact. In that light only did I state that the votes of the right reverend Prelates were in favour of Government so long as it adopted severe measures against the people; and that they began to be opposed to Government only when a more liberal policy was avowed. So long as the existing Administration held the reigns of power with a tightened hand, so long was it assured of the support of the right reverend Prelates; but the moment the system was to be relaxed, and the people of England were to receive the full measure of freedom which they were entitled to by the Constitution, then, for the first time, were their votes recorded against the Government. This, my Lords, I meant to state as the fact, without imputing motives to any member of your Lordships' House. It only remains for me to apologise to the House for any breach of order that I have been unintentionally guilty of, and for the interruption that I have given to the course of your Lordships' proceedings; and I will sit down, assuring you that I did not mean to say any thing which could be considered as offensive to any member of the House.
The Bishop of London:I concur with the noble Earl at this side of the House, as

473
well as with the noble Earls at the other side, that the greatest inconvenience must attend discussions of this irregular nature; but I trust I may be allowed to say a few words in consequence of one expression which fell from the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack; and I ask that indulgence because, owing to causes which I need not more particularly dwell upon, I had not the advantage of being present on the occasion to which this conversation refers. When the noble and learned Lord states that the Bench of Bishops were influenced in their votes on the Reform Bill by a desire to trip up the Government, I cannot remain silent; and I must declare, on behalf of my right reverend friends, that no such thought ever entered into their minds. During the brief conversation which I had with any of the members of that Bench, preparatory to the debate, I found no such intention expressed by one of them; and I am satisfied that, individually or collectively, they entertained no idea of hostilely opposing the present Administration. So far as the interests of the Church are concerned, my Lords, neither I, nor any of the right reverend Prelates, have reason to complain of the conduct of the existing Government; and, so far from having grounds of complaint on that head, a noble Lord himself has originated one great measure which was satisfactory to us all. My Lords, it cannot be for the interest of the Church that the present Administration should be dissolved, and I am quite sure that in all the history of the country, no votes will ever be found to have been given on purer principles than those which my right reverend friends felt it to be their duty to give on a late occasion. Whether that vote was one of wisdom or not is not for me to decide, but this I will say, my Lords, without fear of contradiction, that the votes of the right reverend Prelates were influenced by none but the purest motives, and by the high considerations which should ever influence that body.
The Bishop of Landaff: You will permit me, my Lords, to say, that it was my earnest desire to have acted as a noble Earl (the Earl of Haddington), who pronounced a splendid eulogium on Mr. Canning, said he should, on the late Debate, and to have voted, if possible, for the second reading, reserving to myself the right of not agreeing to all the clauses of the Bill in its further stages through
474
the House. I was anxious, my Lords, to have framed to myself any excuse which would have justified the giving my vote in favour of the second reading; but the more I considered the measure, the more objectionable did I find it to be, and I felt that it was necessary to mark my sense of the mischief which must ensue from it, if passed into a law, by opposing it in that particular stage. I have done my duty; I feel that I have performed it strictly in accordance with the dictates of my conscience, and, having done so, I care little for what may be said by the noble Lords; and their censures pass me as idle words, or as the echo of those sounds with which we are assailed in our way to the House.
The Bishop of Exetersaid, he was wholly astonished at the remarks which had been made on the motives of the reverend Bench, from the highest quarters. Noble Lords assumed the right to censure the body of Bishops for the vote they had recently given. This censure came from those, too, who, from their office and station, were bound to sustain the institutions of the country. He defied any noble Lord to state a single instance in the history of the country when any Members of that House had been so vilified and insulted as the Bishops had been within the last week, by a person of the highest station in the realm. They had been accused of voting against the Reform Bill because it was the measure of a liberal Administration. Was this charge an instance of liberality; and did the members of his Majesty's Government by these remarks intend to incite and encourage violence? He did not apologize for his warmth; for he should be ashamed of himself if he could be cool upon such a subject. Had the attack upon the Bench of Bishops been made at a moment of excitement, to that excitement he would have submitted; but upon the mere presentation of a petition, and that a petition of no consequence, one noble Lord had abused the Church as the great arch-disturber of all order, and another noble Lord had charged the Bishops with being bound together in a conspiracy against the liberties of the country, and against all that could constitute the welfare and happiness of the people. These were the notions that were propagated every where against the Bench of Bishops, and noble Lords had, moreover, spoken against them in that House, in a tone of sarcasm, if not of

475
direct and positive censure, as a body actuated by self-interest, at variance with the public good. Under these circumstances he had thought it his duty to address their Lordships.
