Lords Sitting of 29 July 1839

MINUTES.
Bills. The Royal Assent was given to the following Bills:—Assessed Taxes Composition; Soap Duties Drawback; Indemnity; Supreme Courts (Scotland); Pleadings in Courts (India); Bills of Exchange; Turnpike Acts Continuance; and a number of Private Bills.—Read a first time:—Militia Ballots Suspension; Shannon Navigation; Jurors and Juries (Ireland); Public Works (Ireland); Postage Duties; Constables on Railroads.—Read a second time:—Letters Patent Act Amendment—Read a third time:—Timber Ships.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of Fitzwilliam, and the Bishop of Exeter, from several places, for a Uniform Penny Postage.—By Lord Lyndhurst, from Bangor, against the Church Discipline Bill.—By Viscount Strangford, from Liverpool, against the Inland Warehousing Bill.

THE CHARTISTS.
The Marquess of Londonderryseeing the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government in his place, wished to ask whether it was his intention to take any further steps to increase the military forces in the north of England? He understood that ten days ago the magistrates had applied for troops, but that no troops

915
had been sent, although the great disorder which prevailed in the neighbourhood of Newcastle might have been put down if that assistances had been afforded. On a a former occasion he had read two letters, stating that ten days since the magistrates assembled there and at Durham made an application for troops, and that the application was referred to the General commanding at Newcastle, who stated that he could not supply troops unless barrack accommodation was offered to them. There was no possibility of affording barrack accommodation, and the consequence was that no troops had been sent, and the greatest terror and alarm prevailed at Stockton-on-Tees, which was forty miles distant from any military station. It was true that a number of special constables had been sworn in, and that no great outbreak had taken place. Still, however, the people were in a state of alarm and terror. He had received a letter from a most respectable gentleman in that neighbourhood, and well acquainted with the Chartist proceedings there, and his correspondent stated that the Chartists had adopted an organized system, by which they exacted contributions, not only from shopkeepers, butchers, and tradespeople, but from householders; that they offered Chartist tickets for sale under the pretence that they were a grant of protection to the holders, and if the parties refused to purchase them, they were threatened with being shot and their houses burnt. Under these circumstances, he wished to know whether the noble Viscount intended to adopt any further means for the protection of the country beyond raising the 5,000 men now stated to be necessary?
Viscount Melbournesaid, it was not intended to take any further steps; at the same time, if circumstances required that more troops should be sent into the district alluded to, they would be sent.
Subject dropped.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.
Lord Lyndhurst Lord Lyndhurst moved the third reading of the Controverted Elections Bill, intended to regulate the trial of petitions against the validity of elections in the other House of Parliament. It was obvious that it was a measure of great importance, not merely to that House, but to their Lordships. He regretted extremely the necessity for any change of the law upon this subject, but the necessity of that change was admitted
916
on all hands. It was admitted by both parties in the other House of Parliament, and by the general voice of the country; and the question was not, whether any change should take place, but what should be the nature of the change which should render the law efficient and complete. Their Lordships were well aware that previously to the passing of the Grenville Act, the trial of petitions in respect to controverted elections took place generally at the bar of the House of Commons; witnesses attended there, counsel were heard there, and but few Members were present during those proceedings. But the moment it became necessary to give a vote on any point of importance, the Members flowed in from the library and committee-rooms, and the question was decided, not with reference to the evidence and law of the case, but solely on the principles of party, and for party purposes. That was a matter of fact; and so much was it the case, that the immediate cause of the resignation of Sir Robert Walpole was, that he was beaten in the case of the Chippenham election by a single vote. When Mr. Grenville brought in his bill, he stated his reasons for bringing forward such a measure with so much force, that though his bill was opposed, and vigorously opposed, by the Minister of the day, the House of Commons were so satisfied of the necessity of such a bill, that it was ultimately carried by a very large majority in that House, and when it came up to this House it was passed by a large majority here also. When that bill came into operation it was found to effect completely all the advantages that were expected from it; and it was a remarkable fact, that those who had opposed the measure most violently, became at last some of its warmest admirers. Mr. Fox expressed in very strong terms his approbation of the bill.
"That bill, Sir," said he, in the proceedings on the Westminster scrutiny, "originated in a belief that this House, in the aggregate, was an unfit tribunal to decide upon contested elections. It viewed this House as every popular assembly should be viewed, as a mass of men capable of political dislike and personal aversion; capable of too much attachment and too much animosity; capable of being biassed by weak and by wicked motives; liable to be governed by ministerial influence, by caprice, and by corruption. Mr. Grenville's bill viewed this House as endowed with these capacities, and judging it therefore, incapable of

