Lords Sitting of 11 July 1881

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Universities (Scotland) Registration of Parliamentary Voters, &c.* (130); Presumption of Life (Scotland) (142).
Third Reading—Incumbents of Benefices Loans Extension* (136); Elementary Education Provisional Order Confirmation (London)* (68); Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1)* (125); Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation* (122), and passed.

THE LATE LORD HATHERLEY.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, since your Lordships last met the House has been deprived of one of its greatest ornaments and one of its most distinguished and honoured Members. I have some difficulty in endeavouring to do justice to my own sense of the loss which this House has sustained, because I lived on terms of close intimacy for not less, I think, than 40 years with the eminent man who, now in an honoured old ago, has been taken from us—and personal affection makes me sensible of the difficulty of
  476
  doing justice, in the few words which I shall address to your Lordships, to his admirable qualities—at the same time, I am most desirous not to fail in expressing, in some measure at all events, the feeling which I think all your Lordships must have on the subject of his loss. My Lords, Lord Hatherley was a man who, I believe, from his earliest years lived a life of as much consistency and diligence in doing his duty in every private relation, and in every grade of the professional and public stations which he was called upon to fill—I think he had as much purity and simplicity of character, as much thorough conscientiousness, as much energy and sound judgment as, taking into account the infirmity of man, any of ns could hope to attain. From that intimate knowledge which I had of him, and which, as I have said, lasted for 40 years, I may even go further. There are not a few men of whom one would say that, as far as one may presume to judge from public and outward signs of character, they may be looked upon as examples to be held up for imitation by other men; but of him I would presume even to say that I am sure that judgment cannot be mistaken. Most men, looking back to their earliest life, must ho sensible of many faults and errors, known to themselves if not known to others, Certainly, his modesty never would have permitted him to claim to be more free from faults and errors than other men; and yet I do verily believe that such as he appeared outwardly to others he was from his earliest years inwardly in himself. A man of the most remarkable gentleness and sweetness of character, and at the same time of firmness and decision which never quailed or failed before the performance of any duty, and which enabled him, in all the different posts he was called upon to fill, to discharge their duties to the admiration of all who were able to observe his career. He was as little ambitious of personal distinction as any man so distinguished whom I have ever known. It might be truly said of him that he was not one of those—
  "who stoop, or lie in wait
  "For wealth, for honours, or for wordly state;"
  but was one—
  "Whom they most follow; on whose head must fall,
  "Like showers of manna, if they come at all."