Earl Greysaid, he should be guilty of injustice to himself and other noble Lords, if he permitted this most unprovoked attack to pass without notice. What the right reverend Prelate had uttered was the most intemperate, and the most unfounded insinuation that he had ever heard from any Member of that House. Whether the right reverend Prelate had meant him personally or not he knew not, but whomever he might mean, he could never suffer such an insinuation to pass unnoticed, or without reprobation. The fight reverend Prelate had said, that every man who had spoken from that side of the House had spoken in a tone of sarcasm or reprobation of the recent conduct of the Bishops. He (Earl Grey) asked if such an observation were true, and if it could with truth be applied to the very few words which had fallen from him. He appealed to every noble Lord, whether there was anything in what he had said at all like what the right reverend Prelate had attributed to him. Did he not reprobate the discussion altogether—did he not state it as his opinion that the discussion was altogether inconsistent with the orders of the House—and had he not done all he could to stop it? On what ground, then, would he ask, could the right reverend Prelate make an attack so intemperate, and so utterly without any pretext or foundation? He asked the right reverend Prelate whether it had ever been his (Earl Grey's) custom to say anything whatever offensive to the Church, or anything that was not in support of it? But, said the right reverend Prelate, he had heard from a person holding the highest situation of Government, frequent attempts to degrade, insult, and villify the Church. Whether the right reverend Prelate alluded to him or his noble friend on the Woolsack he knew not, but of this he was perfectly sure, that against neither could the observation or statement be made with any justice or with any truth. The right reverend Prelate was not content with this want of truth, but he had uttered it with all the appearance of a spirit that but little became the garment that he wore. It was the grossest injustice he had ever heard. But the right reverend Prelate had even gone much further. He
476
had said, that those who ought to be charged with the care of the public peace, and were bound to support the institutions of the country, had actually been the instigators of a mob to insult the Bench of Bishops. He could not conceal the contempt, the indignation, with which he heard the charge. He dared the right reverend Prelate to state, if he could, one single syllable of truth to support the falsest and most calumnious accusation which ever had been heard. If any man could be capable of such conduct, no reproof could be sufficiently severe. He rejected the charge as one totally unfounded in truth, and as having no one colour of foundation. He denied that he had ever done anything but what he was obliged to do in the discharge of his duty in that House—nay, so far from encouraging proceedings such as the right reverend Prelate had described, he was one of the very first that would exert the full power of Government to protect those whose votes were hostile to him. He called upon the right reverend Prelate to state his proofs. He had shown for the Bench all the respect he had sincerely felt; but he now repelled, with scorn and indignation, the aspersions which the right reverend Prelate had endeavoured to cast upon his character, and he called upon him to support what he said by proofs.