917
determining upon controverted elections with impartiality, with justice, and with equity, it deprived it of the means of mischief, and formed a judicature as complete and ample, perhaps, as human skill can constitute."
That speech was pronounced after the bill had been in operation twelve or fourteen years; and after long experience, therefore, had been obtained of the beneficial effects of the measure; and from that period down to 1831, the celebrated era of the Reform Bill, Mr. Grenville's Act continued to operate in the manner he had described. Now and then there might be a complaint of the decision of a committee; but in general, he might undertake to say, and he himself could bear testimony from his own recollection and experience, the decisions under Mr. Grenville's bill were approved of by the other House and by the country. Since the Reform Act passed, a great change had taken place, not all at once, but by degrees, in these committees. From that period party spirit had diffused itself through the committees; the decisions had been built, in many instances, upon party feeling and party spirit; and the evil had at last risen to such a height, that in the House of Commons, not one party, but both parties, had said it was necessary to apply a remedy for it. It became a matter of curiosity to inquire by what cause this change had been brought about, what had led to the extraordinary alteration that had taken place within so short a time in respect to the operation of Mr. Grenville's Act. It might be ascribed to several causes: one might be the difference in the composition of the House of Commons—the different materials of which it was now composed. But that was a subject too delicate for him to dwell upon; he merely touched it in passing. There was another thing which might have operated to have produced the change to which he had referred—he meant the composition of the House of Commons in another respect. Previously to the passing of the Reform Bill there was in the other House a body of persons independent of the Ministers of the Crown, and not in opposition to them; there was generally a very considerable number of Members generally supporting the Ministers of the Crown, but not ranging themselves as of the Ministerial party. But no such body now existed in that House. Now, mark what had been the operation of the circumstances
918
he had stated. A considerable portion of that class of men would be returned upon the ballot for an election committee, which, in the first instance, consisted of thirty odd Members. The next operation, was, that each party would strike off alternately one, until the whole number was reduced to thirteen or eleven, the number required. But what was the manner in which that privilege was exercised? Each party would strike off the warmest of their opponents, and the individuals therefore who were thus struck off from each side would be party men, What, then, would be the result under the former state of things? Almost the whole number of independent persons first chosen would remain on the committee, to try the merits of the petition; there would be a great body of independent Members on such a committee who would be a security against any act of injustice or unfairness in coming to a decision upon the question raised by the petition. He considered that that was one of the reasons why the Grenville act in the former state of the House had operated beneficially; and why its benefits it had disappeared in the new composition of the House. There was another consideration: parties in the new House of Commons were nearly balanced, and every vote was of the greatest importance. In cases of petitions on controverted elections, therefore, there was a party struggle in the committees, and the desire for a victory was strong, and operated to produce a much greater degree of party spirit than when the loss of one or more votes was a matter of trifling importance. He had adverted to these different points for the purpose of showing how the Reform Bill had operated, why the Grenville Act, which had led to the formation of a tribunal, satisfactory to the House and the country, no longer answered the purpose, and why it was necessary that there should be a change in the present, system. The first question which arose on coming to consider what tribunal should be substituted was, should it consist wholly of Members of the House of Commons? Or should a tribunal be established which would be independent of that House or out of that House? He did not mean to enter into any speculative inquiries on this subject, and for this reason, it was the privilege of the House of Commons, if they thought fit, to confine it to their own Members, They had declared that on this

