Lords Sitting of 15 April 1850

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Smoke Prohibition; Estates Leasing (Ireland). Reported.—Brick Duties; Exchequer Bills.

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.
LORD STANLEYpresented a petition from St. Peter's, Thanet, complaining of agricultural distress; praying also that the salaries and pensions of public officers might be reduced. He would call the attention of the noble Marquess to this part of the prayer, because the petitioners stated that such reductions were necessary, in consequence of the depreciation in prices which had been occasioned by the late free-trade measures of the Government; and he must he allowed to say, that this was a most significant evidence of the effects of the legislative course which had been pursued, that there should now be an increased demand for parsimonious economy in the administration of the public service, which he was very much afraid might eventuate in preventing adequate remuneration from being given to public servants, by which means the public must themselves suffer. Their Lordships would see that this call for rigid economy was not a strong indication of that universal affluence and prosperity which it was said would be the consequence of the adoption of free trade. The people
296
only asked for strict economy, when they found that their means of paying the taxes were reduced; and the fact was, that the Government, by its course of legislation, had increased taxation disproportionately to the means which the people had of paying it—they had increased by one-third the pressure of the national debt, and a system of taxation which the people had been able to bear under protection, they now found entirely overwhelming. In fact, they found that they could not hear it, and he very much doubted whether they would consent to bear it longer at all. If the Government persevered in this rash experiment, which they were carrying on in the teeth of all experience, they must encounter failure; and he thought the petitioners would be entitled to a large remission of taxation, which it appeared they claimed.
Petition ordered to lie on the table.

BOARD OF TRADE RETURNS.
LORD PORTMANavailed himself of that opportunity to ask a question of importance, with regard to some errors which had crept into the statistical returns presented by the Board of Trade. In the course of the year 1848 certain returns had been made of the exports by that board. In the year 1850 a statement had been presented by the same hoard of the exports of 1848, which did not correspond with the returns made at the time. Now, if a mistake had been committed it ought to be set right; and, if no mistake had been committed, the discrepancy ought to be explained.
EARL GRANVILLEwas glad that the noble Lord had given him an opportunity of setting right a very natural misapprehension. The noble Lord had compared the last monthly report with the current monthly account of 1848, whereas the Customs had properly furnished the Board of Trade with the corrected accounts for 1848. The same apparent discrepancy would have been seen in the same month's account of last year. The note to the twelve months' accounts explained that the additions of the quantities in the twelfth month would not agree with the yearly total, on account of errors corrected. A central board had now been established at the Custom House, which he hoped would have the effect of diminishing the number of these errors. Instead of these returns being sent up from above 100 outports, the papers were sent up to

297
a department of the Customs in London, where they were compiled with more care and attention than could be expected from so many collectors.

PROCEEDINGS AGAINST CLERGY BILL.
LORD REDESDALEasked the Bishop of London whether he intended to proceed with the Proceedings against Clergy Bill. He said there was a strong feeling prevalent throughout the country that the right rev. Prelate should proceed, forthwith with that Bill. Nobody could say that the tribunal of the Privy Council gave satisfaction in deciding questions relative to false doctrine and heresy. The general opinion of the Church was that a convocation ought to be assembled. That was the feeling, although the Privy Council on a late occasion had declared that they had decided no point of doctrine. In asserting this they must have taken the words in the same non-natural sense in which they had treated the canons, articles, and catechism of the Church. Unless something satisfactory were done on this subject, great mischief, he was afraid, would ensue both to the Church and to the country.
The BISHOP of LONDONsaid, that as the noble Baron had appealed to him and had asked whether he intended to proceed with the Proceedings against Clergy Bill, which in one of its clauses established a new court of appeal in cases of false doctrine, he had no hesitation to declare that I it was his intention to proceed with that Bill. That Bill, however, contained other important clauses not connected with the establishment of a new court of appeal As to the clause which related to the substitution of a new court of appeal, he had not, owing to his other occupations at this time of the year, had an opportunity of consulting his right rev. Brethren and the Clergy at large upon it. As soon as he had that opportunity he hoped to be able; to frame a clause which would be satisfactory to the Church and to the country at large. He was not prepared to say that the clause as printed in the Bill was the clause which he proposed to press upon their Lordships for adoption; probably not; for he wished to reserve to himself full liberty of action until he had consulted the clergy at large.
LORD REDESDALEthought that the answer which the right rev. Prelate had given to his question was, in the main, satisfactory. He (Lord Redesdale) was of opinion that as little discussion as was possible should take place on the clause,
298
and that the subject should not be treated like either a political or a controversial discussion. He regretted that at this period of the Session nothing could be done immediately, for if something were not done speedily it would be of no use; for if such a clause did not pass through their Lordships' House till the close of the Session, it would meet with all suitable obstruction elsewhere, and, in all probability, would be deferred to another Session.
The BISHOP of LONDONsaid, it might not be inexpedient to separate the clause substituting the new Court of Appeal from the other clauses in the Bill, for it might stand independently of them. It provided merely a court of appeal in reference to one particular class of cases. He believed there would be no objection to the Court of Appeal in matters of fact, but only in questions of false doctrine. He understood that, as far as regarded the discipline of the clergy, there was no objection to the Bill.
Subject at an end.
House adjourned till To-morrow.