Lords Sitting of 16 June 1865

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament— The Lord Ashburton, after the Death of his Brother.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Admiralty Acts Repeal* (165); Admiralty Powers 4c.* (3 66); Dockyard Ports Regulation* (167); Constabulary Force (Ireland) Act Amendment* (168); Navy and Marines (Wills)* (169); Roman Catholic Oath* (170).
Select Committee —On Mortgage Debentures, Earl Belmore, Earl Grey, and Lord Redesdale added.
Report—Locomotives on Roads* (164).
Committee—Union Chargeability (122); Dockyard Extensions* (143); Drainage and Improvement of Lands Acts (Ireland) Amendment* (117); Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) (Provisional Order Confirmation) (No. 2)* (147).
Report—Dockyard Extensions* (143); Drainage and Improvement of Lands Acts (Ireland) Amendment* (117); Drainage and improvement of Lands (Ireland) (Provisional Order Confirmation) (No. 2)* (147).
Third Reading—Dogs Regulation (Ireland)* (129); Militia Ballots Suspension*; Militia Pay*, and passed.

EXHIBITION OF MINIATURES AT KENSINGTON—QUESTION.
EARL STANHOPEsaid, he wished to call the attention of the noble Earl the Lord President to the general complaint of

333
the exorbitancy of the sum of 5s. each fixed for the price of the catalogues provided for visitors to this exhibition. He thought the sum of 5s. was unnecessarily high, or at all events that another edition might be provided at the cost of 2s. 6d. each. He was sure that his noble Friend, whose liberal feelings in these matters were well known, would be ready to adopt any step tending to increase the popularity of this exhibition, and he thought that if the price of the catalogues were reduced a much larger number of persons would be induced to visit the exhibition.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he would be extremely glad to see this exhibition rendered as popular as possible, but he felt bound to say that it had been found necessary to fix the price of the catalogue at 5s. in order to insure, as far as possible, the defrayal of the expenses, and to prevent having recourse to other sources to meet the necessary charges.

THE SLAVE TRADE PAPERS.

  QUESTION.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he regretted the absence of his noble Friend (Earl Russell), as he wished to urge strongly upon him the early production of the slave trade papers. These only came down to December, 1864, while much of importance had occurred since this period. The slave trade of Cuba had increased in the most frightful manner, notwithstanding the repeated promises and contracts of Spain. Her conduct, indeed, was detestable and disgraceful. She had concluded a treaty with us many years ago for its abolition on receiving a large sum as compensation for any possible loss she might sustain. He could not say that treaty remained unexecuted, for she had received the money, but not performed her obligations. Instead of making a law (as she had promised) making slave trade piracy (which she could not do regularly without the general concurrence of nations), she had made flimsy proclamations and mock laws, while the infernal traffic went on increasing. The difficulties lay both in Cuba and at Madrid. In Cuba Earl Russell declared in a despatch last year that all ranks, from the highest, without any exception, were in a state of demoralization and corruption as regards slavery and the traffic; and at Madrid, when a noble had fallen into distress he was sent out as governor
  334
  to Cuba to restore his fortunes; and some had actually made £100,000 or £150,000 in a year from the bribes of the slave traders. One was a great exception, General Dulce, who honestly and strongly enforced the law against the abominable traffic. He had not been supported at Madrid, however, and a person bearing, he grieved to say, the honoured name of Arguelles, had grossly libelled him because he would not overlook his slave trade dealings. This man had been tried and disgraced, and sentenced for his misconduct, but the sentence was not executed upon him. The conduct of Spain was disgraceful, and he conceived that the true remedy to enforce her performance of the treaty was to impose a heavy duty on slave-grown produce. His illustrious Friend, that great warrior and statesman, the Duke of Wellington, the saviour of Spain, had plainly expressed that opinion, and Lords Denman and Ashburton had held the same opinions. We repeatedly protested against the conduct of Spain, and our repeated protests were treated as so much empty wind. But if we were in earnest and chose to make Spain perform her contract, and abolish the infernal traffic, we had the means in our own hands both of compelling the mother country and the colony, by imposing a duty on Cuba slave-grown produce, which would at once abolish her slave trade.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he could not, off hand, give his noble and learned Friend the information he required with respect to the papers; but he would make inquiry on the subject.

  CHURCH SERVICES AT ST. ALBAN'S— CONFESSION IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.—LAW OF EVIDENCE.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHrose
  "To bring before the House the Information promised in Debate to The Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London on Friday the 12th of May respecting Infractions of the authorized Worship of the Church of England, which were particularly mentioned as having been practised in the Church of St. Alban, Holborn, as well as in other Churches; and also the solemn Oath alleged to have been taken by the Rev. J. Going, Incumbent of St. Paul's, Lorrimer Square, and his Curates, in a Pastoral Address issued by him respecting Confession, and called the Seal of Confession."
  The noble Marquess proceeded to say that it was argued in some quarters that the Protestant religion was so deeply rooted in the hearts of the people of this coun-

