HL Deb 23 June 1851 vol 117 cc1076-7
The EARL of CARLISLE

(as Chairman of the Select Committee) moved, pursuant to notice— That Leave be given to the Petitioners praying to be heard by counsel against the Episcopal and Capitular Estates Management Bill to be heard before the Select Committee on the Bill, whose petitions were presented on the 15th, 16th, 19th, and 22nd of May, and 2nd, 6th, and 19th of this instant, June. The noble Earl referred to various precedents—cases in which this course had been taken.

LORD PORTMAN

said, that the course proposed by his noble Friend was a most unusual one. In the present instance, such was the composition of the Committee, which was one of inquiry as to the best mode of effecting the object contemplated by the framers of the Bill, that all parties who were interested either one way or the other were adequately represented upon it, and any one could be examined before it as a witness. There really was no necessity for counsel appearing before the Committee, which was of a character the least likely to be influenced by them. Counsel, too, would represent parties having extreme views on the subject, and such a course would not tend to the Committee's arriving at a concordant opinion upon it. He must, for one, say "not content" to the Motion.

The EARL of HARROWBY

supported the Motion, urging that the petitioners had an interest in the question to a very considerable extent.

The BISHOP of SALISBURY

defended the course taken by the Committee, which found itself placed in the position of dealing with the personal interests of parties who wore not in any degree represented before them. The interest the right rev. Bench took in the matter was no more than that which must be taken by every conscientious member of the Church, in a scheme which proposed to improve the mode of administering the revenues of the Church.

The DUKE of RICHMOND

said, that if the Motion was carried, the only fair way of dealing with the case would be to cast aside the evidence now taken, as the witnesses bad not been subjected to cross-examination, and for the Committee to begin again de novo. He saw no reason why, after the evidence bad been taken, counsel should not be heard at the bar.

After some words from Earl MINTO in support of the Motion,

The EARL of MALMESBURY

expressed his deep sense of the importance of pursuing such a course as should not trespass upon the high reputation their Lordships' Committees had always enjoyed, of allowing no private or personal interests to sway in the most trifling manner their decisions.

LORD CAMPBELL

thought that the adoption of the Motion would place the House in a most anomalous position.

EARL NELSON

thought the course recommended by the majority of the Committee, of which he formed a part, was the only one consistent with fairness which could be pursued.

After a few words in explanation from the Earl of HARROWBY and the Bishop of SALISBURY,

The EARL of CARLISLE

, concurring in the expediency of the views expressed by the Bishop of Salisbury, consented to withdraw the Motion.

EARL FITZWILLIAM

hoped their Lordships would come to a clear understanding on this subject. He presumed it was the wish of the noble Mover that the Committee should hear witnesses on both sides?

The EARL of CARLISLE

said, the Committee would be at liberty to pursue the course they had chalked out for themselves.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.