Lords Sitting of 9 February 1847

MINUTES.
Reported.—Chelsea Pensions.
3a and passed:—Buck Wheat, &c Importation.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From the Parish of St Helen, Ipswich, for the Repeal of the Poor Removal Act, and for the Passing of a Law enforcing a Union Settlement, and a Union Rating.—From Manchester, respecting the Proposed See of Manchester.

THE PARISH OF MANCHESTER.
LORD STANLEYpresented a petition, for which he claimed attention, as it appeared to him of no little importance as respected the spiritual interests of the Church, more especially that part of the
992
Church consisting of the community of the town of Manchester. The petition proceeded from the churchwardens of the parish of Manchester, elected annually by the whole of the parish, comprising a population of 400,000 persons; and the petitioners complained that while the rectorial revenues of that parish, amounting, as they stated, to above 5,000 l. a-year, but, he believed, exceeding 6,000 l., were received by the dean and fellows of the collegiate church of Manchester, yet the dean and fellows claimed—and perhaps under the law they were technically correct—to be exempt from residence, and from the cure of souls, and that as far as these parties were concerned, the 'parish of Manchester, comprising 400,000 persons, was all but destitute of spiritual provision and assistance. The petition was not prepared in any hostile spirit against the Church Establishment. Had it been, he should have requested that it might be placed in other hands than his to present; but he was of opinion with the petitioners that it was not for the interest of the Church itself to have such cases overlooked, neglected, or kept in the background. The petitioners maintained that such a state of things as they represented was a great injury to the parish; that it was a scandal and a blot, tending to bring the Establishment into disrepute; that it was for the true interests of the Church that it should not remain unredressed; and that, with a view of preserving to that Church to which they were attached the general esteem of the large and important community to which they belonged, and of thereby promoting the stability of the Church, and not from any feeling of hostility to the members of the chapter, they were induced to bring the case before their Lordships, in a full reliance that an evil of such magnitude would not be allowed to remain unredressed. The petitioners stated that originally Manchester was an ancient rectory with the cure of souls, and endowed with tithes and emoluments which amount in 1291 to the annual value of 53 l. 6s. 8d,; that the rectory continued to be a corporation sole until 1421, when Thomas Delaware, the rector, called a meeting of the inhabitants, and after stating that the parish was large and populous, and that some of the rectors had been non-resident, pleaded that, for the great honour of the town, a collegiate church should be endowed, and offered at his own expense to erect that costly building. This was agreed to,

993
funds were added by voluntary contribution, and provision was set apart for the college, in which it was settled that divine worship should be celebrated daily. Their Lordships would observe that at that time the complaint was of non-residence. The petition then proceeded to state—
"That during the first year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, the lands and revenues of the college were taken under the control of the Crown. The Archbishop of York was intrusted with the supervision, and the warden and fellows were enjoined to residence and diligent preaching every Sunday in the church of Manchester, or one of the seven chapels of ease in the pariah. That well-founded complaints having been brought that the funds of the rectory had been alienated, the college was dissolved; and by a charter granted in the 20th year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, after reciting that a certain college called St. Mary's, founded in order that the parishioners, to the number of 10,000, should thereby be instructed in all true Christian knowledge, was deemed to be dissolved, it was ordained that there should be one college, to be called Christ's College, and to consist of one warden, four fellows, two chaplains, four singing men, four singing boys, and that the warden should receive 4s. every day that he should be present and resident; each fellow 16 d.; each chaplain 6¾d. And because the said college had sustained great loss by the absence of the wardens who discharged no part of the duty and charge by their office enjoined on them, it was hereby also decreed that neither warden nor fellow should receive any rents or revenues of the said college, but only when they were present or gone to visit the sick, or preach in some village in the parish of Manchester; but there were given to the warden eighty