  335
  try that it was impossible to weaken it. He agreed that the Protestant religion was deeply rooted in the hearts of the English people; but, at the same time, he thought there was the utmost danger in those objectionable practices. When this matter was noticed in their Lordships' House on a former occasion the Bishop of London stated that the infractions complained of were not sustained by such evidence as he could act upon.; but, on this occasion, he was prepared to state in the hearing of the right rev. Prelate facts which there was evidence to prove. He had the evidence of some eight or nine respectable witnesses who were present at scenes which their Lordships would have some difficulty in believing could have been enacted in Protestant churches. He himself had attended the church of St. Matthias, at Stoke Newington, on Whit Sunday, and on his return home he made a note of what he had seen and heard there. The church was furnished in a very unusual manner. The part of the Morning Service which he was enabled to hear and the Psalms were intoned very unintelligibly to the Gregorian music. After the Morning Service there was a long pause, during which the bell tolled. A youth came forward with a lighted taper, made a low bow at one extremity of the table, and lit a candle, and then ceremoniously went round to the other end of the table, made an obeisance, and lit the other, candle. The table appeared to be covered with a crimson embroidered table-cloth, upon which stood a large black cross on a black ground, and several vases of flowers were on the table. The two clergymen who read the Lessons and the Morning Prayers had a red strap over their shoulders, with, apparently, a brass cross at the end. The two clergymen and a younger one and the choristers, who were very numerous, had now assembled at one side of the chancel, apparently for the purpose of making a procession down the centre of the church, which they proceeded to do, singing a hymn. In the centre of the procession was a man carrying a large brass cross elevated. The three clergymen had crimson-coloured garments, reaching very low down on their persons, ornamented with gold or gilt lace. This procession differed in nothing that he could perceive from the ceremonial processions usually met with in the streets of Roman Catholic towns on the exhibition of the Host. The three
  336
  principal performers now separated from the rest and went towards the communion table, and there remained with their backs to the congregation, until a youth brought forward a plated or tin pot, from which he threw clouds of incense. The principal then turned round and pulled up some part of the machine, thereby obscuring the whole chancel from view by the clouds of smoke that arose from it; then, turning round to the table, he incensed every part of it, and everything upon it, as well as the book in the hands of the other individual, who read the Gospel after it had been incensed. They then went on intoning the Ten Commandments: and it was only by hearing occasionally a word in the responses that he knew what part of the service was being performed. Luring the whole of this time the little boy kept swinging about the incense-pot interminably. At the end of this, one of the clerical performers, having put off his red costume, went into the pulpit with the white surplice on, having the red strap over it. A part of his doctrine was that the red costume which his company wore represented the tongues of fire that appeared upon the Apostles, red being, according to him, the colour of fire; but, in his humble opinion, the vestment in question better accorded with the scarlet drapery of the woman in the Book of Revelations. Another eye-witness had given him the following statement of the same service:—
  "Prayers were intoned, and so imperfectly pronounced, as to make it impossible to know whether the language used was English or Latin. Morning Prayers being ended, the church bell rang for about a quarter of an hour, the three priests and the choristers went away. Presently a youth appeared with a long lighted taper. He was dressed in a white gown tied in at the waist. He lit the two candles on the communion table, going well round the corners of the table to perform this ceremony. On the table was a tall cross and several vases of flowers, the church also was ornamented with wreaths, bouquets, and hoops of the everlasting yellow flower. One of the priests entered bearing a plate covered with a crimson cloth on his head and put it upon the table. The bell ceased ringing, and a hymn was sung. At its commencement there issued forth from the vestry door a procession, the chorister boys, two and two, some one bearing a very tall brass cross raised on high, and lastly the three priests, who were dressed in crimson, braided with gold. The procession moved slowly and with practised steps down the middle of the church, and back again up the chancel, where each chorister took his place, the three priests walked towards the communion table, and stood there with their backs to the assembled people. Two boys stood within the rails, one with the incense holder, which

  337
  he heaved to and fro. The principal priest then turned round, took the incense, caused it to emit volumes of smoke, and, turning towards the table, he threw the incense smoke about in every direction. One of the priests then read the Epistle; after which another priest, taking an illuminated book off a desk, or stand, on the table, gave out the Gospel, then, turning towards the principal priest, he held the book wide open, while clouds of incense arose over it. After intoning and chanting (unintelligibly) the Communion Service, one of the priests went off, and, divesting himself of the outer crimson overall, ascended the pulpit and preached a sermon, telling us that those red dresses symbolized the tongues of fire that fell upon the Apostles, the colour of fire being red."
  The church bell rung for a quarter of an hour, and the three priests, with a number of choristers, proceeded to the communion table. One of the priests entered with a cloth, which he placed upon the table, and then the three priests, with some of the choristers, proceeded to the vestry, whence they returned dressed in crimson robes blazing with gold. Incense was profusely cast about, and, after some further ceremonies, one of the priests divested himself of his robe and entered the pulpit to preach the sermon. He had many communications upon the subject, but most of the writers, while they expressed their willingness to come forward if a properly constituted court for dealing with such matters should be formed, said they did not desire their names to be made public at present. He had also to refer to another church—St. Mary's—in the same parish of Stoke Newington. He had been informed by a respectable gentleman resident in that parish, and who had been for some time churchwarden, that being apprehensive that the rector was about to introduce a number of novelties into the service he appealed to him to abstain from doing so. A large sum of money being then necessary for the repairs of the church, the gentleman, upon the faith of the rector's promise that no innovations should be introduced, assisted in collecting the amount required. Immediately the money was raised, however, the rector changed his mind, and introduced the modern system. He believed that the right rev. Prelate had tried to bring about a better state of things, and had offered to arbitrate. An attempt was made to ascertain the feelings of the parishioners, and it appeared that the singing party numbered 800, while the reading party were 4,000. The noble Marquess then read an account of his visit to the Church of St. Mary Magdalene, Munster Square, where similar ceremonies took
  338
  place, and before commencing the sermon the priest made the Popish sign of the Cross on his forehead. The noble Marquess also read a description of the services at St. Alban's, Holborn, and Christ Church, Clapham, which were marked by the same characteristics, floral decorations, banners, frequent genuflections, and the like. The noble Marquess then proceeded to say that there were one or two other matters to which he desired to call the attention of the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London). As his Lordship was pleased to say that if any Tractarian Prayer Book were used in the churches—which his Lordship very much doubted—proceedings against the offending clergymen should be at once taken, he wished to call his attention to the book he held in his hand, which had been in use in St. Alban's Church, Holborn, where the book itself was purchased. The right rev. Prelate stated that a complaint had been formerly made, which, when investigated, proved to have reference only to the use of an ancient hymn which had been also used by the Church of Rome. But this book contained not only hymns, but prayers and litanies not found in the Book of Common prayer—hymns and prayers in several instances containing doctrines wholly at variance with those of the Church of England, and which were specially protested against by that Church. There could be little doubt that a very large proportion of the hymnals now in use in many of the churches of the country, including Hymns, Ancient and Modern, which he understood had a circulation of a million copies, and were said to be in use in several cathedrals and a large number of parish churches, contained doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church insiduously introduced into them—a circumstance which it was the duty of the Prelates to deal with at once. There were many errors of the Roman Catholic Church introduced into this book, while Roman missals, breviaries, and other works of devotion among Roman Catholics had been placed under contribution to supply poisonous food for the people's souls. It did not require much theological learning to see that Mariolatry, the Invocation of Saints and Angels, Tran-substantiation, the Real Presence, and Prayers for the Dead, had all a place in this book. The organs of the Tractarian party mentioned the churches where these services were used; and as the matter seemed to call for investigation he should

