Lords Sitting of 10 August 1835

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time:—On the Motion of Lord FARNHAM:—North American Association.—On the Motion of Lord DUNCANNON:—Sheriffs' Declaration. Read a first time:—On the Motion of Lord BROUGHAM:—Publication of Lectures.
Petitions presented. By the Duke of WELLINGTON and the Earl of LONSDALE, from Dover, Carlisle, and Kirby-in-Tendal, against; and by the Duke of GRAFTON, the Earl of LONSDALE, Viscount MELBOURNE, Lords STRAFFORD, POLTIMORE, and BROUGHAM, from a great Number of Places,—in favour of the Municipal Corporations' Bill,—By the Archbishop of CANTERBURY, from Keighley, for Amending the Factories' Regulation Act.—By the Earl of ABERDEEN, from Paisley, for further Accommodation in Scotch Churches; and by the Marquess of WESTMINSTER, from Westminster, for Corporation Reform.

CHURCH COMMISSION (SCOTLAND).
The Earl of Aberdeen,on presenting a Petition from the Town Council of Caithness, praying for the Protection of the Church of Scotland, said, he would take that opportunity to call the attention of the noble Viscount opposite to a subject of much interest. He alluded to a Commission which had been issued by his Majesty's Government, the object of which was of the most extensive and important nature. It was appointed to inquire into what opportunities for public worship, for public instruction, and for pastoral superintendence, were afforded to the people of Scotland. It was, he conceived, difficult to imagine an inquiry of more serious importance. The noble Viscount was perhaps aware that the nomination to this Commission, and the composition of its members, had already excited great dissatisfaction amongst the members of the Church of Scotland. If, however, the noble Viscount was not acquainted with the fact, he could state it to him from the most unquestionable authority. He did not complain that the Commission was wholly composed of Whigs, or (as had been said on another occasion) of Whigs and something more; nor did he complain that the paid portion of the Commission, to whom the active part of the business was left, were lawyers of small repute, but what he did complain of was, that the majority of active paid

185
Commissioners attached to this Commission were known to entertain sentiments hostile to the Establishment altogether. One of these gentlemen was an avowed supporter of what was denominated the voluntary system; he had not only spoken in favour of it, but he had published a work in support of his opinion. Another of these gentlemen, acting upon the principles of honour and consistency, had declined being elected a member of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, in consequence of his having come to conclusions hostile to the connexion of Church and State. Now, he would ask, was it right, was it fair, was it decent, that the interests of the Church should be intrusted to individuals holding such opinions? The deputation of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, which had been recently in London, had reason to expect the appointment of a Commission of a very different description; and, therefore, their surprise was great indeed, when they saw, contrary to the assurances that had been given them, how the Commission was filled up. He knew that there were some respectable names on that Commission, but the majority of the Commissioners were such as he had described. The Standing Committee of the Church of Scotland lost no time in meeting when the fact came to their knowledge. They came to an unanimous Resolution, in which they declared, "that the Commission, as at present constituted, was such as to excite the apprehension of the members of the Church." That Resolution, expressive of their feelings, was officially communicated to his Majesty's Government. Now he intreated the noble Viscount opposite, if it were meant that this inquiry should be carried on to really useful purposes, if it were intended that it should be beneficial to the country (and here he would observe that his Majesty's Ministers had cut out work enough for this Commission, work, he would say, far beyond the power of the members of which it was composed), he would humbly recommend to the noble Viscount to add to the Commission a certain number of men whose hostility to the Church was less problematical than that of the majority of those who constituted the Commission as it at present stood.
Viscount Melbournesaid, he was not aware that a majority of the Commissioners
186
were hostile to the Church, or that their appointment had given general dissatisfaction. He could not help saying, that on this, as well as on other occasions, great stress was laid on what men's political opinions were, instead of looking to what were their moral feelings and their capabilities for performing the duties assigned to them. The greatest possible mistakes were continually occurring in consequence. He certainly had met very distinguished members of the Church of Scotland on the subject. He had had much conversation with them, and he had promised them, on that occasion, that the Commission should be impartially selected. By impartial, he meant a selection of men fitted to fulfil the purposes generally contemplated by the Commission—namely, to inquire into the whole state of religious education in Scotland. To effect that object, he thought it was necessary that there should be on that Commission representatives of all opinions. That was the course which he deemed it advisable to take. He would contend that the Commission was most respectably constituted, and would, he doubted not, perform its duties efficiently. The noble Earl asserted, that the interests of the Church of Scotland were placed in the hands of those Commissioners. Such was not the case. The Commissioners were merely called on to inquire into the present state of the Church of Scotland, and to report thereon. He could not state what the opinions of the Commissioners were on the points alluded to by the noble Earl, but he did not believe that they were hostile to the Church of Scotland. In his opinion, the Commission was prudently, wisely, and impartially constituted, with respect to the duties to be performed.
The Earl of Aberdeendid not object to the Commissioners appointed being of a particular political party; all he desired was, that they should entertain a friendly disposition towards the Church of Scotland. This Commission was, however, so constituted, as if its object was to inquire, whether there should be an Established Church in Scotland or not. If that were the object, it was natural that some persons should be appointed on the Commission who were opposed to an Established Church; and as the noble Viscount thought that representatives of all opinions ought to be attached to the Commission, he might have introduced some of those