days of absence, and to each fellow sixty days. That in the tenth year of the reign of King Charles the First great complaints of neglect of duty and misappropriation of revenues having been made against the then warden (who was described as a great pluralist and mighty hunter after ecclesiastical dignities and benefices, as never intending to reside, and refusing to take the oaths which bound him to residence), and the grievances complained of not having been redressed, the then warden was, on a petition and representation of the case to the Crown, dismissed from his wardenship, and the existing charter was granted, whereby after reciting that the college was erected to this end, that in the church thereof should be daily prayers solemnly made, that the sacraments and other Divine services should be celebrated, and that the King's subjects, the parishioners, which were then to the number of 20,000, might be instructed in the duties of piety towards God, and obedience towards the King, and of honest life and conversation towards one another, but that it came to pass, by negligence, and absence, or covetousness of the warden and fellows, that the objects of the foundation were defeated, it was ordained that the warden should be removed, the college dissolved, and another be founded, to consist of one warden, four fellows, two chaplains, four singing men, and four singing boys, and to be paid thus: the warden 70 l. per annum; each fellow, 35 l. per annum; each chaplain, 17 l. 10 s. and marriage dues (salvo semper jure clericorum parochiorum); each
994
singing man, 10 l.; each singing boy, 5l. That any further increase of rents should be received by the warden and fellows, but not till the church should be repaired according to the dignity and honour of the place; and not till a house or houses be provided where the warden and fellows might dwell either together or asunder, and that chaplains should receive increase according to the sound discretion of the warden and fellows. That after also reciting that in the former foundation the college had suffered loss by absence, it was by the same charter determined, ordained, and willed, that the warden and fellows and their successors should continually reside in and frequent (perpetuo residere et victitare) the town or parish of Manchester, and that the following fines should be paid to the poor, namely:—By the warden 10 s. for each omission of a sermon which he ought to preach on Christmas-day, at Easter, on Whitsunday, and Ascension-day (but he might provide a substitute); and 2s. 8d. for every day on which he should not be present in the town or parish of Manchester, so that he could not, being sought for, visit any sick person, or perform the offices of piety and charity in the said parish; by each fellow 6s. 8d. on each omission of his monthly sermon, but he might provide a substitute; 1s. 4d. for every day on which he should not be present in the town or parish of Manchester, so that he could not, being sought for, visit any sick person, or perform the offices of piety and charity in the said parish; also that the warden and fellows, before they should be able to give their voice in the chapter, should bind themselves by oath that they would verily observe the statutes of perpetual residence, or in case of violation to willingly submit to the penalty; and that they would not seek for a dispensation from this oath; but there were excepted 100 days in the year on which the warden was permitted to be absent, and eighty days in the year on which each fellow was permitted to be absent. That the aforesaid fines (though now, from the altered value of money, and the increased revenues of the rectory, become merely nominal and inoperative) were evidently intended to be, and were at the date of the said charter, such as would effectually secure to the parishioners of Manchester constant residence, visitation of the sick, and performance of offices of piety and charity by the warden and each of the four fellows, inasmuch as the warden and fellows were subjected to fines amounting to more than half their income. That the warden and fellows have from time to time, with a view to increase the revenues accruing to them as rectors and parsons of the parish and parish church of Manchester, obtained powers to grant leases of the glebe lands belonging to the said rectory, and instituted suits to establish and enforce payment of tithes in kind arising within the said parish. That in a suit intituled 'Blackburn v. Jepson,' which came on to be heard before Lord Chancellor Eldon, in 1810, the then warden and fellows sought to enforce the payment of tithes, but did not sue in their corporate but in their individual capacities, and founded and established their claims to such tithes as being due to them as rectors of the parish of Manchester in their individual and not in their corporate capacity as a chapter."