  477
  Yet come they did; and it is well for this country that such qualities should be appreciated as they deserve. He was called in due time to a distinguished place on the Bench of Justice, first as Vice-Chancellor, afterwards as Lord Justice; and then he was called to shed lustre upon the Office in which, when I think of him, I feel more than ever my own unworthiness to succeed him. He was called to the great Office of Lord Chancellor, and he carried himself so meekly in the discharge of his public duties, so diligently and so zealously supported every measure which, according to his judgment, was for the benefit of the country and for the advancement of liberty and justice, that when from failing health, or rather failing eyesight, after four years' sitting in this place and presiding over your Lordships' deliberations, he was compelled to relinquish that Office, he carried with him into private life, I am sure I may say, as large a share of esteem and respect as ever fell to the lot of any Predecessor of his in that exalted position—as large as any who may be called upon here-after to succeed him can possibly hope to obtain. Nor did he, even when his eyesight was partially destroyed, cease to labour in the Public Service to the public advantage; for still as a Judge he discharged his duties in your Lord-ships' House with that sound, accurate, and extensive knowledge of the law, that calm, equal, and dispassionate judgment, that desire to do justice, incapable of being biassed by any other feeling, which had previously distinguished him throughout his judicial career. And even when suffering under the heaviest calamity which could fall upon him or upon any other of your Lordships who may be blessed with domestic happiness as he had been for a very long time, a calamity which bowed him down with sorrow in his old age, and from which undoubtedly he never re-covered, still as long as strength and health remained he continued to lend aid to the discharge of the duties of your Lordships' House. My Lords, I feel how inadequate are the words I have used to express all the value of such a man to the country to which he belonged, to the House of which he was an ornament, to the Profession in which he laboured and in which he rose, and I will say to the Christian
  478
  society, to the Church of which he was one of the most faithful members, though he always found it consistent with his attachment to the Church of England and to its principles to be foremost in the application of the great principles of civil and religious liberty upon every occasion on which they could possibly come in question. My Lords, I will only add that I hope your Lordships will pardon the inadequacy of the expression I have endeavoured to give to the feelings which I am sure you share, and believe me that what I have said comes thoroughly from the heart.
  EARL CAIRNS: My Lords, all that my noble and learned Friend has said, all that he could say, in praise and admiration of him who has been taken away from us, will, I am sure, in this House find a response from every one of your Lordships. It has been my lot to have had a long acquaintance with Lord Hatherley. I well recollect the kindness which, as a young man, I received from him, and I can bear witness from personal observation to the excellent manner in which for many years as one of the primary Judges of the Court of Chancery he discharged the duties of that important office. His subsequent life has been in the eyes of every one of your Lordships; and it is not too much to say, now that he is gone, that as a Judge, as a Christian, as a gentleman, and as a man, this country has not seen, and probably will not see, anyone who is his superior.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, it is certainly not necessary for me to add anything to the eulogies which have been passed by the two noble and learned Lords upon one who was so great an honour to this House and to the country; but perhaps your Lordships will excuse me if I add one single word of testimony to the worth of one with whom I had the honour of acting for many years. I can conceive no one who in the position of Lord Chancellor could have greater qualities to entitle him to the respect and attachment of his Col-leagues. While the most consistent politician on the lines which he had laid down for himself, he was one of those lawyers—and I am happy to say that they exist in both political Parties of the State—who, when they attain to the highest honours of their Profession, can look back upon a career absolutely un-

  479
  stained either in public or in private life. One of his most important characteristics was that he not only pointed out difficulties which might occur in politics, but he was singularly fertile in suggesting means for remedying them. I feel sure that, whether remembered as Page Wood or as Lord Hatherley, his name will remain an honour to his Profession and to both Houses of Parliament, of which he was in turn so distinguished an ornament.

UNION OF BENEFICES (CITY OF LONDON).

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  THE EARL OF ONSLOW, in rising to call attention to a statement recently published in the "St. James's Gazette" purporting to be a census of the City of London churches alleged to have been taken on the morning of Sunday, 1st May, 1881, by which it appears that at 57 churches, all situate within one square mile, with, according to the Ordnance Map, 31,055 sittings, and, according to the Clergy Directory, an annual income of £40,266, the total present were 6,731, of which number 571 were officials and their families, 706 choristers—mostly paid, 227 paupers for alms, and 1,374 school children, leaving as general ordinary congregations 3,853—namely, 1,227 men, 1,796 women, and 830 children; also to the present population of the City of London (for which, in addition to the churches, St. Paul's Cathedral and the Temple Church are also available) compared with the population in 1801–81; and to move—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to issue a Commission to inquire into the working of the Union of Benefices Act, 1860, and the state of the several ecclesiastical parishes in the City of London with reference to their population, and to the value of the benefices attached to them, with a view to the suggestion of such further union of benefices, disposal of the sites of churches, and application of the funds arising therefrom, as may, with due regard to the architectural and historical features of the existing edifices, be more conducive to the efficiency of the Church in the Metropolis and its vicinity,"
  said, that, for his purpose, it would be advisable to take only those churches which were situate within the City walls, as those on the edge of the City, such as St. Botolph, Aldersgate; St. Andrew, Holborn; St. Bride, Fleet Street; St.
  480
  Giles, Cripplegate; and St. Botolph, Aldgate, drew their congregations principally from without the City. Taking, then, those within the City walls, it would be seen that of 48 churches the congregations in 13 did not exceed 20; in 28 churches it did not exceed 50; and in only 4 did it exceed 100. The capacity of the 48 churches was 10 times that required for the congregation (exclusive of officials). The officials, choristers, recipients of charity, and school children constituted three-fourths of the whole congregation; a chorister was supplied for every fourth person, and an official for every six. The total actual congregations did not exceed more than 2,300, or an average of 48 to each church; the stipendiary portion, exclusive of incumbents and curates, consisted of 21 lecturers, 513 choristers, 374 officials, with their families, and the emoluments amounted to an average of upwards of £1,000 to each church. These statistics were taken under the superintendence of one of the most efficient clerks and accountants in the City, who employed for the purpose some 80 clerks, a body far more reliable than that of necessity employed in taking the Imperial Census. Their Lordships were fully aware of the increasing depletion of the City at night, which had been going on for many years; but it was not until the latest Census was laid on the Table of the House that the extent of this could be fully appreciated. And it should be borne in mind, in considering the figures which ho was about to lay before the House, that a largo number of those who were compelled to sleep in the City rarely lost an opportunity of absenting themselves from it during the day on Sunday, especially in summer. In the year 1801, the population of the City was 156,859; in 1811, it fell to 120,909; and did not vary greatly until 1861, when the population was 112,063. The fall in the next decade was rapid. In 1871, there were only 74,897; and the recent Census showed that that had fallen still further to 50,526, of whom only 18,712 resided within the City walls. During the same period the population around London had been increasing at a marvellous pace. He would not enter into the statistics of the East End, knowing that the spiritual wants of that population might be safely left in the hands of the right rev. Prelate (the