The Bishop of Exeter, being called upon to produce proofs of what he had asserted, was not unwilling to admit that, although he had charged the excitement which existed against the Bench of Bishops throughout the country to the language which had been held in that House, he had not meant to bring any charge against the noble Earl. He would now, however, proceed to prove the truth of what he had asserted. Irregular as it might be to refer to the Debate that had recently taken place, yet, under the peculiar circumstances of his case, he hoped for the indulgence of their Lordships in being allowed to refer to the proceedings in question. It must be within the recollection of every noble Lord who heard him, that in the first night of the Debate upon the Bill, the noble Earl, in stating the case to the House, without any one thing to excite him from the Bench of Bishops, had thought himself justified in calling upon the Bench seriously to take to mind what would be their condition in their country, if there were to be found a

477
narrow majority of lay Lords against the Bill, and if it were to be discovered that the Bishops had voted with that narrow majority. The noble Earl had put this in a way to show that he expected that the Bench would be induced by the fear of odium to vote with Ministers. To call upon any set of men—to call upon one of the great States of the realm, as they were termed by the sages of the law, and by the law itself—to call upon them by way of a menace of popular indignation, had the tendency—a tendency which the noble Earl, perhaps, little suspected—of exciting the odium of the people. Had not that odium been excited, and was not the Bench of Bishops exposed to its effects? The noble Earl had assumed the character of a prophet, and had told the Bishops "to set their houses in order." It was true that the noble Earl did not conclude the sentence. He left that for themselves to do, but it was impossible not to know that he referred to where the prophet had threatened destruction. The noble Earl, in the same speech, had taken special care to remind the Bench of Bishops that certain important questions were in agitation, which might take the turn that would prove favourable or unfavourable, according to the conduct of the Bench on that night. What were these questions? Where were they in agitation, but in the councils of which the noble Lord was at the head—he hoped so, at least, for he hoped that the noble Earl did not delegate his superiority to inferior minds. If the noble Earl meant that schemes of confiscation were contemplated—if the noble Earl meant that the bold among the multitude would be encouraged, and that the multitude would be goaded on to more immediate execution—then he (the Bishop of Exeter) could, indeed, conceive that the conduct of the Bishops that night might have the effect of driving the multitude to such purposes. Had he said anything but what the proofs he had adduced fully substantiated? The language of the noble Earl had an evident tendency to implicate the Prelates with the people, and to make them be regarded by the people throughout all the country as their foes. The people already pretty well echoed the noble Earl's suggestions, for they read the Debates, and the same language was repeated by the Journals. The Bishops were threatened to be driven from their stations because they did not vote for Mi-
478
nisters—because for once they had thus voted upon the greatest question agitated since the Revolution, when the Bishops had acted in defiance of the Crown. Where would their Lordships have been, where would the country have been, but for the Bishops at the Revolution? The present was the first occasion upon which the Bench of Bishops had opposed the present Ministers, and yet for opposing them this once they were charged with deserving ail the mischief with which they had been threatened.
Earl Greywished to ask the right reverend Prelate, why he had not made the serious charges he now brought forward, when the words he imputed to him were fresh in the recollection of the House, and when he could have made those charges in a regular manner. For his part, he thought that the right reverend Prelate's proofs corresponded very little with his assertions. The right reverend Prelate charged his Majesty's Ministers with having purposely done all in their power to encourage tumult and excite the mob to acts of popular violence.
The Bishop of Exeter: Most solemnly do I declare that I do not think I have used any such words. Upon my honour and conscience I did not use those words. I am quite sure that I never accused his Majesty's Government of exciting the people to outrage.
Earl Grey: The right reverend Prelate in his anger was not likely to recollect what words he did use. He certainly understood that the right reverend Prelate had most positively charged him, or charged the Ministers, with having encouraged and excited the people to acts of violence. He could not misunderstand the words which had been used. The right reverend Prelate had attacked him for having used a tone of warning to the Bench against the consequence of their votes. He at the very time had disclaimed all intention to intimidate or menace, but he had certainly submitted to them, what might be the consequence of the rejection of a measure, in favour of which the public feelings were so strongly excited throughout every part of the empire. He had never meant that the Bench should surrender their right of voting according to their judgment; all he had meant was, that they should look calmly upon the consequences which might follow from their opposing the Bill. He had intro-

479
duced this in terms of respect, and at the same time he professed himself, what he really was, and ever had been, a zealous friend of the Church. He had said, that he had perceived that the right reverend Prelates did appreciate the signs of the times, and had introduced Reforms which had met with his support, and he called upon them to consider whether, in opposing public opinion, in the present case, they might not incur great and serious danger. The right reverend Prelate had uttered a foul and calumnious aspersion, totally unfounded in truth, nor had he in the least benefitted himself by the explanations he had entered into. The right reverend Prelate charged the Government with encouraging acts of violence against himself and his brethren, and for that charge there was not the smallest foundation.