Having by these references shown their Lordships that the complaints from the

995
commencement related to non-residence and non-performance of ecclesiastical duty—having shown that the object aimed at by the charter was an abatement of those evils—their Lordships would be surprised to learn that the dean and chapter of Manchester at the present moment declared that by those charters they were not required to reside within the parish of Manchester; that they had no cure of souls; that they were exempt from residence; and that they were bound to do neither more nor less than pay 1s. 4d. a-day on each day that, being sought for in order that they might perform their duties, they were not to be found. He did not say that technically this construction was not correct. There was no charge of the violation of an oath on account of non-residence, because there was the convenient alternative that these parties should either reside in the parish, according to the intention of the founder, or pay a fine for non-residence. But that fine, as imposed, amounted to about 20 l. for the year, and originally involved the forfeiture of more than one half of the income of a fellow. The revenues now amounted to about 6,000 l. a year, and it was obvious that the fine was now perfectly nugatory and insufficient when applied to an income so increased. With all respect for the dean and chapter of Manchester, he must express his astonishment that, in the face of the avowed and notorious intentions of the founder, men of respectability, and of conscientious and religious feelings, as he was bound and did believe those parties to be, could reconcile it to their consciences to receive from the rectorial funds of the parish of Manchester 6,000 l. a-year, and leave a community of 400,000 persons, in the midst of whom, according to the charter, they should reside and discharge spiritual duties, almost without spiritual instruction, except that which was derived from the establishment of district churches throughout the town. When this provision was originally made, the population was about 20,000, and, besides the collegiate church, there were nine other chapels of ease, in which the rectory was required to perform duty. At the present time there were forty-nine district churches in Manchester, the clergymen attached to which were maintained by fees—one fee being paid for the district church, and another for the mother church; but the whole of the rectorial tithes were received altogether by the dean and chapter. He repeated, that he
996
was surprised that religious and conscientious men could reconcile it to their minds to receive and put into their pockets 6,000 l. a year out of the rectorial tithes, disclaiming the corresponding duty, and claiming the right of holding benefices in distant parts of the country, and to be exempt from the performance of those duties for which they received such sums. Among the provisions of the charter, it was stated that the chaplains should receive increase of salary according to the sound discretion of the wardens and fellows. These chaplains were the persons who performed the whole duty of the district attached to the collegiate church, comprising a population of 20,000 persons. Would their Lordships believe that the sound discretion of the wardens and fellows had been exercised to the effect of returning the original sum of 17 l. 10 s., as a chaplain's salary, though he did not mean to deny the receipt, at the same time, of the usual fees by the chaplains? This was the whole amount of the salaries paid out of the rectorial revenues to those who performed the whole duty. This matter deserved the attention of their Lordships and the Legislature. The occasion upon which this case had been placed in his (Lord Stanley's) hands was the acceptance of the headship of St. Bees, in Cumberland, by one of the fellows, or canons, as they were now called, of Manchester; that preferment rendering it absolutely necessary that he should reside at St. Bees for seven months in the year; while the duties of the appointment ought, in fact, to engross the whole of his time. The petitioners could not conceive why a canon of Manchester should be exempted from those provisions which applied to rectors in their individual capacity; which prevented their holding more than one benefice, except within certain distances and of certain value; and which would undoubtedly require the residence of the rector of Manchester in that town, if he were a corporation sole. What the parishioners desired was, not that the dean and canons might be deprived of their present advantages, but that, as they had received the emoluments of the rectory, they should comply with those conditions which it was clearly and indisputably the intention of the founder and of the Legislature to impose upon them; namely, that they should reside in the town, and take the cure of souls, instead of devolving upon one or two hard-worked and ill-paid curates the

997
whole duties of a district containing upwards of 20,000 inhabitants, it being, as their Lordships were aware, one of the great evils and grievances of the present day, that there was not adequate provision made for the spiritual instruction of the people residing in large towns in this country. The parishioners apprehended that a recent Act of the Legislature, though wholly contrary to the wishes and intentions of the Legislature, would place them in a worse position than that in which they now were. In the third year of the reign of Her present Majesty, an Act was passed giving certain powers to the dean and canons of Manchester, until the erection of the see of Manchester; but the parishioners apprehended that that Act, the object of which was to make better provision for the application of the cathedral funds, would in fact do them an injury, because it would sanction and confirm the abuse of rectorial and parochial funds for the emolument of the chapter. He (Lord Stanley) had detained their Lordships at greater length than he had intended in stating the complaint of the petitioners; but he believed their Lordships would concur with him in thinking, that if such a state of things as he had described was warranted by law, the subject well deserved their serious consideration. He (Lord Stanley) could not conceive why the dean and canons of Manchester should be allowed to forget that they were also corporate rectors, and why they should be permitted to make use of their corporative character to deprive a large, an extensive, and a destitute population, of a provision of 5,000 l. or 6,000 l., which was made by law for the cure of souls. The petitioners prayed their Lordships that, at or before the time at which the see of Manchester was erected, provision might be made for securing the application, in such manner as might be deemed expedient, of the whole income and revenues of the rectory for the efficient pastoral and ecclesiastical superintendence of the rectory of Manchester; and that such residence might be enforced as was required in benefices with the cure of souls.