187
philosophers, many of whom might be found in Scotland, who would declare, that in their view of the question there ought to be no religion at all. If, however, he understood the noble Viscount, Government wished to uphold the Church of Scotland; and yet, how did they proceed? They appointed as Commissioners persons who had avowed their hostility to that Church. One gentleman printed his sentiments, and another declined being a member of the General Assembly, because he was unfavourable to the principle of a Church Establishment. If Ministers intended to uphold a Church Establishment in that country or in this, was it proper, was it decent, to appoint persons who professed such sentiments to inquire into its situation? He was grieved when he was informed of that Commission. The names of the active paid members were totally unknown to him. They were lawyers of very small repute, because he was certain that he should have known them if they had any great standing or character at the Scotch bar. If the noble Viscount wished to give satisfaction to Scotland, he would infuse names into the Commission that would give confidence to that country. He left political opinions entirely out of the question. He merely wished such men to be appointed as, from their calm and deliberate feelings, were likely to give satisfaction. So far from the present Commission having given satisfaction, it had excited great discontent in Scotland. Last year the noble Viscount was not hostile to the claims of the Church of Scotland. The noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham) had also, in a very able speech, pointed out the claims of the Church of Scotland to the notice of his Majesty's Ministers; and a noble Lord, whom he now saw in his place, thanked the noble Viscount in the name of the Church for the manner in which Government seemed disposed to take up the question. He hoped that the noble Viscount, after the resolution and remonstrance of the General Assembly, would make such an addition to the Commissioners as would afford satisfaction.
The Earl of Mintosaid, that the noble Earl spoke in a manner as if his object were to induce their Lordships to believe that this Commission was conceived in a spirit hostile to the Church of Scotland. If he could have believed that that was so, no power on earth could have induced him to
188
take a part in the Commission. He was attached to the Scotch Church most sincerely. He was a member of it; and he should not have consented to be made a party to the Commission, if he did not believe that the larger portion of the Commissioners was friendly to it. With regard to those whom the noble Lord had called the working Commissioners, he believed that most of them were friendly to the Church; and with regard to the rest, he believed that they were friendly to it, though they might not be friendly to the particular scheme which had given rise to the inquiry. He believed that the inquiry would be beneficial to the Church of Scotland, and that the proceedings would be fairly and impartially conducted. When he said that he would not have taken part in the Commission if he had believed that it was conceived in a spirit adverse to the Scotch Church, he ought to have added that he would not have done so if no representatives of opinions opposed to his own had been included in the Commission.
The Duke of Buccleuchsaid, that it gave him great pleasure to hear the noble Earl declare that it was his intention to maintain the Church of Scotland, and that he entertained friendly feelings towards the Establishment; for whether on good or bad grounds it was impossible to say, but the noble Earl had not that reputation. He had received several communications from persons who were much alarmed at the appointment of these Commissioners. He himself was attached to the Scotch Church, though he was not a member of it. He hoped the noble Viscount would have no objection to lay on the Table a copy of the Commission, though perhaps it would be asking too much of him to request a copy of the instructions to the Commissioners. His opinion was, that the moment the Established Church was not supported it would be destroyed, and that with that would be annihilated everything worthy of being kept, including all that was valuable in the moral and religious condition of the inhabitants of Scotland.
The Earl of Minto,in reference to what the noble Duke had said as to the reputation regarding his opinions, observed that he was well aware that great pains had been taken by certain persons to spread the belief that he was not friendly to the Church of Scotland, That belief,