  339
  present the papers to the Lord Bishop of London. The question was one which concerned millions of members of the Established Church, as well as all those who sympathized with her Protestant Articles and Formularies, and any attention given to the subject would not be misspent.
  He had now to call attention to a statement he made on a former occasion relative to the public letter addressed to the parishioners of St. Paul's, Lorrimore-Square, Walworth, by the Rev. J. Going, incumbent, and his curates, the Rev. F. W. Helder and the Rev. W. G. Abbott, in which, after urging the parishioners to come to them for the purposes of confession, they say, "Remember that your clergy are bound by a most solemn oath never to betray your confidence." The right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London) very properly denied that he ever administered such an oath, and also declared that the administration of such an oath would be a misdemeanor; but the question remained why such a document should be put into circulation, containing inducements to criminals to take clergymen into their confidence on the allegation that they had taken a solemn oath—clearly an illegal one—not to betray the confidence thus reposed in them? There were guilds, confraternities, and sisterhoods in which, he understood, that vows of questionable legality were taken. Mr. Lyne, who called himself "Father Ignatius," for instance, in a report of a lecture delivered by him at Manchester, and revised by himself, said—
  "We have established a branch of our Third Order in Newcastle and its members are sworn to bring about a daily celebration of the Eucharist in the town, if possible."
  As a practical commentary on this system of administering and taking illegal oaths, they had read of the excommunication fulminated by Brother Ignatius against two members of his "Third Order," residing in Bristol, who, in that document, were charged with the crime of perjury—of having broken some oath of obedience to himself, and they had been in consequence cursed with the utmost possible vehemence by this mountebank. And now he would ask the right rev. Bench what they intended to do? It was at one time his intention to use his privilege as a Peer and represent these matters in an audience to Her Majesty; but he had rejected this course on reflecting that, in taking that
  340
  step, he should be bound to use the privilege by craving leave to go into the Royal presence through the medium of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whom it had been his painful duty to unmask in reference to the case of the unfortunate Mary Ryan. He felt bound to notice the illegal conduct of the right hon. Gentletleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department in refusing, on the most flimsy pretexts, to prosecute those who must be regarded by every reasonable man as having infringed the law. When he found that he must proceed through the agency of Sir George Grey, he was reminded of the exclamation of Cromwell, "The Lord deliver me from Sir Harry Vane!" and he exclaimed, "The Lord deliver me from Sir George Grey!" He would ask, whether it was the intention of the right rev. Bench to leave matters in their present condition, or whether it was proposed by them or by the Government to legislate upon this subject with a view to putting an end to these constantly recurring scandals. He could only hope that the appeal which he had made to the Members of the right rev. Bench would not have been made in vain.
  THE BISHOP OF LONDONsaid, he had to express his thanks to the noble Marques for bringing these facts under the attention of their Lordships. The matter was, of course, a very serious one; and he believed he was giving expression to the sentiments of his right rev. Brethren when he said that they regarded it in a very serious light. But he feared the facts brought forward by the noble Marquess were so intimately connected with fresh legislation, that it was doubtful whether he had touched upon any real remedy. In more than one instance he (the Bishop of London) had had occasion to consult the highest legal authorities upon the course to be pursued in these cases, and his conviction was that the impediments which at present existed rendered action in these matters extremely difficult. One great difficulty was the existence of a rubric which provided that the ornaments of the Church and its ministers shall be retained, and be in use as they were in the second year of the reign of King Edward VI. That rubric was, he hoped, capable of such an interpretation as he himself put upon it; but it was clear that its existence introduced great uncertainty into the law. He was perfectly ready for his own part,

  341
  and he believed he might express a similar readiness on the part of his right rev. Brethren, to promise his support to any well-considered measure introducing an alteration which would tend to remove this difficulty. A point, too, in which the law required alteration, and an alteration which he should also be prepared to support, was another rubric which provided that whore doubt was entertained upon any subject of this kind reference should be made to the bishop of the diocese, and in case of his decision not being deemed satisfactory to the archbishop of the province, whose decision was to be final. At first sight this remedy appeared to be an extremely easy one; but in many oases in which he had endeavoured to apply this mode of settling the matter, he had been met with an objection which he believed to be insuperable. The rubric said, "If they have any doubt" but in these cases the clergyman invariably said that he entertained no doubt at all upon the subject, and therefore declined all reference to himself, the archbishop, or any one else. All that they could say, therefore, was that the law was in a very unsatisfactory state. It was said that these evils could not be put down until a new court was established to deal with them, but it was an alteration in the law, and not a new Court that was required. While deeply deploring such follies as those to which the noble Marquess had referred, he felt convinced that he should have the sympathy of his right rev. Brethren when he regretted, as on a former occasion, the difficulties which obstructed them in attempting to deal with these matters. Bishops were invested in ecclesiastical matters with a twofold authority. The first was the authority their advice always carried with it, and to which he was glad to say by far the majority of the clergy, not only in his own diocese but throughout the kingdom, were 'always ready to accommodate themselves; but in case any persons were not willing to listen to the first kind of authority, the bishops could only fall back upon their legal authority, which was of course circumscribed by the written law, the uncertain nature of which rendered it difficult for the bishop to do more than protest against these evils, and use his personal influence to procure their abatement. There were, however, two other parties who might do much to discourage these things, the patrons and
  342
  the parishioners. A good deal of power was lodged in the hands of the patrons. If they appointed improper persons they had themselves to thank. And the parishioners also could use much lawful and proper influence in the election of churchwardens, for in their choice of persons to fill this office they had once every year an opportunity afforded them of expressing the view in which they regarded these matters, and, if they thought fit, of assisting to put an end to them. In the churches to which the noble Marquess had alluded what had taken place might be supposed to be the will of the parishioners, as expressed by the election of the churchwardens. He trusted that in the district churches—for it was principally in those churches that these matters were complained of—the parishioners would bear in mind the solemn duty which devolved upon them in their choice of their churchwardens. Of course, the noble Marquess would not expect him to enter into all the subjects to which he had alluded, and especially he could not in that place say much as to revelations or concessions made by individuals to clergymen in whom they confided. The particular instance to which the noble Marquess had referred appeared to show nothing more than that the clergyman referred to was accustomed to listen to such matters as his parishioners chose to divulge to him. If the noble Marquess would refer to his (the Bishop of London's) primary charge he would find the subject to which he alluded treated at very considerable length. He believed also that the sentiments of others of his right rev. Brethren had been as publicly expressed on the same subject. He might without offence allude to his Grace the Archbishop of this Province, who in another diocese, now a long time ago, had occasion to inquire into a complaint relative to the practice of confessing to clergymen, and all that took place at that time at Leeds had been published, the sentiments of his most rev. Brother being as clearly expressed as his own sentiments in the charge to which he had alluded. It would be the greatest mistake to suppose that the bishops were not quite aware of the very great evils which the noble Marquess had pointed out, and he should be most anxious in any way that he could by the use of his legitimate influence to dissuade the clergy from the practices complained of. But he