LORD BROUGHAMobserved, that this was a lamentable instance of compliance with the letter of the foundation, while its spirit was utterly disregarded; but those who had been accustomed to practise in courts of law were well aware that it was far from being a rare case, for it was indeed one of the most ordinary cases
998
that occupied the attention of courts of equity. He must, at the same time, express his opinion that this was a very hard case; but it was one of those cases in which it was difficult to ascertain precisely what intention had prevailed in the mind of the founder, and in which they must take the rule of law to govern their decision. The common observation might indeed be applied in this instance, that if testators could rise from their graves, they would be astounded at nothing more than at the wills the law had made for them. He considered, that when a fit occasion occurred, some legislative remedy ought to be adopted for remedying the grievances of which the petitioners complained.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas not about to offer any opinion as to the construction to be put upon the charters by which the deanery and chapter of Manchester were constituted. He was, however, anxious to state that, in consequence of the fact of this petition having been prepared and becoming known in Manchester, and its also having been ascertained that his noble Friend opposite (Lord Stanley) had undertaken to present it to their Lordships, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) had received a letter from the dean, or, as he was formerly called, the warden of Manchester, accompanied by a request that when the petition was presented, that letter might be read to the House. He (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was sure their Lordships would feel that it was only just to the distinguished gentleman and scholar who held the deanery of Manchester, and who undoubtedly considered that the petition involved a charge of neglect of duty against himself and the canons, that this communication should be laid before them. He hoped, therefore, that the House would indulge him while he read the statement to which he referred, and which was as follows:—
"My dear Lord—I have to-day received a letter from Lord Stanley, informing me that the churchwardens of Manchester have placed in his hands a petition to the House of Lords, of which he sends me a printed copy, which I enclose; printed by them, I apprehend, for the purpose of circulating freely its false representations and insinuations amongst the inhabitants of Manchester. This petition contains much irrelevant matter, in which I believe there are some inaccuracies; but I have not time, and it is not necessary, to investigate them. In the more important parts it quotes inaccurately from the charter, to suit its purposes, residere et visitare, instead of residere et victitare, which means to have both bed and board; and subsequently it states untruly that the dean and

999
canons make a claim to certain exemptions, 'notwithstanding the oaths required by the existing charter binding them to perpetual residence, and not to seek dispensation from such oath.' Those words contain an untrue statement; the chapter are not bound to perpetual residence, but to reside, or furnish an account of their days of absence, and pay a fine to the poor for the number of days of absence exceeding the number stated in the charter. The dean and canons have not, and never have had, the cure of souls. It is vested by distinct words in the chaplains. The dean and canons do not set up any claim, though it is so asserted more than once in the petition. They simply enjoy the rights that have been enjoyed ever since the incorporation, which took place in the reign of Charles I. The words by which the cure of souls is vested in the chaplains are incontrovertible—duo sint in perpetuum capclarii seu vicarii qui ægros visitabunt, sacramenta aliaque necessaria, et divina servitia in dicto collegio et in parochiâ de Manchester celebrabunt. The dean and canons are not ordered, nor have authority, to visit at all; they are required to pay a fine to the poor when absent, 'so as not to be able, if requested, to visit a sick person, and perform other acts of piety and charity in the parish.' The petitioners speak of a claim to exemption from that which was never imposed; and they throw out a calumnious insinuation