The Duke of Wellington: My Lords, the question before the House arises on a petition which was presented by a noble Baron, in which a charge is made against the Dean and Chapter of the Diocese of Ely, but the noble Lord who presented it, indulges so much in a habit of joking, that nothing very serious was apprehended from his charge. Well, then, a noble Lord on the same side comes forward and makes a charge against the right reverend bench, and tells you that the right reverend Prelates have been in the habit of giving their support to the Governments that conducted themselves on arbitrary principles, but that they now refused to vote for an Administration which was the first to introduce very liberal measures. My Lords, I should be glad to know what the noble Lord means by Governments conducted on arbitrary principles. I desire to know on what act he founds that assertion, so far as the Government which immediately preceded the present is concerned. The charge is made on the incidental discussion attending the presentation of a petition; and I do not suppose that the noble Baron can think of seriously repeating it. My Lords, in defence of the bench of Bishops I must say that, for ten months, there has not been a single case of a division occurring where the right reverend Prelates had it in their power to show whether they gave their support to the present Government or not. There was only one division in which I voted, and that was with regard to the postponement of the Bankruptcy Bill for a few days; and yet the right
480
reverend Prelates are accused of having refused to give the present Government their support because, in one instance, they have thought proper to judge for themselves. If the Bench of Bishops refused to give their support to his Majesty's Government on that occasion, I can only suppose that they felt they could not do so consistently with a sense of their duty, and of the obligations which they owed to the country to support its institutions. The right reverend bench were entitled to the same indulgence which any one of their Lordships claimed in his own person, and I think that nothing can be more unfair than to bring such unfounded charges against it.
The Duke of Newcastlesaid, that the noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government had said, that Government had afforded no encouragement to the mobs in the violence and outrages which had been committed by them. He did not accuse his Majesty's Government of having done any such thing. But as attacks had been made on the lives and properties of noble Lords on that side of the House, and as he (the Duke of Newcastle) had been himself yesterday made the subject of one of those attacks, on his return from his attendance in that House, he begged to know from his Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the King's Ministers had taken any measures for the purpose of affording that protection to the lives and properties of noble Lords on that side of the House, which they had a right to expect and to receive from a regularly constituted Government. He would just state to the House the circumstances of the attack which had been made upon him yesterday on his return from his attendance in that House, and the reasons which he had for complaining with regard to the impossibility which he experienced in obtaining assistance from the Home Office. On his return home yesterday evening, he found his house surrounded by a numerous and violent mob. After some consideration he thought the best course to adopt under such circumstances was, to go down to the Home Office to seek for protection for his person and property. This occurred, he supposed, shortly after seven o'clock. He could not be precise to the minute, as unfortunately he had not his watch about him, for, amongst other accidents, his pocket had been picked of it; but he saw

481
a clock in his way, and he recollected that the time was a little past seven o'clock. When he arrived at the Home Office there was nobody there to give him any information, there was no person with whom he could communicate, and he begged to know whether it was usual for the official persons whose duty it was to attend there, to go away from thence at such an early hour, especially in times of such difficulty and danger as the present? If such was the usual practice in that office, he would not say a word more on that point. He must be permitted, however, to observe, that on an occasion like that of yesterday, when such attacks as had been made by the mob on himself, and on other Peers sitting on that side of the House, might have been expected, some persons ought to have been in attendance at the Home Office to receive their complaints, and to afford them protection. He thought that such persons ought to be found in attendance at the Home Office, and it was under that impression that he went there to seek for their assistance. But he found no such person there, and he was consequently obliged to have recourse to a person connected with the police, who, he must say, gave him every assistance. The fact was, that if such outrageous proceedings as those to which he was alluding were not prevented and put down, they would have no government in this country but the government of a mob. If the Government did not put down such proceedings, and