  343
  was bound in justice also to say that one distressing part of the case was this— that many of those who were making themselves conspicuous in this way were men of very deep piety, and were sacrificing their health to their most self-denying efforts in the poorest parts of his diocese.
  LORD EBURYsaid, he desired to make a few observations on the subject which had been brought forward by the noble Marquess, to whom in the outset he must offer his best thanks for the courage and perseverance he had displayed. He said courage, because whoever ventured to do what the noble Marquess had done was certain to be severely criticized and pointed at as an intolerant bigot. It could not, however, be any longer denied that the great increase in those practices to which the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Westmeath) referred was causing a deep feeling of disquietude among the Protestant portion of our fellow-countrymen, and that the public discussion of the subject could no longer be adjourned—with all his heart he wished it could—no matter could possibly be less inviting. It was apt unduly to excite the minds of men, and in treating of it, however much a man might desire, it was very difficult to avoid giving offence. What was it that they complained of? They saw a Church, whose confessors and martyrs suffered and bled to establish it in the utmost purity of doctrine and simplicity of ritual, gradually approaching in its doctrine and ritual to the Church of Rome. They had transubstantiation, in all but the name; auricular confession, penance, priestly absolution, prayers for the dead, ornamental vestments, emblematic banners, and processions, crucifixes, incense, candles lighted in broad daylight, with an exaggerated amount of music in the service. They were told, indeed, that these things were contrary to law, and that the law was sufficient to repress them; but the obvious rejoinder to this kind of reply was, that the law was the same as it had been for the last twenty-five years; and that so far from these practices having been put an end to, they had during that time gone on steadily increasing. The right rev. Prelate had himself acknowledged that the law was powerless. Scarcely a week passed without hearing of something new in these matters. The Bishop of Exeter—no mean judge in these matters—had recently refused to consecrate a church in Torquay
  344
  because of its Romish ornamentation and the manifest tendency of the practices of the clergy of the church to lead men over to Home. Only a fortnight ago the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby), in presenting a petition, told them that the church of a very populous parish—St. Martin's, in Liverpool—had a very small congregation because of the eccentricities practised by its incumbent. What those practises were they were informed by another noble Earl later in the debate—the use of incense and auricular confession. The right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London) told them that the right rev. Bench would not shrink from the prosecution of such cases; but he added that the law was not clear, that it was difficult to obtain information, and that he did not move unless he was sure the law was on his side. In truth, from some reason or other, the law was of but little use in stemming the evil. The case was put by one of the newspapers known for its High Church leanings (The Morning Post) with so much truth and fairness that he could not help quoting two sentences from it—
  "There can be no doubt that the use of incense in Divine service, the interpolation of unauthorized prayers, and certain processions are wholly without excuse; they are additions to the prescribed ritual, and are a moral, though perhaps not a technical, violation of the Act of Uniformity and the oath of canonical obedience. The difficulty is, how to bring the case of delinquency home to any offending clergyman. People often feel scandalized who shrink from being mixed up with a prosecution."
  The evil, therefore, went on unchecked, until the Protestant world were startled by some such scandal as that of Mr. Wagner and Miss Constance Kent, which revealed to them how their Church was being undermined and destroyed. He might, perhaps, be asked, if things were in such a state, what was the remedy he had to propose? He confessed that in a House where Her Majesty's Government was so largely and ably represented, and where almost the entire Bench of Bishops had seats, it was hardly fair to put upon a private Member the responsibility of finding a remedy for the dilemma in which the Church now found herself. However, in this instance he stood perfectly clear. Five years ago he made a Motion urging their Lordships to address Her Majesty for a Royal Commission to revise the rubrics, formularies, and canons of the Church; and upon that occasion he met with an opposition so overwhelming as almost to cast