when they speak of 'the conduct of the dean and canons in the exercise of such claim.' I appeal from these three gentlemen to the voice of all Manchester, whether I or the canons have ever declined to visit, to comfort, or to help the afflicted and distressed. If the three gentlemen who signed this petition had visited one-hundredth part of the cellars of the destitute that have been visited, unsolicited, by me and by my family—if they had sued like me from door to door, even to exhaustion, for subscriptions to educate the poor—if they had raised that education from its former to the improved and progressive position which it now occupies—if they had sat day after day, as I have done, in committees for the relief and advantage of the indigent, they would not think themselves chargeable with that want of charity and piety which they are disposed to attribute to me and to my zealous and respectable fellow-workers, the canons of Manchester, to whose meritorious conduct towards the people of Manchester I beg leave to bear the most unflinching testimony. The next assertion in the petition is, that 'unless some legislative provision be made, 400,000 inhabitants will be left (except through the medium of the district churches) wholly destitute of ecclesiastical superintendence.' That is, that unless the cure of souls is fastened by a new law on the dean and canons, who have it not, the people of Manchester will have no pastors but those whom the law has assigned them, and whose number is so great, and daily increasing, that I cannot pretend hastily to count them! But the whole system of modern legislation, and of episcopal regulations, is directly opposed to the concurrent cure of souls. Sir Robert Peel's Act erects the new districts into parishes; and there has been even a disposition to allot sub-districts to special curates. The petitioners ask you to enact that, in addition to the two chaplains, the five members of the chapter also shall have concurrent cure of souls with the various rectors, incumbents, and curates of the whole extent of Manchester, over 400,000 people. They also put
1000
on a semblance of anxiety for the interests of the chaplains, who make no complaint, and have no cause of complaint, their income being comparatively better than that of the chapter. You will have seen that the income attributed by the petitioners to the chapter, falls very short of the sum with which the Legislature thought the chapter ought to be endowed, with a view to its important position in this great town. I am satisfied that the injustice and the impolicy of the petition will be apparent to the House of Lords; and without any fear I commit the future interests of the chapter to the impartial justice of Her Majesty's Ministers and of the Legislature. I beg leave to add, that the canons have exceeded, instead of shrinking from, the performance of their duties; that the dean is not only so by a late Act, but is by the charter warden or dean; and that it is not true, as asserted, that the chapter have now any obligations that would cease on the erection of a see of Manchester, nor have any grounds been laid for placing the chapter of Manchester on a different footing from that of any other cathedral town by a new and special enactment."
Their Lordships were aware that he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was in no way connected with Manchester, and he was totally ignorant of the matters to which the petition presented by his noble Friend referred; but he could bear his testimony to the fact, that there was no individual who had contributed more zealously and earnestly to promote the cause of education in that great city, or who had done more to encourage the erection of schools, and to superintend their progress, than the gentleman who held the important situation of Dean of Manchester. He begged also to express his sincere regret at the absence of a distinguished Prelate, in whose diocese Manchester was situated, and who was thus prevented from giving any information to their Lordships on this subject. He could state, however, that the right rev. Prelate was exceedingly sorry that he was unable to attend the House that night, and that he in no way acquiesced in the statement of the petitioners.
LORD BROUGHAMhoped it would not be supposed that he had said one word against his honourable, reverend, and truly learned Friend, Mr. Herbert, the Dean of Manchester.
