Lords Sitting of 12 May 1870

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Ecclesiastical Dilapidations* (94); Railways (Powers and Construction)* (96).
Committee—Report—Ecclesiastical Patronage Transfer (55).
Report—War Office (92).
Royal Assent—Naturalization [33 Vict. c. 14]; Dublin Collector General of Rates Franchise [33 Vict. c. 11]; Customs (Isle of Man) [33 Vict. c. 12]; Survey of Great Britain, &c. [33 Vict. c. 13]; Oyster and Mussel Fisheries Supplemental [33 Vict. c. 6].

ECCLESIASTICAL PATRONAGE TRANSFER BILL—(No. 55.)
(The Lord Lyttelton.)
ECCLESIASTICAL PATRONAGE TRANSFER BILL—(No. 55.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Bill considered in Committee (according to Order).
  On the Bill being reported, without Amendment—
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYasked the noble Lord (Lord Lyttelton), who had introduced the Bill, to give their Lordships some idea of its object. Nobody on his side of the House appeared to know anything about it.
  LORD LYTTELTONsaid, the object of the measure, as he had fully explained on a former stage, was to remove a flaw in former Acts respecting the transfer of patronage. There were in his neighbourhood some small livings, of which the patron wished to augment them; but being unable to contribute the quota required by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in the case of benefices in private patronage, he desired to transfer the patronage to some public body. At present, however, an unintentional defect in former measures on the subject was an obstacle to such a step. The Bill there-
  570
  fore provided that the patronage or advowson of benefices so circumstanced should be included within the powers of the former Acts, and might be made either from or to any ecclesiastical corporation, aggregate or sole, notwithstanding any Statute of Mortmain.
  THE BISHOP OF LLANDAFFsaid, that he would mention a case in his own diocese which showed the necessity for this change in the law. In 1861 a district parish was separated from the mother parish of a large and populous town in his diocese—Merthyr Tydvil. That district then contained 5,288 persons, and during the nine years which had since elapsed the number of its inhabitants had doubtless greatly increased. A church was built by means of private liberality, aided by grants from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and Queen Anne's Bounty, and a sum was raised for endowments which gave an income of £79 a year. An application was made to the Commissioners to increase that small sum, and they agreed to make it up to £300 a year, on condition that the patronage of the Church was made public. The incumbent raised a sufficient sum to purchase the advowson. The Commissioners proposed a scheme; but the Law Officers made an objection to it, and it was cancelled. The result was that this clergyman, who besides his own church had four licensed schoolrooms, each with its separate minister, had been left for nine years with a stipend of £79 a year. That was surety a sufficient illustration of the need there was for the Bill.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he had thought it his duty to examine the Bill by the several statutes referred to, They were very clumsily worded, and though the defects which had been pointed out were of a somewhat microscopic; character, he thought that they might as well be cured.
  Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

WAR OFFICE BILL.—(No. 92.)
(The Lord Northbrook.)
WAR OFFICE BILL.—(No. 92.)

  REPORT.
  Amendment reported (according to Order.)
  LORD NORTHBROOKstated that the suggestion of the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond) on a former evening had been considered by the Secretary of State for War with the attention to

  571
  which, the spirit in which it was offered entitled it, but he had not felt himself able to adopt it. The appointment of an Assistant Under Secretary would involve changes in the constitution of the Department which were not deemed advisable.
  LORD LYVEDENsaid, he wished to say a few words on the position in which the House was placed by the adoption in Committee of the Amendment of the noble Earl (Earl Grey). He (Lord Lyveden) admitted that at the present time the duties of the Secretary for War were very laborious; but he deprecated the creation of new Offices merely on account of temporary pressure. It was not attempted to be shown that this pressure of business would continue. He would not, however, dwell upon that—he had once held Office in the Department himself, and he knew that there was much to be done. The justification of the Bill, as he gathered from the explanation of the noble Lord (Lord Northbrook), was that the Secretary for War was frequently a civilian, and he admitted that when a short time after entering upon his Office he had to propose the Estimates, he found that he should have a difficulty, as a civilian, in explaining them. The Bill, as brought up from the Commons, proposed that the Surveyor General of the Ordnance, if a Member of the House of Commons, should vacate his seat on accepting Office, and that the Financial Secretary should be under no such obligation. The noble Earl (Earl Grey) proposed in Committee that the Surveyor General should not vacate his seat, explaining that he did so merely for the sake of symmetry, and that if it were rejected he should, move that both officers should vacate their seats, and their Lordships adopted that Amendment. He was never more surprised in his life than to see the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Richmond) and his Friends vote in favour of that Motion, because he had understood the noble Duke to contend that neither the one officer nor the other should have seats in the House of Commons. There was much to be said in favour of that proposition; but by the vote he gave the noble Duke had thrown an additional obstacle in the way of what he wished to obtain, for if the Surveyor General had been called on to vacate his seat there was a chance that he might not be again elected; but by
  572
  the vote the noble Duke had given it was certain that both the Surveyor General and the Finance Secretary would always be Members of the House of Commons. This was a great constitutional question. It had been frequently argued whether a Minister on his appointment ought to vacate his seat or not. Now, he submitted that it was a question for the constituencies, whether persons whose position changed from perfect independence to perfect subserviency should be bound to vacate their seats. It was one which peculiarly belonged to the House of Commons; and he trusted that their Lordships, who were always jealous of any infringement of their privileges, would carefully avoid a collision with the House of Commons in a case where nothing whatever was to be gained. He wished to know whether the Government were content that the Bill should go back to the Commons with such an Amendment?
  LORD NORTHBROOKreplied that the Government, though they had opposed the Amendment for reasons explained at the time by his noble Friend (Earl Granville), did not deem it right to ask the House to reverse its decision. The point was not one of great importance either way, and it would ill become him to anticipate the view which might be taken of it by the other House.
  Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

IRISH COLLEGE, PARIS, AND ENGLISH COLLEGE, DOUAY.

  MOTION FOR A PAPER.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE, with a view to obtaining complete information on the matter which he brought before the House on Monday, moved that there be laid before the House—
  Return of unsettled demands on the funds provided by the Government of France for liquidating the claims of British subjects, and of the balance which remains unappropriated to the liquidation of such claims, including interest thereon; together with copies of Treasury Minutes relating to the surplus fund arising out of the Treaties and Conventions of 1814, 1815,and 1818, between his late Britannic Majesty and the King of France.—(The Lord Somerhill.)
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEstated that there was an objection to the Motion in point of form, but not to the production of the Report, and he would lay it on the Table.

  ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill for the amendment of the Law relating to Ecclesiastical Dilapidations—Was presented by The Lord Archbishop of YORK; road 1a. (No. 94.)
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.