919
occasion they would do so, and their Lordships had no right to call their privilege in question. Therefore it was a mere speculative inquiry into which he did not think it either necessary or advisable to enter, whether or not a tribunal out of the House of Commons would be more effective and perfect than one in it. And their Lordships had no right to complain of the House of Commons in this respect, for they did the same thing; in doubtful cases respecting peerages, they allowed no other tribunal to interfere with them. Those cases were considered as peculiar to their Lordships' house; they had the right to decide them, and they suffered no other body to interfere with their right. This was an ancient privilege of the House of Commons. In the time of Elizabeth, and afterwards in the time of James, it was attempted to be broken in upon; but they resisted the attempt, and it was stated by one popular historian, and he thought rightly stated, that this was an inherent privilege of an assembly constituted like the House of Commons, and that it was necessary that they should possess and exercise such a power. Having made these preliminary observations, he would, if their Lordships would allow him, point out the provisions of the bill, and he thought they would be satisfied that the tribunal about to be constituted, was likely to be effective for the discharge of the duties for which it was to be appointed. Their Lordships were aware that the bill was originally suggested by a right hon. Baronet in the other House, who had framed and introduced it, and who had distinguished himself on several former occasions by the introduction of laws of a most beneficial character. The Speaker for the time being, at the commencement of the Session, was to select six persons from the Members of the House of Commons, to constitute what was called the general committee of elections. Those six persons were to select, at their discretion, six other persons, from time to time, to try any particular election, the validity of which was questioned. With respect to the principle of this plan, he had heard it objected, that it was doubtful how it would operate, for this cause:—the Speaker was, of necessity, a party man. He was selected by a party—generally by the Ministerial party—and he would therefore feel a tinge of party spirit, which would display itself, at least to a certain degree, in the selection
920
of the first general committee, and that committee being tainted also with party spirit, they would be influenced in the selection which they had to make of those whom they would be called upon to appoint. But when they came to consider the manner in which this plan would operate, he thought they would feel that there was no validity in the objection. It was true the Speaker was selected by a party, and that party generally the Ministerial party, but he must of necessity be a man of respectability and character, or he would not have been placed in that situation. He must also feel and know, that from the moment he was appointed Speaker, it became his first duty to lay aside all party feelings and considerations. He must know also, that his character in the country, and with the Parliament, depended on his impartiality; nay more, that even his character with the very party which placed him in the chair depended on it. This was, therefore, the greatest assurance that the first appointment would be impartial, from the character of the individual by whom it was made, but more so from the nature of the act which was to be performed. It was to be performed in public; it was the most important duty he could be called upon to discharge; and it was almost impossible that the person in that situation, with the eyes of the Parliament and the country upon him, should not discharge that duty faithfully, and, as as far as possible without any party feeling. There was this farther security, if farther security was required, that the return of the six Gentlemen was to be laid before the House, in order that any person might call attention to the subject, and object to the panel, either entirely or in respect to any individual placed upon it. He did not suppose it likely that any such objection would ever be made; but if the Speaker knew that an opportunity was thus given, there was an additional security for the performance of his duty uprightly and honestly, and in a manner to satisfy all parties. The next step in the progress of this machinery was, that the general committee were to divide the House into five panels. This was done for the convenience of Members, the five panels being taken in rotation, so that they would always know, from week to week, when their attendance was required. Having stated all be thought necessary in explanation of the plan, he would call to the recollection

921
of their Lordships, that they had adopted a similar system with respect to the appointment of private committees in their own House. They were aware, that formerly complaints were made, that the business was unsatisfactorily conducted before the private committees. Applications were made to the members of the committees, solicitations were urged, and, indeed, the whole system was such as to give great dissatisfaction to their Lordships, and to the country. They then determined upon an amendment, and adopted a principle similar to that of the bill which he had now proposed. That system had worked exceedingly well, and all the complaints which existed before with respect to the manner in which the business was executed had been entirely removed. He did not say, that the two cases were exactly similar; but in both, solicitation had been got rid of; and it was but fair to conclude, that the same good effects would follow from the adoption of this measure as had resulted from the system which had been adopted in their Lordships' House. There was another point relative to the machinery of the bill which was of the greatest importance. After the Committee was constituted, the next matter for consideration was the appointment of a chairman. Nothing could be more important to the beneficial working of the plan than the character and qualifications of the chairman. It was material that the chairman should be a man of great experience, of great intelligence, and of a high reputation for fairness and impartiality. If the appointment was left to the Committee which had to try the merits of the return, a person might possibly be chosen, who was possessed of none of those highly essential qualifications. It, therefore, had been considered proper that the General Committee of Election should have this power of nominating a certain number of persons to be called the chairman's panel, to be composed of six or ten or twelve members, as might be deemed necessary. That panel, so framed, would, of course, consist of Members the most conspicuous for intelligence, impartiality, and character, and thus ensure a competent person to fill the chair. When the Committee was appointed for trying the merits of the return, then came the consideration of the person to be appointed chairman, and it was provided by the bill that the chairman should be selected from the chairman's
922
panel, and, in consequence of that selection, be placed at the head of the Committee. It, therefore, appeared, that the chairmen were, in the first place, to be taken from the whole House, and the chairman's panel formed, and then that the members of that panel were to have the power of selecting the persons who would have to fill the chair of each election committee. Such was the mode in which the chairman was to be appointed. He had thus detailed the chief provisions of the measure, and let them now compare its probable operation with the operation of the Grenville Act. It the six Members appointed by the Speaker as the General Committee of Elections were, as they undoubtedly would be, men of intelligence and character, they would have a Committee for the trial of the return selected by persons the best qualified for such an office, and a tribunal would be secured the least likely to be affected by party spirit, and the most likely to act with fairness and impartiality; they would have a Committee in which all parties would place confidence. But under the Grenville Act the case was different. The Committee was not selected, but chosen by ballot. When the ballot had taken place, the parties interested retired, and each party had the privilege of reducing the list by one, till the number given by the ballot was reduced to the number constituting the actual Committee. And on what principle was the reduction made? Each party struck out its adversaries, and always those first who were the most able and intelligent, and the least actuated by party spirit, and in consequence of that proceeding the Committee when at last determined, must have consisted of party men. But while a spirit of party was thus infused into the Committee, it so happened that those party men were not the most distinguished by intelligence, nor were they persons the most esteemed, because by the process which was acted upon, and which was called "striking out the brains," all the most eminent Members were got rid of. In the Committees, therefore, appointed under the Grenville Act, party spirit had no restraints, and in consequence the system had not given satisfaction to the parties interested, to Parliament, or to the country. In the other House of Parliament, and while this measure was under consideration, it had been suggested, that it would facilitate the