  345
  an air of ridicule upon his Motion, and he was compelled to allow it to be negatived without a division. The canons, rubrics, and formularies of the Church remained unrevised; in many respects absurd, obsolete, and contradictory regulations perplexed the administration of the law, and he appealed to the right rev. Bench to confirm what he was about to say—that the language of some of the rubrics and occasional services went far to palliate, if they did not absolutely justify, some of those practices which were so bitterly complained of. But he addressed himself to those distinguished persons who occupied the right rev. Bench, and he ventured to suggest to them one means of combating this evil, which would not need the putting the law into operation, or the expenditure of a single shilling. Partly from their high offices, partly from their own characters, partly from the patronage which they had at their command, they had, or they might have, a paramount influence in their respective dioceses. Now, if they would cause it to be understood that they entirely set their faces against these practices and those who dabbled in them—if they would check them wherever they saw them springing up, and make it unmistakable that they gave neither support nor countenance to them—though it might not put an end to them altogether, it would, at all events, go far towards it; and it would tend very much to restore confidence to the public. But could they say with truth that such had been the conduct of the right rev. Bench? Let their Lordships look at the recent charges. Did they see any attempt made to grapple with that evil? Why, they had been startled by one of the latest of those charges, which seemed to point to the desirableness of making advances to the Church of Borne. These expressions had since been explained; but he must say, considering the circumstances in which the Church now found itself, a more dangerous utterance could hardly be imagined; and he was afraid, therefore, that they must say that while, generally speaking, the Bench was indifferent, there were some right rev. Prelates who gave a tacit, and some an open, countenance to many of the practices—thus bringing the Church into troubles and dangers, both religious and political, of which it was impossible to foresee the issue. That subject was very far from being exhausted, but it was not his intention to trouble their Lordships further than with a few words upon one
  346
  point—he meant the exaggerated amount of music in the services inflicted by relentless clergymen upon reluctant congregations in rural districts and parish churches. The choral service was undoubtedly legal in cathedrals; it was doubtful whether it was so in ordinary parish churches and chapels. Many people were very fond of it, and it was a great pity that any one should be deprived of what he liked. Unfortunately, however, it was found that it was almost invariably the thin end of the wedge—the premonitory symptom of the coming of those objectionable Romish practices of which it was complained; and he protested as strongly as he could against the youth of this country being educated in a school which had a tendency towards that Church, of the members of which he desired to speak with perfect respect, but against which our own Church was intended to be a standing protest. The right rev. Prelate had told them that many of the persons who introduced these practices were very pious and self-denying men. He believed it, and he respected them for it; but he asked whether Roman Catholic priests did not display equal self-denial, and whether they did not refuse to marry in order that they might devote their lives to the relief of suffering and distress? Therefore, that argument was entirely beside the question. The right rev. Prelate had also spoken of the power of the churchwardens; but the churchwardens had in many instances done their best without being able to get rid of the evil. The public were, then, in this matter in an evil case. They saw how little the law had done for them, and his noble Friend the noble Earl below him (Earl Granville) had informed them the other night that while he was by no means prepared to deny, and was certainly prepared to regret, the existence of those things which the noble Marquess opposite had set forth, yet that the Government had no remedy to propose. Well he knew, and had always been forward to admit, that these things could not be remedied all at once, in a moment; but he earnestly trusted that their Lordships did not intend to sit with folded hands, rejecting all proposals for a remedy, until this matter became the property of a popular agitation, and passed out of the domain of calm and deliberate settlement.
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, he could by no means agree with the noble Lord who

  347
  had just sat down as to the desirability of discussing—
  LORD REDESDALErose to order. They were carrying on a discussion without there being any Question regularly before the House.
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, he hoped he would be permitted at least to make one remark, and that was that he sincerely trusted the Members of the right rev. Bench would not allow themselves to be induced, in consequence of the speech of the noble Lord below him, to adopt any tyrannical action towards any portion of the Church. It was much to be regretted that the noble Lord had come forward in that House to speak in harsh terms of highly honourable and pious men, whose lives were devoted to the cause of charity and benevolence, simply because they differed from him in certain of their religious opinions. ["Question!"]
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY,who was also met with cries of "Question," said, he had intended to offer a few observations on the subject brought forward by the noble Marquess; but he could assure their Lordships that, however strong might be his own feelings on the subject which had just been brought under their notice, yet if the continuance of the discussion was at all irregular he would not then say a single word upon it.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHwished to say only a few words in reply; but there being a general cry of "Order" the noble Marquess sat down.

DIVISIONS OF THE HOUSE.

  STANDING ORDER NO. 25. NEW STANDING ORDERS.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND THE DUKE OF RICHMOND moved— that the Resolutions of the 10th of March 1857, regulating the Mode of taking Divisions, be now vacated: The same was agreed to.
  Then it was moved to resolve,
  "That when, on the Question being put, a Division is called for, the Lord on the Woolsack or in the Chair shall order Strangers to withdraw, and thereupon the House and the Side Lobbies shall be cleared of Strangers, but not the Galleries and the Space within the Rails of the Throne, unless the House shall so order:
  "That as soon as the Order has been given for Strangers to withdraw, the Clerk at the Table shall turn a Two Minute Sand Glass, to be kept on the Table for that Purpose; and the Doors shall be looked after the Lapse of Two Minutes,
  348
  as indicated by the Sand Glass, and the Lord on the Woolsack or in the Chair shall then again put the Question:
  "That the Contents shall go forth through the Door on the Right Side of the House near the Throne which leads to the Right Lobby, and shall proceed through the Right Lobby and reenter the House through the Door on the Right of the Bar; and the Not-Contents shall go forth through the Door on the Left of the Bar which leads to the Left Lobby, and shall proceed through the Left Lobby and re-enter the House through the Door on the Left Side of the House near the Throne:
  "That any Lord may, on the ground of Infirmity, by Permission of the House, have the privilege of being told in his Seat; and that the Votes of such Lords and of the Lord on the Woolsack or in the Chair be taken first:
  "That Two or more Tellers be appointed for each Division without respect to their Degree; and that Two Clerks be in attendance at each Division to take down or mark the Names of the Contents and Not-Contents respectively; and that such Clerks be stationed in the respective Lobbies as near as conveniently may be to the Doors through which the Contents and Not-Contents re-enter the House:
  "That if any Lord shall have by Mistake gone out with the Contents or Not-Contents (as the Case may be), having intended to vote on the other Side, he shall wait until the other Lords in the same Lobby shall have passed out, and on presenting himself to the Tellers desire that he may not be counted by them, he having entered that Lobby by mistake; and the Tellers shall thereupon come with such Lord to the Table and inform the House of the Circumstance, and shall ask the said Lord whether he was in the House when the Question was put, and if he shall reply in the Affirmative, whether he desires to vote Content or Not-Content on such Question, and the Vote of the said Lord as then declared by him shall be taken by the Tellers in the House, and recorded by them accordingly:
  "That when Proxies shall be called, the Names of the Lords Content and Not-Content who vote by Proxy shall be respectively taken down and marked by the Clerks at the Table:
  "That the Tellers shall count the Votes, and announce the Numbers to the Lord on the Woolsack or in the Chair; and the Doors shall remain locked until the Numbers are declared:
  "That Lists of the Lords present and voting shall be framed, in which the Names shall be inserted in Alphabetical Order, and similar Lists of the Lords who have voted by Proxy; and such Lists shall be appended to the Minutes of the Day:
  "That in such Lists the Names of the Lords shall be inserted according to the Titles by which they sit in Parliament; but in Cases in which any have higher or more ancient Titles or Dignities the higher or more ancient Title or Dignity shall be added in brackets:
  "That each Division, and the Number and Names of the Lords voting thereon, be also inserted in the Journals, the Names of the Lords being placed in the Order in which they stand in the Roll, the Proxies being recorded in a separate List:
  The same was agreed to.
  Ordered, That the said Resolutions be declared Standing Orders, and that they be entered on the Roll of Standing Orders of this House.