The LORD CHANCELLORdid not intend to enter into the question at any length, for their Lordships were not in possession of information enabling them to judge whether the members of this corporation had or had not performed those duties which, under the charter, they ought to discharge. This, however, was quite clear from the grant of incorporation—namely, that they were subject to certain pecuniary payments, which, when paid, re-

1001
lieved them from the obligation of perpetual residence. If they held their preferments subject to the terms of their charter, there was no difference between their title and that of most of the ecclesiastical corporations in the country; it was the same title, indeed, by which many of their Lordships were the impropriators of tithes. If so, the law must be altered before any change could be made in the holding under the charter. Their Lordships were aware that in early times, it was a common thing for religious houses, ecclesiastical corporations, and the dean and chapter of places, to become the rectors of parishes, subject to parochial duties and charges; but the rectorship was in most cases vested in the ecclesiastical corporations. In the time of Henry VIII., when monasteries and other religious houses were dissolved, the rectories and tithes held by these ecclesiastical bodies became the subject of purchase and grant, and those which remained vested in ecclesiastical bodies had remained as impropriated rectories to the present day. In the neighbourhood in which he (the Lord Chancellor) lived, there were four contiguous parishes in which a dean and chapter held the rectories. The income received by these ecclesiastical rectories in his own parish, could not be less than 800 l. a year; and the sum they allowed to the clergyman who performed the duty was 40 l. per annum. In other parishes throughout the country, he believed it was in about the same proportion. The result was, therefore, that discretion lay in the hands of the rectors, who were themselves members of the ecclesiastical corporation; and they had the law entirely on their side. The law had left the payment of the persons doing the duty to the discretion of these bodies. There were Acts of Parliament empowering the bishops to fix the salaries of the working clergy in proportion to the population; but Parliament had felt so sure that these deans and chapters would perform their duty in this respect, that they had not interfered to place the clergy of the parishes to which he alluded under the protection of its bishops. The matter was left to their discretion, which had been more or less liberally exercised. If the dean and canons of the collegiate church of Manchester conformed to the terms of the charter, respecting which he would express no opinion, they were as much entitled to the tithes as any one of their Lordships was entitled to his estates. If the petition appealed to the wants of the parish of Manchester, that
1002
was another question, and it might be proper that an Act of Parliament should be obtained to remedy the grievance complained of.
LORD CAMPBELLcontended that there was a palpable distinction between the property in question and impropriate tithes; because the last were held in fee, without the ecclesiastical duties that belonged to the others. It was clear that this property was held as ecclesiastical property, and that it had ecclesiastical duties belonging to it; and he differed from his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, who thought that it was not binding upon those who held such property to perform the duties which its possession demanded. There was a penalty attached of 1s. 4d. a day for the non-performance of those duties. That penalty showed that certain duties were imposed upon them which it was necessary that they should perform, and the payment of it did not free them from future responsibility. A man was not a good citizen who paid a penalty for the breach of the laws; but he who did the duty that the law enjoined. It appeared to him, that by the charter the duty of residence was imposed upon these persons, and that duty ought to be performed. He did not wish it to be understood that he thought the parties in question were not good and pious men, willing to perform all those duties which they considered properly devolved upon them.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that his noble and learned Friend must have been thinking of something else when he (the Lord Chancellor) addressed the House, for he had expressed no opinion whatever as to whether those persons who held the property were compelled by the terms of their charter to perform "duties." He had merely called the attention of their Lordships to the nature of the property.