923
labours of the Committee, and improve the system to be adopted, if assessors were appointed. That suggestion, however, had been strongly opposed, particularly by those who had framed the bill, and it had ultimately been decided not to have assessors, because such appointments would have been contrary to the principles of the bill, which was that election tribunals should be composed exclusively of Members of the House of Commons. Such was the character of the bill for which he now solicited the approbation of their Lordships. It had been approved by the House of Commons and by the Members of the Government, and sent up to their Lordships' House with the general consent of all parties. There were many other points of the measure of great importance indeed, but on which he should not trouble their Lordships at any great length. Great improvements had, for instance, been made in the existing law relating to recognizances, with the view of preventing those preliminary discussions which, under the Grenville Act, had tended in the very outset of the proceedings to create a party spirit. Alterations had also been made in the law relative to costs, with the view of securing justice more effectually to parties concerned in case of vexatious proceedings. The object of these alterations was to indemnify those who acted fairly and honestly, and to mulct those whose proceedings were harassing and vexatious. He thought he had now discharged his duty, and fulfilled the promise which he had given to their Lordships. He had simply pointed out the nature of the measure, and the character of the details; he had shown how the bill would work, the inconveniences of the old system, and the mode in which it was proposed to remedy them, and it only remained for him to move, that the bill be now read a third time.
Lord Wrottesleymuch approved of this measure, and should give it every support in his power. The whole country was dissatisfied with the old system, and, in his opinion, justly so. The House of Commons had acted wisely in continuing the jurisdiction in its own Members. If they had not done so, they would have told their constituents, that out of the 658 Members of the House of Commons, it was impossible to form an honest and impartial tribunal. In his opinion the House of Commons had done itself great credit by the preparation of this bill.
Lord Broughamhighly approved of this measure, which did great credit to the sagacity of those who framed it. As the other House had taken one leaf out of their Lordships' book, he trusted they would take another also, and apply the same principle as that on which the present bill was framed to their private legislation.
Bill read a third time and passed.