189
however, was not entertained for an instant by these who knew him or had any means of knowing his opinions. With respect to the danger which the noble Duke supposed to threaten the Church of Scotland, he entertained no such fears, for he was well convinced that that Church was so thoroughly rooted in the affections of the people of Scotland as not to be shaken by any such means.
Petition to lie on the Table.

CORPORATION REFORM—PETITIONS.
Viscount Melbournepresented a Petition from Manchester, signed by 22,832 persons His noble Friend had already stated why it would be unwise now to go at length into observations upon petitions, and he should therefore, confine himself to mentioning that as soon as the news was received at Manchester of the determination to hear Counsel, and the people thought that the Bill would be delayed, they at once convened a public meeting on the subject.
Lord Broughamhad been requested by the highly respectable individuals who had forwarded the petition to his noble Friend, to second its prayer. He did not understand that his noble Friend had stated the period of time within which the 23,000 signatures were affixed—they were all obtained within twelve hours. He was desired to add another observation. The reason—and he had received this information from highly respectable individuals whom he had long known in that part of the country—the reason why the petitioners had not adopted that other, and in his idea that best mode of expressing their opinions, not only to that House but to every other body and every other quarter—he meant by public meeting, publicly called and publicly announced—was, that there really was not time to call it, and to give the necessary notice to the inhabitants of Manchester of the intention to hold it.
On the Question that the petition do lie upon the Table,
The Duke of Newcastlethought it right to make their Lordships acquainted with the contents of a letter he had received that morning respecting the petition. The letter stated that it had been got up in the way in which such petitions very frequently were—by obtaining the signatures of persons who were perfectly incompetent to affix their signatures to it. He
190
would read the letter, which, as their Lordships might suppose, was from a very good Conservative. The noble Duke then proceeded to read the letter. It stated that the Radicals of Manchester had been getting up a petition in support of the Corporation Bill, in consequence of the Lords still being in a majority against the Bill, which the Commons had sent up to it. The writer begged to state how the petition was getting up. It was by placing tables at the corners of the public streets, and getting all such persons as could just scribble their names to put them down; as the boys came out at their dinner-hour from the factories they were called to sign their names: not one of them knowing what they were signing. "I hope," added the writer, "I hope you will explain to the House this trick, carrying on by the Whig-Radicals—the representative party of our blessed House of Commons. If the qualification were higher, we would not have such Members as we now have. You may rely upon it that the property and prosperity of this borough are Conservatives." Now the writer of this letter certainly was not a very great scholar—but it contained matter worthy their Lordships' consideration notwithstanding. He (the Duke of Newcastle) would only say, in conclusion, that he was astonished at the Commissioners making such a Report as they had done, upon the most partial and false statements. He thought their conduct deserving of the severest reprehension of that House, and if any proposition to that effect were brought forward, he, for one, would cheerfully vote in its favour. He did not believe that the majority of the people advocated the Bill, but that the excitement in its favour was fomented and encouraged by his Majesty's Government.
Lord Brougham: My Lords, I hope the noble Duke, if he means to punish these Commissioners, does not, at all events, mean to punish them without first hearing what they have to say in their own behalf. Why, the noble Duke's mind is so far made up, that he is prepared to punish one side without hearing a word in its defence; he is ready not only to pass sentence, but to execute it immediately upon these Commissioners. Now, my Lords, I have no objection to rise in my place in defence of these Commissioners—not now though, but when the time comes—and I pledge myself to show

