Lords Sitting of 21 January 1840

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a second and a third time:—Prince Albert's Naturalization Exhibition.
Petitions presented. By the Bishop of London, from a Parish in Essex, against any further Grant to Maynooth College; also from a place in Gloucestershire, for Church Extension.

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND
The Duke of Richmondpresented a petition from persons belonging to the church of Scotland, complaining of the suspension of seven ministers of their church without any apparent cause, and contrary to the wishes of the parishioners among whom they for a long time resided, and by whom they were universally esteemed. It also expressed deep regret at the unhappy occurrences that lately occasioned a collision between the civil and ecclesiastical courts in that country. He would give no opinion at present on this question, but he hoped Parliament would not separate before some measure was passed for its settlement, as considerable excitement prevailed in Scotland respecting it.
Lord Broughamentirely agreed in the opinions expressed by his noble Friend. He alluded with pain to transactions which had lately taken place, and which were so discreditable to one part of the empire. He concurred with the noble Duke in thinking that measures should be taken for the quiet of that part of the United Kingdom. But he begged leave to add, distinctly and deliberately—and it was a matter in which, he would venture to say, that there was not one of their Lordships, whatever sect he might belong to, whatever church he might be in communion with, or whatever political party he might adhere to—he trusted there was not one Member of the House who would differ with him in what he was about to assert: that, at all events, until the Legislature interposed—as long as the law of the land remained what it now was, there was but one mode in which the Legislature and that House could suffer quiet to be established, and there was but one course which that House would unanimously expect to find adopted in Scotland—that of respectfully submitting to the decrees of those courts of justice by which the law in question had been unanimously, judicially, and deliberately pronounced. The noble Lord said, that he himself bore a part in that judgment, and
356
if he alone had pronounced it, he would not say a word in its favour. It was a unanimous, clear, and deliberate judgment of the House; and he had expressed his hope, his confident expectation when that judgment was given, that it would be respectfully submitted to by the ministers of a Christian church, administering to the spiritual comforts of the people, and superintending their religious and moral instruction in Scotland. He had entertained that hope from all his past experience of the venerable judicature of the Scottish church; but, in that hope, he deeply grieved to say he had been entirely disappointed. He felt another hope, however, in which he took leave to express that he had neither yet been disappointed, nor was he ever, he knew, to experience disappointment—he meant his confidence in the steady and firm determination of the courts of law in Scotland, and of the Supreme Court of Appeal which he had then the honour of addressing to enforce obedience to the law by every legitimate means.
Petition laid on the table.

COPYHOLD TENEMENTS BILL.—
Lord Brougham, on moving the second reading of the Bill for the enfranchisement of copyhold tenements, said that there had been three or four hundred divisions of territory, in every one of which property was held by a different law. It was certainly a most anomalous thing, the wonder being, that it should continue to exist. There was no general classification, no systematic arrangement—each territory, each township, each hamlet, had its peculiar law. He knew many cases in this country in which a house was held under one law and the garden under another—nay, even one part of a house which it had been his lot to inherit was held under one law, and another part under another. That, he assured their Lordships, was precisely the state of the law in this country, as far as regarded freehold and copyhold property, up to the very moment at which he was addressing their Lordships. He had stated to their Lordships, the last time he brought the matter before them, the provisions of the Bill. The provisions of the present Bill were the same as those of the Bill of last year. One defect which it was desirable to remedy was, the want of a reciprocal interest between the landlord and the tenant, and the only alteration that

357
had been made in the present Bill had been, that instead of leaving it entirely to the option of the landlord, so that all the tenants together could not enfranchise without his consent, seven or eight clauses had been added, to the effect that in the event of a large preponderance of the tenants of the manor requiring the enfranchisement, the landlord should be bound, with proper power of appeal and proper protection, to give his consent. He had stated last year that that ought to be the frame of the Bill; but upon that, as upon all the other provisions of the Bill, provided they only agreed in the principle that it was fit to give facilities for the removal of this opprobrium on our law, ample opportunity would be afforded in the committee above stairs, to which it was his intention to move this Bill be referred, for discussing all the minor principles, and certainly all and everyone of the details. He felt some reluctance in sending the Bill to a committee up stairs, because both Houses were charged with shifting from themselves the responsibility of legislating. They would be liable to this charge if they legislated in accordance with the views of commissioners unconnected with Parliament. He saw no objection, however, to adopting the result of the enquiries of commissioners, provided that measure were introduced on the responsibility of the Government, or of an individual Member. He did not think he should subject their Lordships to such a charge if he referred this Bill to a committee, for the purpose of discussing its details. The noble and learned Lord concluded by moving that the Bill be read a second time.
The Lord Chancellorwas prepared to agree to the second reading of this Bill, and also to the proposition that it should be afterwards referred to a select committee. The mixed interests of landlords and tenants, and the rights of each under the present law, undoubtedly were productive of great inconvenience. The object of this measure appeared to be to obviate that inconvenience, and therefore it was, no doubt, one deserving the favourable attention of their Lordships. For his own part he should feel it to be his duty to attend to the details of the measure in committee: and he only hoped that the noble and learned Lord who had brought it in would take care to allow full time for its discussion.—Bill read a second time.