  481
  Bishop of London), further than to say that, with the exception of Hackney, the districts in the East, such as Shore-ditch, Whitechapel, and St. George's in the East, showed a slight decrease of from 2 to 9 per cent. If they turned to the South and West of London, and to the county of Surrey, in which he (the Earl of Onslow) resided, and of whose spiritual necessities he might, therefore, claim to have some knowledge, they would find that the increase had been stupendous. In the districts of Fulham, Hampstead, Wandsworth, and Kensington the increase had been 198, 137, 186, and 85 per cent respectively; and, in the registration district of Fulham, the increase had been 50,000; while in that of Battersea it had increased by 54,000, nearly exactly doubling the population of 1871, and the increase being greater in that one district alone, within 10 years, than in the whole population of the entire City of London. South London, hitherto the centre of the market gardening industry, was now becoming covered with a mushroom-like growth of small bow-windowed houses, inhabited by that class, almost exclusively, whose daily avocations lay in the City. He knew of one contractor, and that only one of many, who had contracted to build 1,000 of these houses, turning them out at the rate of four a-week, which were filled before they were dry, often with two families. It should be observed that while the area of the Metropolis North of the Thames covered 50 square miles, the area South of the river covered 68; and that while the increase of the population in the 20 years from 1851–71 for the entire Metropolis was at the rate of 34 per cent, the increase in the Southern part of it had been at the rate of 57. It should also be known that while the increase in the rateable value in the Metropolis might be calculated to be three times greater than the increase of population, in the South of London it was at the rate of 127 per cent, against 104 per cent for the entire Metropolis, while the increase from 1871 to 1881 had been in still greater proportion. The Metropolitan counties showed no exception to that growth, that of Surrey being no less than 1,344,000 in the decade. It could scarcely be supposed that spiritual provision could have kept pace with that gigantic increase. It was esti-
  482
  mated by the Secretary to the Bishop of Rochester's Fund that at least four churches should be built immediately, and an endowment of £10,000 a-year secured to give church accommodation and spiritual ministration to the population of South London in that diocese. It was impossible that the inhabitants of these houses, hardly able as they were to pay their rent, could find the funds necessary for the purpose of erecting and endowing additional churches; what more natural, therefore, than that the endowments of the empty City churches should follow those for whose good they were intended to their new homes? He did not wish it to he supposed that no efforts had been made in this direction; on the contrary, the most rev. Prelate and the right rev. Prelate, during their Presidencies over the See of London, had both done their utmost to lessen these anomalies. The right rev. Prelate had succeeded in diverting a sum of £5,500 a-year for church purposes without the City; nor had the right rev. Bench been less active in Parliament. In the year 1860 a Bill was brought in by the most rev. Prelate for the union of benefices, the opponents to which, however, succeeded, ere it passed into law, in introducing clauses with, he (the Earl of Onslow) believed, the avowed design of impeding the objects which were sought to be obtained. The process under this Act might thus be described—The Bishop of London issued a Commission to certain Commissioners; they made a return to him as to the terms of the proposed union. Those proposals were then completed, and submitted to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for consideration. When these proposals came before the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, they had had the general assent of the Vestries, and of the patrons, and of the Bishop of the Diocese. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners then considered the proposals which were put before them; and if they thought they were consistent with the provisions of the Act, and could properly be carried out, they expressed their approval of them, either with or without modifications, and then copies of that scheme were sent to the Vestries and to the patrons of the cures affected. They were allowed two months under the Act to consider any alterations or modifications which the Ecclesiastical Commis-