COPYHOLDS ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
Lord Broughamrose to call their Lordships' attention to a bill, framed with the greatest care, and founded upon the soundest principles. This bill proceeded from the Real Property Commissioners, who, after much inquiry, had produced a report on the subject of tenures. He should state shortly to their Lordships what the objects of the bill were. A great part of the landed property of the country was built over by towns, or it was situate in the neighbourhood of towns, and was, therefore, likely to be built over, and much of this property was held by the tenure called copyhold. Lord Coke, and after him Mr. Justice Blackstone, said that this tenure, though not of a high family, was of a very ancient house, corning as it did from the ancient villeins. By degrees those villeins obtained possession of their lands, and there grew up a firmer title, but still in the eye of the law the possessors of those lands were merely tenants-at-will, although under very peculiar circumstances; the will of the lord being determined by the customs of the manor. Now, the manner in which the customs arose in each particular manor, formed the groundwork of the bill which he had the honour to propose to their Lordships. In each manor the customs varied, and constituted a code of law which, however different from that which obtained in other parts of the kingdom, was the law of that manor. Now, let them only look at the consequences of this. The position of the ground, and its quality, whether wood, river, or mine, the state of the inhabitants, the degree of their civilization, the amount of property held by the lord, the amount of property held by the tenant—nay, more, the mere caprice of the lord, became severally the origin of all the diversities in the customs of manors which had since sprung up. There was not a greater diversity in the laws which affected the customs of France

925
before the Code Napoleon amalgamated and melted them all into one, than at this moment was to be found in England. The first diversity respected the enjoyment of land, particularly the leasing power. Generally speaking, the tenant could not lease for more than a year, but with the consent of the Lord he might grant a lease for a longer term. In many manors, however, the copyholder might lease for seven years, in others for nine, in others again for life, and in one manor the custom was for the copyholder to lease for life and forty years afterwards. In like manner the custom varied in different manors as to the amount to be paid to the lord for his license to lease. The amount was sometimes perfectly indefinite, and the Lord of the Manor might demand whatever sum he pleased for his consent, and consequently the copyholder in many instances could not lease at all. In other manors the tenant might lease on payment of a fine certain, and the amount of that varied in different manors. So much as to the mode of enjoyment as far as tenure was concerned. But there was another diversity. The timber which grew on copyhold land could not be cut down by the copyholder without the consent of the lord in many manors, and indeed it was a common proverb all over England, "The oak will not grow except on free land." So with respect to the enjoyment of underground property; mines and minerals generally belonged to the lord, but by special custom to the tenant, and sometimes the property was to a certain extent in the lord and to a certain extent in the tenant. The consequence was, that in these cases the mines could not be worked without the joint consent of the lord and the tenant. So again, as many diversities prevailed in the customs affecting free bench or dower, and the transmission of the copyhold property by descent. The widow of the copyholder was sometimes entitled to a third of the property for her dower, sometimes to a moiety, and sometimes to the whole. Then, again, when the property passed by descent, it came sometimes to the eldest and sometimes to the youngest son; in some manors all the brothers took together, and no son at all; sometimes it passed to the youngest daughter, sometimes to all the daughters in coparcenary, and sometimes the eldest daughter took all. There was equal variety in respect to the
926
conveyance of the property, whether by transfer inter vivos, or by will, and also in respect of the amount of the fine payable on the transfer. Then, again, the customs differed with respect to heriots. Their Lordships knew that a heriot was the best chattel which the tenant had, and he believed that the race horse Smolensko was once claimed as a heriot. (A noble Lord, Waxy was also taken as a heriot). But the evil did not stop here. If a piece of copyhold land descended according to the custom of gavelkind, all the sons had to pay a heriot, and if the land were divided for building purposes, it might so happen that 90 or 100 heriots would be payable. He had said enough to show their Lordships that they ought to get rid of these diversities in the law, which without doing much good to the landlord, were exceedingly injurious to the tenant. It was proposed, therefore, to give facilities for voluntary enfranchisement, and failing that, to have recourse to compulsory powers. The tithe commissioners, who had judiciously and successfully carried the Tithe Commutation Act into effect had consented to take the superintendence of this measure. There was no compulsory power under the bill, with the exception that a binding power was given to the majority of copy-holders over the minority; and whenever the lord of the manor, together with more than one-half of the copy-holders in number, and more than three-fourths in value, assents to enfranchise all the copyholds, the provision was made to enable them to avail themselves of the power of the commissioners by appointing valuers, obtaining reports, settling disputes, and fixing the amount of compensation to the lord. The noble and learned Lord concluded by moving, that the bill be read a second time,
Motion carried.
Lord Lyndhursttrusted the noble and learned Lord did not intend to press the measure forward this Session, because many noble Lords interested in the matter had left town with the impression that it would not be brought on.
On Lord Broughammoving that the bill be committed,
their Lordships divided:—Content 28; Not-Content 39: Majority 11.
Bill put off sine die.
Lord Lyndhurstbegged to state, that he did not object to the principle of the bill, but to its details; and that he should

927
be happy to assist his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) in framing and passing a measure similar in principle next Session.

POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS.
The House in Committee on the Metropolis Police Bill.
Lord Ellenboroughwished to draw the attention of their Lordships to some facts of this bill, and more particularly to the manner in which several provisions of it were thrown together in one measure. Some of the clauses were, in his opinion, too general for a local bill of this kind, and ought to have been confined to the locality of the metropolis, or to have been embodied in a separate bill. He must complain of the 42nd clause, which prevented persons from being admitted into the houses of licensed victuallers before a certain hour on Sunday, as it might fall peculiarly hard on persons who had just arrived in town. By the clause which provided against any noisy instruments being used in the public streets for calling persons together, a church bell could not be rung, after the Monday following the passing of this act, without a penalty of 40 s. being incurred. Punch, too, and that whole class of amusements, must cease the instant this bill was passed. At the same time, it might be very difficult to frame a clause so as to save punch and church bells. There was also a clause which would fall peculiarly hard on those persons who on a Sunday were accustomed to visit their friends, and were generally known by the name of a "bore," for there was a penalty imposed upon "every person pulling any door bell, or knocking at any door, without lawful excuse." Besides, as soon as this bill passed, no noble Lord could take home a friend in his cab or carriage, which on a wet night was so extremely convenient, without being liable to a penalty of 5s., unless indeed he had previously asked the permission of his coachman, for the Aet said, that every person riding upon, or causing himself to be drawn by, any carriage in the metropolitan district, without the consent of the driver thereof, shall be liable to a penalty of not more than 5s." By the 61st clause, too, constables were allowed to destroy any dog that was suspected to be in a rabid state; but that was confined to a circuit of fifteen miles from Charing-cross, so that beyond that distance hydrophobia
928
might rage to any extent. His object, however, was to press on their Lordships, that it was wrong to throw together in one bill provisions which ought to form at least four different measures. Those clauses relating to the police force only might form one; other clauses as to the Thames police, a second; the different offences to be punishable in the metropolitan district, a third; and the other clauses, especially those respecting public houses, and which were of a general character, the fourth. But he would not propose any amendments, although he thought some ought to be made in those particulars, because there had been great difficulty in getting this bill through the House of Commons, as it was, and he might thereby endanger its passing at all.
Viscount Duncannonsaid, all the clauses in this bill had been taken from other police bills. He had no objection to introduce a few words to confine the clauses to the metropolitan district. With respect to the ringing of church bells, he did not think this clause would be construed so strictly as the noble Lord had stated, or that any magistrate would convict a person on that account, for the clause was intended only to prevent such noises as were considered a nuisance.
The Earl of Wicklowconsidered the bill extremely useful. At the same time, the provision against unlicensed theatres was very hard, particularly the power given to arrest any persons seen to enter them.
The Bishop of Londonhoped the noble Earl did not allude to the penny theatres, which were the greatest sinks of vice and iniquity in the vicinity of London, and were amongst the greatest nuisances of the metropolis. These could only be put down by giving the magistrates summary jurisdiction.
Bill passed through the Committee with amendments.

SUSPENSION OF ECCLESIASTICAL PREFERMENTS.
Viscount Melbourne,in moving the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Preferments Suspension Bill, said, that the object of the present bill was to suspend for one year the appointment to cathedral preferments, except under certain specified circumstances, so as to allow time for further inquiry, and to give Parliament in the next Session time to carry out the measures recommended by the ecclesiastical commissioners.
The Bishop of Exeterwould briefly state the grounds on which he should move, that the bill be read a third time that day three months. The noble Viscount had laid no ground for calling on their Lordships to assent to the bill. The ground that Parliament had passed similar bills before was no justification of this, because no hope was held out that the inquiries would be more complete, or that Parliament would be better prepared in the next Session to pass the measures alluded to than it was in the present. Much injustice would be inflicted on tenants and lessees of church property if their Lordships passed this bill. No leases which might fall in could be renewed. The only evil that could possibly accrue, if the bill were not passed, would be to fill up vacancies which might arise, till the commission could bring forward a bill. The right rev. Prelate concluded with moving, that this bill be read a second time that day three months.
The Bishop of Rochesterthought the bill most unjust to the whole of the clergy and to the welfare of the Church. The bill ought not to be brought forward at this period of the Session. He considered this measure as a precursor of a more general one.
The Bishop of Londonconcurred with his right rev. brother, who had just sat down, in what he had stated about bringing forward the bill at that period of the Session. He thought, however, that it should be continued. He would not give his vote for the second reading, if it were not for the understanding that her Majesty's Government would submit early in the next Session of Parliament the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill to their Lordships.
The Earl of Wicklowthought they might do away with the prevention of renewing lessees, and put an end to one of the most powerful objections against the measure.
The Archbishop of Canterburysaid, that a rectory preferment in Berkshire now vacant, would still be suspended till the bill that was proposed to be brought in for the suspension of sinecures was passed. If that bill were brought in, and did not pass, that sinecure rectory must be presented to, and it would be continued for the life of the person who received it. He was speaking in this instance against his own interest, because that sinecure was in
930
his own gift. That, and another sinecure, of very considerable value, had been placed at the disposal of the commissioners, and were to be disposed of in the way they might direct, by Act of Parliament. He considered that the mention of that circumstance would rather operate as an inducement to their Lordships to pass this Suspension Bill for this year. He hoped that the bill respecting collegiate churches and sinecures might be submitted to Parliament next Session; because, if not brought forward, he really did not see how their Lordships could be called on to pass another Suspension Bill.
Bill read a second time.