if the mob were allowed to go on with the attacks which they were making on noble Lords on that side of the House, both in their progress to, and on their return from the House, on account of the conscientious discharge of their duty, he would repeat, that mob government would be, in fact, the order of the day, and the regular Government of the country would stand the chance of being accused of neglecting its duty through the fear of the mob. Before he sat down he would entreat his Majesty's Ministers to guard against the doings of the mob which was announced for to-morrow. He would caution them to prevent such large collections of the people, under existing circumstances, as were announced for that occasion. If they did not do so, tumult, and riot, and disorder, might be the result; and attacks might be renewed on the lives and properties of those noble Lords who had given a conscientious vote against the Reform
482
Bill. It was not so much on account of the attacks which had been made personally upon himself or upon his property, that he drew the attention of the noble Lord opposite to this subject; it was on account of his anxiety for the general good of the country, and for the preservation of the public peace.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, that he had also some circumstances to state illustrative of the system of outrage carried on against noble Lords on that side of the House, to which he wished to call the attention of the Secretary for the Home Department. He should not have done so on account of any personal attacks that had been made upon himself, but as the noble Duke who had just sat down had mentioned the attacks which had been made on his person and property, he (the Marquis of Londonderry) would state to their Lordships what had occurred to him in his coming down to and returning from the House yesterday. On his coming down to the House he was assailed by a large mob, and he was also in his return from the discharge of his duties in that House, again attacked by a furious mob. He would not say that all arrangements for the prevention of such outrageous proceedings had been neglected by Government, but it did so happen on this occasion, that there was not a single policeman stationed in Parliament-street, where an immense and riotous mob was assembled, though there was a considerable police force in the immediate neighbourhood of the House. He was proceeding home from the House in his cabriolet, when this mob in Parliament-street attacked him. They seized his cabriolet, endeavoured to drag him out of it, and one big strong fellow hit him a violent blow with a stick on his arm. If the mob had succeeded in pulling him out of his cabriolet, he was quite sure they would have murdered him; but, fortunately for him, the individual who was with him in the cabriolet drove the horse forward, and he thus escaped from the mob. He did not state the circumstances of this attack upon his life through fear or alarm. Knowing, as he did, that we can all die but once, and that when our time arrives we must go, he was not accessible to personal intimidation. But he, and the other Peers in that House who were made the objects of such attacks on the part of an outrageous mob, had a right to demand protection from his

483
Majesty's Government. His Majesty's Ministers should have remembered that such attacks might be made, and should have been prepared to provide their Lordships with due protection both for their persons and properties. He (the Marquis of Londonderry) had not only been personally attacked and his life put in danger, but a large mob had also attacked his house, and if the windows of his house had been mended since the former attack which was made upon it, they would have been all broken. As it was, such as had been mended were all broken last night by the mob. He thought that under such circumstances he had a right to call for the protection of his Majesty's Government. The Government were bound to protect the lives and properties of all his Majesty's subjects, which included, of course, the noble Lords on both sides of that House, and to see that none of them should be made the victims of popular fury. The Peers of Parliament should be defended against the assaults of a violent mob, in their progress to and from that House. They were entitled to that protection while discharging the important duties which devolved upon them. He must say, that if such proceedings on the part of the mob were allowed to go on, and if such attacks were to be permitted upon the persons as well as the properties of the Members of that House, he, for one, was determined to carry arms about with him for his protection, and he would now declare, that if any man should attack him again in the way that he was attacked last night, he would use the arms which he would carry with him in his vindication and self-defence. If any man should strike him as the fellow did last night, he would use those arms in his defence. Again he would call on his Majesty's Government to take proper precautions against such outrageous proceedings on the part of the mob—again he would urge on them the necessity of taking such steps as were necessary under existing circumstances to afford protection to the Members of that House in the discharge of their public duties.