  483
  sioners might have inserted; and when their replies were received, the scheme was again brought up before them, and when the necessary assents were given, or the objections overruled, the scheme was, by direction of the Board, laid before Parliament, and after the expiration of a period of two months from that time, the sealed copy was sent to the Privy Council Office with a view to ratification by Her Majesty. When the scheme had been ratified and published in The London Gazette, the subsequent proceedings in carrying out the terms of the union commenced. The consents contemplated by the 17th section of the Act being obtained, the first process generally was the removal of the fittings of the church which was to be pulled down, taking care of the sacramental plate, the font, Communion table, and all things which were not to be sold, and then the arrangement for the removal and re-interment of the human remains which were under the church. That was usually a very long process, and when everything of that kind was complete, then the sale of the site took place. Their Lordships would observe that it was necessary to conciliate two bodies whose veto was absolute. The first and most difficult to deal with was the Vestry, a body which had passed into a proverb for narrow-mindedness and incapacity for organization. The length of time also necessary for the completion of the scheme frequently allowed of a complete change in the constitution of that body, which was at all times a small one, and swayed by the minds of one or two of its more active members. With the patrons of the livings less difficulty might be experienced in the City than elsewhere, inasmuch as they were, for the most part, what he might term public bodies. The patronage was thus disposed of.
  In the gift of—

  £

  Bishop of London

  10,584

  Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's

  5,565

  Archbishop of Canterbury

  4,240

  Lord Chancellor

  4,081

  £

  Drapers' Company

  950

  Grocers' Company

  813

  Mercers' Company

  165

  Merchant Taylors' Company

  1,250

  3,178

  Five Trustees for St. Olave's, Hart Street

  2,100

  Parishioners

  1,511

  484

  £

  Crown

  1,215

  Corporation of London

  1,136

  Dean and Chapter of Westminster

  1,108

  Dean and Chapter of Canterbury

  1,034

  Balliol College, Oxford

  340

  St. John's College, Oxford

  550

  890

  Corpus Christi College, Cambridge

  584

  Magdalen College, Cambridge

  292

  876

  Simeon's Trustees

  496

  Eton College

  340

  Committee of St. Benet's Welsh Church

  300

  St. Bartholomew's Hospital

  250

  Six Private Patrons.

  Duke of Buccleuch

  1,095

  Trustees of W. Phillips

  850

  Mrs. Birch

  400

  H. G. Watkins

  225

  Sir Henry Peek, Bart., M.P.

  200

  Mrs. Storketh (Reprs.)