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FISHERIES' COMMISSIONERS.—QUESTION.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEasked Her Majesty's Ministers, Whether the Chairman of the Fisheries Commission, appointed under the Act 26 & 27 Vict. c. 114, is a Clerk of the House of Commons? And, Whether Her Majesty's Ministers will consort to the Appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the Working and the Results of the above-mentioned Act? The Act which was now before the other House for amending the Salmon Fisheries' Act, professed to follow the Act which had worked so well in Ireland. Now, the English Bill provided a form of appeal which was quite different from that provided by the Irish Act; and, in fact, it appeared to be drawn up without the slightest consultation between the parties. The Act was so badly drawn that when it expired, as it must do at the end of next Session, every owner with a good title, whose weir had been pulled down, might set it up again, and the trial would begin again. This, however, was not a matter of right or title, it was a matter of practice and procedure, and he hoped the Government would consider the case with a view to appply a remedy.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that in answer to the first Question of the noble Marquess he had to state that Mr. Eden was a clerk of the House of Commons, and was appointed clerk to the Committee appointed to inquire into the fishery laws; and the Chairman of the Committee, who previously had not known Mr. Eden, recommended him to the Government as the fittest person to preside over the Commission. It was a temporary appointment, which could not endure for more than two or three years, and Sir Denis Le Marohant had consented to allow Mr. Eden's name to remain upon the list of clerks of the House of Commons, he receiving no pay, and it being understood that he was not to re-enter upon those duties unless there should be a vacancy. With respect to the capabilities of Mr. Eden, from the information he had received from the Irish Office and from the Home Office, it was their opinion that a fitter person
350
could not have been appointed than this gentleman; and a high legal authority who had been consulted, in consequence of a difference which arose between Mr. Eden and one of the legal members of the Commission, was surprised at the just and admirable manner in which he had decided most difficult and intricate cases. With regard to the manner in which the Commissioners had discharged their duty, he might mention that there were only forty-four appeals from their decisions out of an innumerable list of cases determined; that fourteen of these were heard; that only one was decided against the Commissioners, and then only upon a technical point, and that the other thirteen were given entirely in their favour. A very large number of the other appeals were withdrawn in consequence of some of these decisions; and, as far as he could ascertain, the administration of the law by the Commissioners was irreproachable. The Commission would expire in another year, and he was sure their Lordships would agree that it would not be desirable to appoint a Committee to conduct an inquiry which would involve legal points, or matters in course of being determined by the Commissioners. The noble Marquess had asked whether the Government would consent to a Committee of Inqniry, but the noble Marquess had given reasons why such consent should not be given. As to legal difficulties which had arisen, it could not be expected that their Lordships would interfere with matters that were before the legal tribunals. He was informed that there had been forty-four appeals, of which fourteen had been decided, one only against the Commissioners, and that upon a technical point.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, that there were several vague charges against the Commissioners, but in spite of the assertions of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Clanricarde), and of certain violent articles which had been published, he thought that their Lordships would be of opinion that these gentlemen had performed their duty. He (the Earl of Donoughmore) was much interested in one river, and could say that the public feeling in that part of the country was strongly in favour of the Commissioners. Certain persons had taken possession of public rights of considerable value, and under the Act of 1863 they had been compelled by the Commissioners to give

351
them up; these persons were, no doubt, much dissatisfied at being obliged to surrender up what they had, in fact, got by usurping the public rights. The fact, however, was, that the Act, and the way in which it had been carried out, had conferred an inestimable benefit upon Ireland, and had furnished employment for a great many fishermen who had been previously starving.

UNION CHARGEABILITY BILL.

  (No. 122.) COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into a Committee read.
  Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into a Committee on the said Bill.—(The Lord President.)
  THE MARQUESS OF BATHobserved, that in the face of the division which took place on a previous evening, and of the statement that the introduction of any Amendments made in the Bill would be a virtual rejection of the measure, he felt that it would be useless for him to move any Amendment in Committee. He wished, however, to offer a few observations to their Lordships upon the matter. As to the argument that the labouring classes suffered under the present law and would be much benefited by the proposed changes, he would say a few words. The Bill contemplated two distinct objects—the modification of the law of settlement and the extension of the area of rating. The alteration in the law of settlement proposed was an extension of irremovability to cases of residence for one instead of for three years, the period at present required. The law of settlement, or rather the removals consequent upon it, were a great hardship upon the poor, and for his part he should be glad to have seen the Bill go a great deal farther in reference to this part of the subject. There was no argument for the change proposed which did not apply equally to the total abolition of the law of settlement, and his objection to this part of the Bill was that while the measure was an improvement upon the present law, it was a measure which, so far from aiding, would only tend to retard the progress of legislation towards the total abolition of the law of settlement. After this Bill the hardship of removals would remain, although the number of them might be diminished.
  352
  Let them look who were the parties interested in the maintenance of the law of settlement. The abolition of the law would throw a considerable charge upon the town parishes; and, therefore, it was that Parliament had made a compromise with the town parishes by saying, "We burden you with a modification of the law of settlement, but we relieve you by throwing the country parishes into the area of your rating." The representatives of towns had great power in the House of Commons, and his own impression was that this measure would very much impede instead of promoting legislation for the total abolition of the law of settlement. Now, as to the advantage to the labourer. It was said that the present limited area of rating was an encouragement to landlords to demolish cottages, or, at all events, not to build them. There was nothing to support the truth of this statement except the statistics of Mr. Simon and the statement of Dr. Hunter; but he contended that the statements made did not support the conclusions to which he had referred. He denied, however, that any demolition of houses had been going on of late years, although houses might, of course, have been demolished in exceptional cases for the purposes of property. The Returns which had been made in the case of the parishes in which this demolition was alleged to have occurred showed that out of 821 parishes selected as exemplifying this demolition nothing of the kind could, between 1851 and 1861, be shown in 290 instances. Prom 1841 to 1861 the number of houses in 419 of those parishes had either increased or remained stationary, and on going back another ten years the total number of houses in the 821 parishes exhibited a decided increase. The obstacle to the increase of houses was, however, due not to the action of the Poor Law, but to the expenditure which was necessary for their erection. The cost of a cottage might be put down at £125, though he himself had always found them to exceed that sum, and the value of the land upon which it was erected at £25. Now, in the agricultural districts of England, no higher rent could be demanded than 1s. 6d. a week, or £3 18s. a year—about half the ordinary interest on the outlay, and making no allowance for what would have to be expended in repairs and other matters. Cottage building, therefore, did not, and could not pay, and as long as this was the case no alteration