Viscount Melbournebegged to assure the noble Marquis and the noble Duke opposite, that the first desire of his Majesty's Government in general, and of himself in particular, as it was his especial duty, was to afford every possible protection both to the persons and properties of all
484
his Majesty's subjects. He deeply lamented the state of excitement in this town at present: he deeply regretted the agitation which prevailed in it, and he deeply and sincerely lamented that any noble Lord, or any individual, should have been exposed to acts of outrage and violence. He could assure the noble Lords who had complained of such acts of outrage, and he could assure the House, that no individual could be more anxious than he was to use every effort in his power, and to direct all the energy and force of the law towards repressing every species of violence and outrage. When, however, he was told that means of defence should have been provided against the attacks which might have been expected upon the houses of noble Lords on the opposite side of the House, he begged their Lordships to bear this in mind, that when a violent agitation prevailed, when great crowds of people were collected together in different parts of the town, and when the rabble were led to commit those acts of outrage, some of which had been unfortunately committed on this occasion—when such a state of things existed, it was impossible for the Secretary for the Home Department, and for the Magistrates, with any force that was in their possession, or that they could bring together, to guard every house in town that might be supposed liable to be attacked. He exceedingly regretted that the house of the noble Duke opposite should have been attacked in the manner he had stated. The noble Duke stated, that on his applying at the Home Office, he could find no person there to give him assistance, or information as to where he could procure it. He must beg, therefore, to state in his own vindication, that every arrangement had been made by the persons connected with the Home Office which it was in their power to make, for the preservation of the peace of the town last evening, and if the noble Duke had applied either to the police-office in his neighbourhood in Marylebone-street, or to the police-office in Scotland-yard, instead of going to the Home Office, he would have found that assistance which he required. When the noble Duke did apply to the police, as he had stated, that assistance was afforded to him, as the report made to him that morning stated, promptly and efficiently. Again he would say, that the outrages on property were deeply to be lamented and deprecated,

485
and the outrages upon the persons of individuals were still more to be deplored and deprecated. He was exceedingly sorry to hear that the noble Marquis opposite (Londonderry) had been attacked in the violent manner that he had stated. It was much to be regretted, sincerely and exceedingly to be deprecated, and this observation applied to the case of other Peers as well as to that of the noble Marquis, that any particular course which they might have felt it necessary to pursue on any public question should expose them to popular displeasure. He need not repeat that he regretted it much. He need not say, that he deprecated and condemned in the strongest manner the display of any thing like violence towards them. Every thing that depended on his Majesty's Government would be done to preserve the public peace. But the noble Marquis must see, that the Government, take what steps it might, could not prevent many things that had occurred, as the result of popular excitement in the metropolis; but he repeated that it was the firm determination of Government to use all means at its disposal to prevent the violation of the public peace.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, that he fully concurred in every thing that had fallen from the noble Viscount. He was quite sure that the subject would engage the noble Lord's best attention, and that he would use all the means in his power for the protection of the persons and property of the noble Lords in that House, in common with the rest of the King's subjects. He would, however, beg to suggest to the noble Lord the propriety of having a police force stationed along Parliament-street and Whitehall, as well as in Palace-yard, in order to afford safe and free access to that House. Such a course was absolutely necessary, as the crowds were generally collected in greatest force beyond the line where the police were stationed.