  140

  2,910

  £41,814

  He believed that if some power were given to override the caprice of the Vestries far more might be done than hitherto had been effected; for it could not be denied that self-interest was the ruling spirit amongst these bodies, which was clearly exemplified in the case of the union of St. Benet's, Grace-church Street, with another benefice. In that instance, the scheme was assented to, gazetted, and became law; but then, under the 17th section of the Act—where four consents of Her Majesty's subjects were required, after she had signed it, to the pulling down of the church—the late Archdeacon of London exercised his veto on the church coming down, and the reason was because it was not to be sold by tender, he objecting to having it sold by auction; the consequence of his refusal was that they were obliged to have a supplementary scheme to change "auction" into "tender." The parishioners then woke up and said—"Well, but now we will have something; we will not give our consent to the supplementary scheme, unless £4,000 is given to us as a reparation fund;" and it was obliged to be given. Then they said—"We will stand out that the Commissioners of Sewers shall have these two frontages for nothing;" that was resisted; a long battle was fought as to what the money should be; ultimately they agreed to £3,000, so that it was calculated that £12,000 must have been the loss to the church.
  He believed that if a Royal Commission was granted which could consider the City parishes as a whole, and which would have the public confidence, they might recommend a large scheme for the union of benefices, selecting at once those churches which, from their historical or architectural interest, should not be touched, forming them into mother churches for groups of parishes, to serve a real, not a phantom, population, and, where that might not be the case, they might transfer their wealthy endowments—leaving sufficient to repair the fabrics—to some of the adjacent districts, whose spiritual destitution he had pointed out. Thus those who worked in the City by clay, and for whom these endowments wore intended, would derive the benefit from them to which they were entitled, while a principal weapon would be removed from the enemies of the Church of England as to the alleged great waste of her rich possessions. He begged, in conclusion, to move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.
  Moved, that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to issue a Commission to inquire into the working of the Union of Benefices Act, 1860, and the state of the several ecclesiastical parishes in the City of London with reference to their population and to the value of the benefices attached to them, with a view to the suggestion of such further union of benefices, disposal of the sites of churches, and application of the funds arising therefrom, as may, with due regard to the architectural and historical features of the existing edifices, be more conducive to the efficiency of the church in the metropolis and its vicinity.—(The Earl of Onslow.)
  VISCOUNT MIDLETON: said, he quite concurred in the sentiment that this was a question that could only be dealt with by a Bill in Parliament. There could be no question that in the City of London there was great waste of ecclesiastical power. They had there a large number of churches with no congregations to fill them on the Sunday. For years the population of the City had been steadily diminishing, and that of the suburbs increasing. There were very few clergymen of such exceptional abilities as to tempt the people back to the City churches from their residences in the suburbs. So far as regarded the Union of Benefices Act, the machinery was of far too cumbrous a character to render it workable, and the result was that no-
  486
  thing had been done under it which was worthy of the name of reform. He confessed that his experience was that unless the recommendations of Royal Commissions were backed up by the aid of the Government they very often failed in their object. In point of fact, the success or failure of a Royal Commission depended very much on the encouragement given to them by the Government of the day, and he instanced the case of the Alkali Commission as an example. In regard to the present question, he pointed out that a very large amount of evidence had already been taken on the subject. There had been an attempt to introduce a general measure by a private Member in the other House; but they all knew how very little chance a private Member had of getting a Bill through unless the subject had the hearty sympathy of the Government. He would suggest that if Her Majesty's Government saw its way to supporting any measure on this question, the Ecclesiastical Bench were well able to deal with it. He thought that a Bill dealing with the question would be a more satisfactory solution than the issue of another Royal Commission; but if the Government thought otherwise, if they wished to be fortified with another Royal Commission, then he should support it in preference to nothing being done. At all events, looking at the great importance of the question, he hoped that it would be dealt with at no distant date.
  THE BISHOP OF LONDON: said, he should have preferred to have the matter left over until another Session of Parliament, when something practical might be done; but as the subject had been brought forward he could not avoid offering a few words on the question. The population of the City of London had been reduced to 52,000, which was 900 less than the increase of only one of the parishes referred to—that of Kensington, and for that population there were 60 churches. But even the sleeping population was much larger than the average Sunday population, for a large number of those who lived in the City left it on the Sunday. Meanwhile the population of the suburbs had increased enormously; and whole towns had been built and inhabited by artizans and others of a class quite unable to provide themselves with churches and