191
your Lordships, not on their own showing, but on the statement against them, without adducing any one word in their favour, that there is not one thing in which the slightest objection can be taken to them or the slightest impropriety laid to their charge. The noble Duke has anticipated the decision of your Lordships on a main point of the inquiry, with which we are not at this time entitled to deal, the evidence not yet being weighed, or even printed, if I understand truly. He not only anticipates the decision of your Lordships, but enters into a discussion upon the subject. I do not mean, I can assure you, my Lords, to follow the noble Duke's example further than to say, that I suppose his anonymous correspondent, who, as he says with considerable justice, has not had much of the benefit of the schoolmaster, can at least sign his name. Now, I want to see a specimen of his handwriting; of course I shall be better able to judge of the fact, if the noble Duke will have the kindness to hand over to me that letter with the name signed to it; but I have not much doubt that it will be found to be that of an individual very well known in Manchester, who has been—I will not say slandering—I will not say misrepresenting—I will not say calumniating—but speaking on all occasions, with reference to this subject, in a very unreserved and somewhat violent manner. He may be a very good Conservative, as the noble Duke says, but he has been a very bad speaker, on every occasion, and at every turn, for a very considerable time. As to only Radicals having got up this petition and signing it, I can only say, that I know one or two persons very well indeed, who have come up with it, and they are just as little Radicals as the noble Duke himself—which is perhaps saying very much. One of these gentlemen is one of the most respectable individuals in Manchester—a country banker, second to none in this country—of such wealth as I do not know whether many of your Lordships envy, but as I do very much—a very sensible man on all points—and one of the most quiet, most moderate, and most temperate politicians of any sort or kind that I ever have known in my experience; and he never was thought to be a Radical. Mr. George William Wood is, but Mr. Heywood is not, a Member of this—what is it?—good-for-nothing Parltament, that
192
this anonymous gentleman talks of? Precious Parliament, was it not? [The Duke of Newcastle: Blessed.] Oh, aye—blessed. We have heard of various Parliaments the Parliamentum indoctum among others; but I, for one, never heard of the Parliamentum benedictum; nevertheless, if the present Parliament pass this wholesome and blessed measure of Corporation Reform I think the name the noble Duke has given it may well belong to it, and that it may well and justly be called "the Blessed Parliament" ever afterwards. Mr. George William Woods, I was about to say, my Lords, has been elected since the Reform Bill; but Mr. Heywood was a representative under the old system, and before the passing of the Bill of 1832, of blessed memory.
Lord Ashburtondeprecated the introduction of a system of universal suffrage, the effect of the annual exercise of which, in towns like Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield, could not be too strongly dreaded. He could not conceive how malevolence itself could introduce into any place which was the resort of manufacturing industry a greater curse than the Corporation Reform Bill must inevitably prove. If he were an inhabitant of Manchester, his first object would be, to exempt that town from the operation of the Bill; indeed, he had heard that many of the respectable inhabitants had intended to petition for a Charter of their own. On reference to the petition before the House even, he was at a loss to find that the extension of the provisions of the Bill to Manchester formed any part of its prayer.
Lord Brougham: the noble Baron had said that if he belonged to Manchester his first wish would be that the Corporation Bill should pass over that great and flourishing town, and he had the satisfaction of finding that the inhabitants of that town differed totally and entirely from the noble Baron. They strongly desired, he knew, that the Bill might extend its benefits to them. One of the bodies of the greatest interest among them had met and consulted upon the very point to which the noble Baron had adverted; but the idea suggested itself to them—it ought to have suggested itself to the more accurate mind of the noble Baron, who had read the petition and not the Bill—that it would have been a most preposterous thing for them to have