Lord Wharncliffesaid, he was ready to bear his testimony to the zeal and activity of the noble Secretary for the Home Department, in the steps he had taken to preserve the public tranquillity. He did believe that every possible means had been taken in that respect, and for guarding the persons and property of the Members of that House. Certainly, considering the excitement that prevailed, as one of the consequences of the vote to which
486
they had come the other day, he was ready to say, that it was a consequence for which he was well prepared, and which he fully expected at the time when he had given his vote. He did not think that the inhabitants of the metropolis had done any thing to disgrace themselves. He was happy to see such prudence exhibited by them. Notwithstanding the means that were tried to create excitement among the people, he was satisfied, and felt a confident hope, that they would treat their Lordships with respect, and would believe that their Lordships, in coming to the decision to which they had come, had no intention of injuring their liberties, but rather, that in the vote to which the people might think, perhaps, they had wrongly come, had taken that course which to them appeared the best for the protection and preservation of the rights and liberties of the people. He must say, in justice to the inhabitants of this town, that they had not committed any thing in the way of disturbance of public order, beyond what he had reason to expect, or even so much.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, that no public excitement prevailed on this subject in the metropolis, that had not been mainly and entirely occasioned by the public Press, and if his Majesty's Ministers did not take steps to coerce that Press, but allowed it to pursue its present criminal course with perfect impunity, there was no calculating what mischief might happen. He gave the noble Viscount credit for what he had stated, and he had no doubt that his Majesty's Ministers would do what they could to preserve the public peace—what was expected from them both as Ministers and as gentlemen and men of honour.
Subject dropped.

SELECT VESTRIES BILL.
Viscount Melbourne Viscount Melbourne moved the second reading of the Select Vestries Bill.
The Duke of Wellingtonasked what was the object of the Bill?
Viscount Melbournesaid, that it went to establish several new, and he, considered, necessary, regulations with respect to the powers of vestries in general, and select vestries in particular, with respect to which great excitement at present prevailed in the metropolis, and in several of the large towns throughout the kingdom. It appeared that the common-law right of all

487
rate-payers to vote at vestries was found to be extremely inconvenient in large and populous parishes, and in order to facilitate the proceedings of vestries, it was found necessary, in many cases, to have the business of the parish confided to select bodies. This, however, was, in its turn, found to lead to some abuses, and to very general dissatisfaction. It was complained of from all quarters, and its inconvenience was admitted even by many of the members of those select bodies, that it was a system which required alteration. The object of the present Bill was, to make those amendments which were considered necessary in the system. He would now move, that the Bill should be read a second time, and be referred to a Committee up-stairs. One of its chief objects was, to introduce a system of general election from the whole body of rate-payers, under certain regulations. As the measure was one the necessity of which seemed to be admitted by all parties, he supposed there would be no objection to its being now read a second time.
Lord Skelmersdalesaid, he would not object to the second reading, on the understanding that it was to be referred to a Select Committee, as he considered the Bill would require considerable amendment before it could be passed into a law.
The Duke of Wellingtonthought, that that clause in the Bill which left it optional with a parish to avail itself of it or not, would not have the effect of allaying the excitement which at present existed on this subject: he feared it would have the contrary effect to what was intended, and was, therefore, particularly objectionable. He admitted that the system in many of the parishes in the metropolis required amendment, but why not confine the Bill to the metropolis, or why not apply Mr. Sturges Bourne's Act to the metropolitan parishes, as a remedy for the evils complained of?
Lord Kingsaid, that much greater excitement would be caused if this Bill was thrown out, than could possibly arise from the operation of any clause in it, such as that alluded to by the noble Duke. It being admitted on all hands that the existing system required revision and amendment, whatever they did for that purpose should, in order to effect the objects which they had in view, be done as speedily as possible.
The Bishop of London, speaking from what he knew of the system of select
488
vestries in several parishes in this metropolis, feared that some such measure as this was absolutely necessary for their better regulation and amendment. He was of opinion that the government of parishes should be placed as much as possible upon the same footing as the general Government of the country—that was to say, that the people should have the election of their parochial, as they had of their Parliamentary Representatives, who had to deal with their money. It might be necessary, however, to introduce some modifications of the Bill, both as regarded, parishes in London and in the country, and for that purpose, as well as for coming to a true understanding of the nature of it, it was necessary to refer it to a Committee up-stairs.
Bill read a second time, and Committee appointed.