  487
  clergy. The action of the Union of Benefices Act had done something to cause this disproportion. Of the 70 churches in the City nine had been removed and 12 built in the suburbs entirely, and eight others materially aided. But the Act was too cumbrous to work effectually and required two many consents. It was said that if these City churches were properly served, and if the services in them were made attractive, they would be filled. Those who argued thus pointed to St. Paul's as an example. But it must be borne in mind that there was a limit to the supply, and if the population went to fill one church another church must suffer. Others deprecated any attempt to reduce the number of the churches on the ground that they were ornaments to the City of London; but he ventured to say that a large proportion of the 60 City churches were passed by hundreds and thousands of people who never observed that they were churches at all. The question then was—Could it be maintained that this large number of churches, with a diminished surrounding population, should be left untouched, while the wants of the increasing suburbs were so great? The great difficulty, as had been stated by the noble Earl, was as to the rights of the incumbents, and others interested in the maintenance of the churches. All these had vetoes. In consequence of the difficulties thus interposed, there was hardly any means of dealing with the City churches at all. The present state of things, however, was acting injuriously to the Church, inasmuch as it prevented many who were willing to assist in Church extension from giving that help while there existed that disproportion of churches to population that was seen in the City of London. But he ventured to doubt whether a Royal Commission would expedite a settlement of the question. The proceedings of a Commission would cause much delay; the facts were already known, and the question was one which should be settled as soon as possible. In his view, the best way to deal with it was by Act of Parliament. He trusted that next Session the question would be taken up by the Government, when, it was to be hoped, more time could be devoted to such a subject than could possibly be expected now, and he hoped that they would then
  488
  arrive at some settlement of this difficult question. He quite agreed that they ought to proceed on one general plan, and pointed out that a Bill founded on that basis, which he introduced in 1873, was considered by a Select Committee, and passed their Lordships' House. If any Bill was again brought in, he hoped that it would deal with the question by way of a general scheme.
  THE ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY: said, he felt called upon to defend the ecclesiastical patrons of benefices in the City of London from any charge of opposing difficulties in the way of settling this question. It was a great mistake to suppose that the ecclesiastical patrons as a body were opposed to the union of benefices allowed by the Act of 1860. Certainly he could speak on that point for the right rev. Prelate the (Bishop of London) and himself. Never, so far as he knew, had they offered any objection to the removal of City churches which were not required, and the erection of them where they were much wanted. On the contrary, perhaps it was worth noting, considering the use that had been made of these statistics elsewhere, to call attention to the fact that all movements for the improvement of the City in this respect had emanated from the Episcopal Bench. It was found by experience that no improvement could be effected when the origination of the movement was left to the Vestry, because the controlling power of the Vestry was generally the Vestry clerk, and as the Vestry clerk was very unwilling that his parish should disappear, it was very difficult indeed to get a Vestry to move in the matter. He was quite sure of this—that every well-wisher of the Church of England was desirous to see such an anomaly as the noble Earl had so well pointed out removed, consistently with the principles of justice. At the same time, he ought to remark that the effect of the Act for the Union of Benefices had been that 10 churches in the City had been removed in 20 years, which was a considerable result, and the funds derived from the removal had formed a fund to erect 12, and partly eight more, in the suburbs. The existing law might be cumbrous; but he did not think it was much more cumbrous than the necessities of the case, except in the number of consents, required. The difficulty was that the churches had to be dealt with