LORD STANLEYhad not attempted to offer any opinion on the legal part of the question, nor was it his intention to do so now. The noble and learned Lord on the woolsack said that this property was clearly the property of the rectors. No doubt the Act 3 and 4 Victoria, c. 114, gave a description of property which was applicable to rectorial uses; but it treated the rectory in question as one not having, as it were, the cure of souls, and as though the property in its possession was applicable to chapter purposes, with the view of increasing the funds of the curates, and appropriating to them and to their success-

1003
sors a certain amount of income from the general fund of the Ecclesiastical Commission. He would not go so far as to carp at the legal construction put upon the matter by his noble and learned Friends; but he must repeat his surprise that a body of Christians, churchmen, and he verily believed, conscientious churchmen, could be satisfied that they had in this instance performed the sacred duties which devolved on them. One part of the petitioners' statement remained totally without contradiction, which was this; that whereas, a sum of 5,000 l, or 6,000 l. of rectorial property was paid into the hands of the dean and chapter of Manchester, as rectors of the town of Manchester—that whereas it was the intention of the founders that these parties should reside, as shown by subjecting them to a penalty for non-residence equal to half the amount of their incomes at the time it was imposed—that whereas the charter required that they should visit the sick when called upon—yet that these parties contended that, according to the charter, they were not bound to reside, and that they fulfilled the duties which a moral sense of right imposed upon them, if they paid an annual fine for the violation of one of the provisions of the charter, while they were receiving the whole amount of the income, and appropriating it to their own use. He did not say that this was contrary to the law; but it was for their Lordships and for the public to say whether this ought to be the law. If so, then the inhabitants of a parish paying from 5,000 l. to 6,000 l. a year must be content to lose the benefit of the spiritual provision for which that sum was granted, and it must be paid to persons who did not recognise the rights, but who claimed to spend those funds where they pleased, and as they pleased. The parishioners of Manchester were alarmed lest these funds should be, under the new arrangements, liable to be diverted from rectorial purposes to chapter purposes; and there ought to be an understanding upon this subject. The parishoners of Manchester said these were rectorial, and not chapter funds. They had stated what they believed were the obvious intentions of the founder; and he was surprised the dean and chapter of Manchester had taken advantage of a technical expression to maintain the contrary.
The BISHOP of ST. ASAPHinquired where it was stated that the dean and chapter were bound to take upon themselves the cure of souls?
LORD STANLEYhad no doubt, from the terms of the charter, that such was the intention, and that the course of the dean and chapter was at variance with the letter of the law.
Petition to lie on the Table.

PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND).
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he had seen a statement in one of the blue books from Captain Wynn, that two gentlemen of influence in the county of Clare had put farmers of theirs, renting to the amount of 50 l. or 60 l. per annum, upon the public works. That statement he observed had been denied; and he wished to know whether Government were in possession of any additional information on the subject?
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, he had read the statements which had been made respecting Captain Wynn, and he had also read the gallant officer's correspondence, which had appeared in the blue books; but he had not given any attention to particular acts of his. He (the noble Marquess) was at all events aware that Captain Wynn had discharged his duty to the Government and to the country with great zeal and courage; and the district in which he was placed had derived considerable advantage from his exertions.
LORD BROUGHAMwished to know if the Captain was still employed as an officer of the Government?
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that he had every reason to believe that he was, as nothing to the contrary was stated in the last letters received by the Government from Ireland. He believed that nothing whatever had occurred to occasion the withdrawal of confidence from Captain Wynn.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that he did not know Captain Wynn personally, but he could bear testimony to the efficient manner in which he and all other officers performed their duty in the south and west of Ireland.

SCOTCH DISTILLERIES.
The EARL of EGLINTOUNpresented a petition from the Scotch distillers, praying to be heard before a Committee, against the reduction of the duties on rum. They wished for a countervailing duty that would prevent colonial spirits from having an advantage over our spirits. As it was impossible that alterations could be made

1005
in the Bill now before the other House, when it came to their Lordships' House, he trusted that the noble Lord opposite would endeavour to make such a change as would make it more palatable to the distillers.
The EARL of CLARENDONsaid, that if the noble Lord had given notice of his intention to enter into a discussion of this Bill, he should have been prepared to go more fully into it. There had not been the least wish or intention to bear hardly on the Scotch distillers. He had seen the gentlemen from whom the noble Lord had presented the petition, and they had also had an interview with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and they were both of opinion that the Scotch distillers had no real cause of grievance, and that the 6d. protection, which would be afforded to them as well as to the English distillers, was what they were fairly entitled to, and no more.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that he had a petition from the Irish distillers to the same effect as that presented by the noble Earl. Their case was harder than that of the Scotch distillers, because they had no drawback.
EARL GREYsaid, that the existence of the malt duty payable by Scotch distillers had not been overlooked. The Board of Excise had taken pains to calculate what, considering the amount of duty on malt and the restriction, was the burden that fell on Scotch distillers; and having made that calculation to the best of their power, they stated what they considered ought to be a corresponding duty to be imposed on colonial spirits.
Petitions to lie on the Table.
House adjourned.