GOVERNMENT OF CANADA.
The Marquess of Normanbyon the report of the Canada Government Bill having been brought up, moved an amendment on the third clause respecting the powers of taxation vested in the Governor and Council.
Lord Ellenboroughcontended, that a more distinct specification of what was intended by "local objects" in the clause ought to be given. He was afraid that the measure would not turn out to be a temporary one. The noble Marquess, he much dreaded, would come down next year with a bill for the same purpose as this, with some slight alterations, and so things would go on from year to year, Lower Canada continuing to be governed on the principles of this bill. He was opposed to the scheme of a legislative union of the two provinces, which he regarded as wholly impracticable, inasmuch as the Government would find arrayed against them so strong an opposition in the House of Assembly as it would be impossible for any Government to contend with. The scheme, too, if practicable, would, he was convinced, prove the worst possible form of Government for the lower province. To setting up the forms without the substance of the British Constitution, he was utterly opposed. Nothing better than this could result from the project of an union, for more than a formal resemblance to British institutions could scarcely be expected amidst a population who were so completely different in habits, manners, and feelings, and among whom the trial by jury would not, he feared, afford any prospect of impartial justice. However, he was not without hopes that peace, tranquillity, and loyalty, might be

931
recalled to the lower province by reestablishing a popular Government there. He thought further, that the Imperial Legislature ought to give the people of Lower Canada the largest means of improving their condition and that of the country by their own industry; but above all things, the most important omission, on the part of the Government, was their non-adoption of those measures so earnestly pressed upon them by Lord Durham for improving the internal communications of the two provinces, which would at once improve their commerce and make them strong in affection for this country.
The Marquess of Normanbywas disposed to agree with the noble Baron who had just sat down, in the importance with which he viewed the improvements in internal communication, and he could assure the noble Baron that it was not from any lethargy that the Government had not turned its attention to those points, but from the difficulties in the way of practically effecting those suggestions. Neither did the Government fear hereafter being able to establish a settled form of government which would be satisfactory. The object of taxation he thought to be clearly defined in the clause by the words "local improvements," meaning thereby, improvements not confined to districts, but extended over the whole country.
The Duke of Wellingtonbelieved that the House had agreed generally that powers should be given to the Governor and Council to levy taxes for local improvements, but it appeared that the Governor's correspondence and the report made by the Council to the Governor, pointed to measures which could not in this country be deemed to be local improvements. He did not understand that either this or the other house of Parliament had approved of a general extension to the Governor and Council of powers to levy taxes, to establish local jurisdictions to build gaols, or for many other object; adverted to both in the despatches of the Governor and in the report of the Council Now, it was very desirable that this bill and the powers which it conferred should not be misunderstood in Lower Canada and under these circumstances he (the Duke of Wellington) earnestly recommended that a few words should be added to the proviso at the end of this clause stating to what objects the power of taxation should not be extended—in other
932
words, setting forth from the words in the despatch and the report those measures and objects to which it was not the intention of the Government of this and the other House of Parliament that the power of taxation should apply.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, he would endeavour to have a proviso framed before the third reading, to meet the views of the noble Duke.
Report agreed to.