  353
  in the Poor Law would lead to an increase of cottage building. Now, what would be the effect of the measure upon the labouring classes? He maintained that the land did not naturally find employment for the people for more than eight or nine months in the year, and that during the remaining months the labourer was employed by the farmer comparatively at a loss, though that loss was not so great as it would be if the man were thrown upon the rates. The weak, the old, the infirm, for whom labour was found by the farmers now, would be forced, if this Bill were passed, into the union workhouse. Farmers could not pay the rates twice over. They could not pay for the unnecessary labour as well as the rates in the towns. A great deal was said of this being a landowner's question. As far as he could gather he did not believe the landowners generally would be injured by the Bill. In his own case he would be a largo gainer. The landowners would suffer only in special cases—in the thinly-inhabited rich grazing counties. He did not think farmers generally would suffer. It was the people that would suffer; and he did not see what could be done to help them, unless they made some large change in the law regarding the administration of relief to the poor in the rural districts, in whose behalf alone he had taken the liberty of addressing these observations to their Lordships.
  LORD KINGSDOWNsaid, he could not permit this Bill to go into Committee without shortly expressing the grounds of the objections he entertained to it. He objected to it both on the ground of justice and policy. It was fraught with injustice in this respect—that it threw upon one class the burdens which at present properly belonged to, and by law was imposed on, another. He objected to it on the ground of policy, because it sapped the very foundation of that principle to which he believed they were indebted for the admirable effects of the new Poor Law—namely, the vigilant superintendence of parochial relief by the guardians of each parish. Unions had been formed almost universally on this principle—there was a country town with probably a large population; that was made the centre of the Union, and the agricultural villages around were added to it. He might mention the parish of Sittingbourne, with which he was himself connected. In addition to the ordinary population of the town, there was a numerous body of
  354
  labourers who were engaged in extensive brickfields in the neighbourhood. A vast number of cottages were run up, over which that population was distributed. These men earned extremely high wages during the summer months—perhaps 30 s. a week; but in the winter their work was stopped and they were thrown on the parish. By this Bill they proposed to make the agricultural parishes, which had no connection with the town, and derived no benefit from the population, contribute to the rates by which that population was to be maintained. Besides, a tradesman was not rated for his capital, stock in trade, or profits; but landowners or landholders were called on to pay on their stock-in-trade, capital, and farm stock—rated to the full extent. Not only did they pay for the maintenance of a population to which really they ought not to contribute, but in a greatly increased ratio—more than they ought to be charged. Could anything be more unjust than this? The injustice of the Bill was perfectly monstrous. What reason had been assigned for this alteration of the law? The reason assigned for it had entirely failed. The demand for labour was great. Instead of cottages being pulled down, cottages were rising on all sides, partly because farmers required them and partly because landowners wished to see their labourers properly housed on their estates. The reform which had been effected in the administration of the Poor Law was greatly due to the fact that the Guardians from the different parishes who made a point of attending, and who had an interest in seeing that none but proper objects received relief, had performed their duty with the greatest fidelity. At present it was the interest, as well as the duty, of the landlords of each parish to take care of their labourers, and prevent them from being thrown on the rates; but the case would be altered by the operation of that measure, and its effect would be to charge those parishes which did their duty in that respect with burdens caused by the neglect or misconduct of other parishes. Some years ago the population of a parish in Kent being very redundant, a large sum was raised in it to aid the unemployed in emigrating, and by that means its surplus population was reduced. But by this Bill that parish would have thrown upon it the charge of maintaining a town population with which it had no connection, and also the poor belonging to pa-

  355
  rishes which had incurred no such expense for emigration. He could not but think the measure was most objectionable both on grounds of justice and of policy. With respect to any Amendments which might be introduced into it in their Lordships' House, he was not in the least apprehensive that, if they were carried, there would be any difficulty raised on that account by the House of Commons on the ground of privilege. He could not suppose that the other House would strain the doctrine of its privilege in respect to matters of revenue to an extent to which common sense showed that it could not reasonably be carried; but if that course should be taken the result would be that they would gain a respite from this measure for another year.
  LORD LYVEDENsaid, he could not think it desirable that that Bill should be postponed for another year. The question with which it dealt had been constantly inquired into for the last thirty years, the arguments on both sides were thoroughly exhausted, and he could see no possible advantage in any further delay. The object of the Bill was to bring about a change, which ail authorities had held would be most beneficial to the labourer—namely, to give him a wider range and a freer scope for making the most of his industry. The opinion of the noble and learned Lord who had just spoken was no doubt deserving of respect; but it was directly at variance with all the Reports of Commissioners and Committees, and with the views of all who had devoted the closest attention to this subject for many years past. Sir James Graham—no mean authority—said the parochial system favoured the idle and profligate, and discouraged the industrious, skilful, and well-conducted labourer—it protected the former class from competition, and placed fetters upon the latter. The noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Bath) seemed to doubt whether the feeble and the aged poor would be cared for in their own parishes under the proposed system as much as was the case at present; but, in the Docking district, where union chargeability had been voluntarily adopted, no such result as the noble Marquess apprehended had been produced. It had been objected to this Bill that it did not go far enough; and he quite agreed in that opinion. If the Government remained in office they must look forward to an alteration of the law of settlement which, in
  356
  the last century, Adam Smith deemed to be the greatest infringement of personal liberty, expressing at the same time his wonder that the people of this country had not revolted against it long ago. Of all evils inflicted on the pauper that of removal was the severest; and if by this Bill they unfettered labour, he hoped they would soon have another measure abolishing the principle of settlement throughout the whole kingdom. They had obtained freedom of trade, and he thought now they should obtain freedom of labour. He did not think it advisable that the adoption of the Bill should be delayed any longer, and, indeed, he believed that the sense of the country could more faithfully be taken upon it in the last Session of the expiring Parliament than in the first Session of its successor.
  THE DUKE OF CLEVELAND,in supporting the Bill, said, he had been a Member of the Committee of the House of Commons which had sat so long to consider this subject, and which was composed of men perfectly conversant with the question, and who were almost unanimously of opinion that in time a union settlement, or even a measure of a more extensive character, would have to be adopted. The general tendency of recent legislation had been to reduce the period of residence in a parish necessary to create a settlement, and he could see no reason, after that period had been reduced from five to three years, why it should not be still further reduced to one year. The time had come when this advance should be made, and although he foresaw that great benefits would result from this measure, he believed that the evils which some noble Lords seemed to apprehend would not be realized. In reference to some observations which had been made during the discussion, he might say that although the poor might be well treated under the present system in certain parishes, they were not taken proper care of in other parishes. He could not regard this question as one between the towns and the country as it was one involving the general welfare of the poor throughout the kingdom. There had, no doubt, been great complaints of close parishes, and that cottages had been taken down to get rid of the poor; but his own conviction was that in the present day there was no new foundation for such charges. The condition of the poor had much improved during the last few years, owing to the increased