SCOTCH APPEALS.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Scotch Court of Session Bill, for the purpose of postponing it to Thursday.
Lord Wynfordcould not let that opportunity pass without asserting that he was ready to maintain the correctness of the judgment he had pronounced in this cause, and which his noble and learned friend had last night impugned. The Bill assumed that be directed the issue to be tried by a Jury of merchants, but he did no such thing.
The Lord Chancellorwas sorry that his noble and learned friend felt so much annoyed on this subject, or that he should at all imagine that his professional character was affected by it. He had yet to learn that a knowledge of the Scotch law or practice formed any portion of the education of an English lawyer. On the contrary, he believed that the better lawyer an English advocate was, the less he was likely to know of the practice of Scotch law, and the more probable it was, that he should fall into the mistake that special Juries, so familiar to the mind of an English practitioner, should be also found in a country so civilized as Scotland. He was anxious to postpone this Bill to Thursday, in order to have the advantage of the presence of his noble and learned predecessor, in whose time this judgment had been pronounced, and who was fully acquainted with all the circumstances of the case, which he himself was not. He

489
did not imagine that any doubt existed as to the propriety of passing this Bill; but after what had fallen from his noble and learned friend, he should make particular inquiries concerning it.
Lord Wynfordsaid, he held in his hand the judgment which he had pronounced, and it contained no such words as, "Special Jury of Merchants." The words in it were "Special Jury."
Lord Ellenboroughsuggested, that the proper course would be, to refer the matter to a Committee of privileges. It appeared to him that if an error had been committed, their Lordships could correct it without an Act of Parliament, and that it was not expedient to involve the House of Commons in an act to correct an error in their own judicial proceedings. At present there was no foundation for such a bill in the shape of a petition from the parties in the cause; and, even if the proceeding were a right one, it should not be done hastily, and without a due observance of the rules and orders of the House.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, this was not a Bill for the purpose of altering a judgment of the House, but for the purpose of placing a cause in a state fit for a rehearing. There would be abundance of time for discussing the subject on Thursday.
Lord Wynfordsaid, that as a lawyer and as a layman, he had no doubt as to the correctness of the judgment he had given. This cause related to a partnership, and, to the disgrace of the judicature of the country, it had been before the Courts since the period of the American war. The Scotch Judges, instead of sending a question of a matter of fact, which the case involved, to a Jury, sent it to an accountant for decision. He (Lord Wynford), seeing that it was a cause that ought to be tried by a Jury, ordered it to be sent to one, and the parties to be examined, and he was, in point of law, justified in sending it to a Special Jury in Scotland, as, by a late Act of Parliament, Juries had been introduced into that country for the trial of important civil causes. He had to complain that the Judges in Scotland, and the parties interested in this matter, had not corresponded with him on the subject, and that they had withheld all their light from the very individual who would now have to defend the judgment. In pursuance of the practice of the Courts of Equity in England in similar cases, he had ordered that the parties should be examined on
490
oath, and it was now said, that this could not be, as the original parties to the suit had long since died; but that fact did not vitiate or annul the judgment; for if their Lordships decided in a case to-day, that the parties should be examined on oath, and those parties should die to-morrow, that fact would not annul the judgment. Even supposing the judgment in this particular case wrong, there was no occasion for an Act of Parliament to correct the error. He should be sorry to think it necessary to apply to the House of Commons to correct a clerical error in one of their Lordships' judicial decisions, and to suppose that they did not possess a power vested in the lowest Courts in the kingdom, of correcting errors in their own decisions.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, it would be inconvenient to proceed with this discussion now in the absence of the noble and learned Lord (Lyndhurst) with whom the Judges in Scotland had corresponded on the subject, who was fully acquainted with it, and who had no doubt that there was a mistake. He begged to assure his noble and learned friend (Lord Wynford) that there was nothing more common in Scotch practice than to refer to an accountant the decision of disputed matters of fact.
The second reading fixed for Thursday.