193
applied to Parliament for a Charter, when the provisions of the Bill gave them the power of applying for that Charter elsewhere. They, therefore, postponed their application until the happy and long-wished-for period of its passing arrived, when they would apply for it—not to Parliament—but under the provisions of the Bill to the Executive Government. They had, in fact, no Corporation at present, possessing merely the remains of a manor Court, which might have suited Manchester very well as a small hamlet, but was totally inapplicable to a great, populous, and flourishing town.
Lord Ellenboroughconfessed that on reading the prayer of the petition he came exactly to the same conclusion as his noble Friend below him (Lord Ashburton) had done. If it really was the desire of the inhabitants of Manchester that the provisions of the Bill should extend to them, they must have changed their opinions very materially within the last six or eight years, inasmuch as about eight years ago they applied to Parliament for a Bill which gave them, in fact, a local corporation for purposes of police; but a Corporation under local Acts was as different as possible from those proposed to be established by the Bill. If they desired the Bill to extend to them, they practically petitioned against 240 gentlemen elected annually under that system, one-third going out in three years. They had a stipendiary Magistrate; they enjoyed at present all the means of a good and quiet Government; and, above all, there was a limitation to the tax that could be imposed on them for maintaining it.
Lord Broughamsaid, that if he were not much misinformed, those very 240 respectable persons to whom the noble Baron had referred had actually met on this very point, and had only postponed the presentation of a petition on the subject for the very reason he had himself stated when he had addressed the House.
Petition to lie on the Table.
On the presentation of a petition from Coventry by Lord Melbourne,
Viscount Strangfordsaid, that on Monday last the ancient town of Coventry was thrown into a state of greater excitement than it had ever been since the time of the celebrated exhibition of the Lady Godiva, a paper with the heading 'Most Alarming Crisis,' was extensively circulated, and the public were informed
194
that papers were left for their signature at the Prince's Head, the Woolpack, the Rose and Crown, the Hand and Mace, and other public houses therein named. He had received a letter on the subject from a most respectable correspondent, in which the following passage occurred:—"Several of our friends went late last night to the different public-houses where the petition was represented as lying for signature, and there only saw blank sheets, which they were requested to sign. They were elected, it was true, by what was now considered a high qualification, but the government of Manchester was a popular one. They were shortly told the purport of the petition, but were not permitted to have a sight of it. No doubt many of the signatures will be forged, and it is of the utmost importance to the public that the truth should be exposed." It then went on to state that the petition presented against the Bill had the residence of each of the petitioners affixed to it. Would the noble Viscount inform the House whether the places of residence of the petitioners were affixed to the present petition?
Viscount Melbourne: It is not usual to affix the residences of the petitioners to any petition.
Viscount Strangford: It is strong evidence of their respectability.
Viscount Melbourne: It was not evidence that was usually furnished. The noble Lord's correspondent stated, that there was no doubt many signatures would be—not had been—forged; and that it was necessary the truth should appear. He agreed with the writer of the letter. It was necessary that it should appear, and be established too. The petition was very temperately worded: it was short, and its contents might easily have come to the knowledge of those who signed it.
On the motion that the petitions lie upon the Table,
The Duke of Newcastlehad never intended to charge his Majesty's Government with fomenting those dissensions or the agitation in the country. He put it, however, to the noble Viscount whether such assertions as had issued from a newspaper, which on the authority of the noble and learned Lord opposite might be called a Ministerial paper (he meant the Morning Chronicle) had not that tendency. The article to which he referred contained

195
the following sentiments;—"We will not so far libel the character of our countrymen as for a moment to suppose that when victory is about to crown their efforts, they will weakly turn their backs on the foe and submit to be trampled on by infuriated oligarchs. Throughout city, town, and village, we expect to see the people once more at their posts, prepared to crown the work which added so much to the national glory in 1832. Repose from incessant and most harassing agitation they never can expect till they humble the oligarchy in the dust; for submission would only make these tyrants more insolent in their exactions. With a hostile Court and a hostile Peerage, they must have no truce till they have deprived both of the power of doing mischief." He (the Duke of Newcastle) called upon the noble Viscount to state, whether he intended to direct the Attorney-General to prosecute the publishers of this most villainous article, affecting, as it did, the dignity and safety of the Crown. He quoted this article from the Standard of the 5th of August, but this article was all of a piece with those emanating from the publication (The Morning Chronicle) He contended that it was the duty of the Government to prosecute such diabolical observations as these—observations calculated to deprive the Crown of all favour in the minds of the people.
Viscount Melbournesaid, he was not responsible for that or any other article which might be sent forth to the public through the medium of the public press; nor was he called upon to pronounce any opinion upon the article which had been quoted by the noble Duke. It was unnecessary that he should now go into any details as to the principles on which the Government would act; he would merely say, that he had heard of many articles sent forth to the public of which he did not approve, and that with respect to that quoted by the noble Duke it was not his intention to institute any prosecution.
The Duke of Newcastlesaid, that he had only asked the question of the noble Viscount in order that he might show by his reply his anxiety to save the name of the King, being so much polluted as it was in the article to which he had adverted.
Petition to lie on the table.