  357
  demand for labour and to the large additional amount of cottage accommodation afforded them all over the country, new cottages having been built, some through self-interest and some through philanthropy. There was a great change in the condition of the labourer compared with the times in which the new poor law was passed; and there was now a great demand for labour everywhere, which made it desirable that the labourer should be enabled to carry his labour to the best market. He did not think there was any serious intention on the part of their Lordships of opposing the Bill, to which he gave his hearty support.
  LORD DENMANsaid, he had presented two Petitions from Boards of Guardians—one for and the other against this Bill, but had been reported to have presented two Petitions in favour of the Bill. The Guardians of the Bakewell Union, knowing that he wished it to be referred to a Select Committee, yet intrusted him with their Petition at rather a small meeting, and the majority of the Guardians had wished to convene a meeting afterwards to oppose the Bill; but, seeing the great majority in their Lordships' House for the second reading, had abandoned their intention. He feared, with the Guardians of the Belper Union, that decayed towns would be supported by the agricultural "districts, and that the Bill went too fast towards a general rating, as no preparation had been made for equalizing the rate.
  Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly; Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 171.)

COURTS OF JUSTICE CONCENTRATION (SITE) BILL—(No. 141.)

  COMMONS AMENDMENT CONSIDERED.
  Commons Amendment to Lords Amendment considered.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that on the third reading of this Bill, his noble Friend (Lord Redesdale) moved an Amendment, which their Lordships passed, to the effect that no steps should be taken to secure property, and that no contract should be entered into for the erection of the proposed Palace of Justice, until the plans and estimates had been submitted to and sanctioned by Parliament. The Commons had consented to an alteration
  358
  in the provisions of the Bill in that respect so far as that proceeding should be stayed until a certificate had been received by the Treasury signed by all the Commissioners, which he thought would meet the views of the noble Lord on their Lordships' Amendment. He moved, therefore, that the Commons' Amendment be agree to.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, that what the Commons had consented to was a complete admission that the matter required serious investigation, and he had full confidence that the Commission would do its duty in that respect. He had had since the Bill was before their Lordships some communication with the Incorporated Law Society, and he was sorry to find, from their views on the subject, that the country would probably be subjected to a very much larger expense than the sum which had been named, if it were desired to have anything which would be worthy of the name of "a Palace of Justice." They told him that the estimates were made for the plainest possible building, that it would be impossible to take the suitors' money for ornament, and that if the country I wanted that sort of thing the money for it must be sought elsewhere; and that, as to the approaches, they had nothing to do with them, as the Metropolitan Board of Works would see to them. He (Lord Redesdale) was convinced that the estimates were insufficient, and he thought it right that the public should know what it had to expect. There was, however, one thing to be said—a good Baker Street elevation would be quite sufficient for Bell Yard and Carey Street; and as to the Strand, the best thing to do there would be to erect a row of shops, and put the building behind it in order to secure somewhat more quietude for the business of the Courts.
  LORD DENMANwas very sorry that the diffidence of the noble Baron, prevented his retaining his Amendment, for a more extravagant, speculative, and absurd plan had never been heard of; and as for its architectual pretentions, it was impossible to make it anything better than a bad imitation of the Four Courts at Dublin. The Bill was chiefly intended to enable barristers to hold briefs in all the courts at once, and in Westminster the present buildings, with a few additions, were good enough, if short causes only were tried in term, and long causes after term. He (Lord Denman) had for eighteen

  359
  years attended in the courts, and had done his best for the welfare of suitors, solicitors, and all engaged in the administration of justice, and had been badly paid for it, but he staked his reputation on the fact that these courts were unnecessary. The approach to the Carey Street site would be wretched for those who wished differtum transire forum populumq, whilst the withdrawing the sittings from Guildhall would be most inconvenient to suitors, to jurors, to witnesses, and would prevent merchants from easily sending for documents to their counting houses, and from being permitted to receive and answer any important note as to business in the jury box, which was often done by the permission of the Judge. He wished their Lordships would at once reject these Bills, and then New Boswell Court could be occupied, and lodgers return to those houses which were now deserted. He regretted being opposed to both sides of the House, and giving offence by his opinion on this subject, but he was sure their Lordships would one day regret having ever authorized the dust of demolition, and if these were the last words he had to speak he should utter them in deprecation of this Bill.
  Motion agreed to.

COURTS OF JUSTICE BUILDING BILL.

  (NO. 23.) COMMONS REASONS CONSIDERED.
  Commons Reasons for disagreeing to Lords Amendment considered.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, their Lordships had struck out the 27th clause of this Bill, and the Commons had reinserted it, as the effect of striking it out was the taking of £200,000 from the Government without any return for it. The noble and learned Lord moved that their Lordships do not insist upon their Amendment.
  On Question, whether to insist? Resolved in the Negative; and a Message sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith.
  House adjourned at Nine o'clock, till Monday next, Eleven o'clock.