  489
  one by one. He did not think a Commission could add anything to the information that had already been obtained. What was wanted was a vigorous effort, if he might be allowed to say so, on the part of those who had the control of Parliament, to carry this question to a solution. There was no slowness on the part of the Episcopal Bench or the clergy, though there might, no doubt, be interested persons who were not willing that their livings should be interfered with during their own lifetime; but there was great slowness on the part of Parliament in adopting a general measure. The matter required to be dealt with cautiously. He thought that the only mode in which much could be done, under the difficulties of the case, would be by the Government introducing some such measure as had been suggested by his right rev. Brother.
  LORD HOUGHTON: said, that, looking at the question from an æsthetic point of view, it was a great pity that these fine old architectural edifices, some of which were products of the genius of Sir Christopher Wren and other eminent architects, should be pulled down and ruthlessly destroyed. He thought it would be a good plan, if any of these churches were found not to be requisite for religious services, to put them to other uses, and especially to make them available for educational purposes. He believed the School Board for London, if they were handed over to that body, could utilize them to great advantage in the promotion of higher education in the Metropolis.
  EARL GRANVILLE: agreed that the noble Earl (the Earl of Onslow) had raised a very useful discussion, and had adduced facts tending primâ facie in favour of an alteration of the existing law. He thought, however, it was not probable, after the discussion that had taken place, that the noble Earl would carry the question to a division. He agreed in almost all that the noble Earl and those who followed him had said, but thought he had been fully answered by the difficulties which had been pointed out by his right rev. and most rev. Friends. No doubt the evil was a great and increasing one; but he very much doubted whether the mere fact of appointing a Commission would tend to expedite legislation on it, because that was certainly not his experience with respect to other Bills; and considering
  490
  that this subject had been on more than one occasion referred to a Committee, he thought it would be worse than useless to send it to another. There were several views to be taken of this subject. There was the sentimental and aesthetic, so well represented by his noble Friend (Lord Houghton) and those who agreed with him, who thought the churches might be utilized for other purposes. If it could be shown that of a certain number of churches some were absolutely useless for religious purposes, but could be made use of for very important moral purposes, he, for one, certainly would not object. There was, however, this difficulty in the way of the suggestion of his noble Friend (Lord Houghton), that if there were no people to go to church there would be nobody to go to school. It appeared, moreover, that the greatest difficulty was with the Vestry clerks, and he doubted whether the Report of a Royal Commission would have very great effect upon them. It had been suggested that the Government should deal with the question. This was not a very opportune moment for making that suggestion, and certainly he could give no undertaking in the matter. To him it seemed that the question was one which would most fitly be dealt with by those persons who took an intelligent view of it, such as had been expressed in the House that night, communicating with the right rev. Bench. Any proposals that might be made as a result would not meet with discouragement from the Government.
  LORD DENMAN: said, the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London) had expressed a wish for something practicable. He (Lord Denman) could recollect the removal of a house stone by stone and timber by timber to a distance of three miles; and he thought that churches might be removed to the more healthy places to which City congregations had migrated, and even their ministers go with them.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: said, he thought their Lordships would share his opinion that the speech in which the noble Earl had introduced this question was most interesting. Nevertheless, the state of mind of noble Lords was rather nebulous in regard to the question. They all desired some improvement in the present state of things; but even the noble Earl himself did not appear to perceive more clearly that the rest of

  491
  the House the precise mode in which that improvement could be made. He would not, therefore, express any opinion on the general subject; but he agreed with the most rev. Primate that the difficulty had always been the Vestry and the Vestry clerk. A letter had been sent to him by the Rev. W. J. Hall, President of Sion College, who took very grave exceptions to the kind of evidence on which this movement was based. The rev. gentleman said that in the Return 125 was given as the number of his congregation. The rev. gentleman demurred to the census being taken exclusively on Sunday morning, and stated that the number of attendances in his church in the years 1876, 1877, 1878, 1879, and 1880, were 117,500. These figures showed a yearly average of 23,500, or a weekly attendance of something like 450 persons, which would not seem an inadequate number for the spiritual ministrations of a single incumbent. He did not venture to state any opinion in opposition to that which both spiritual and temporal Members of that House had expressed as to the existence of a grievance which required redress; but ho had merely said these few words in order to impress on their Lordships' Minds that these statistics ought to be received with care.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

AFRICA (WEST COAST)—MORTALITY AT THE GOLD COAST.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT BURYasked, Whether it is the fact that there has been during the Spring much mortality and sickness among the troops stationed at the Gold Coast, particularly in the 2nd West India Regiment; whether such mortality and sickness is not greatly aggravated by unhealthy quarters and by road making during the hottest hours of the day; and whether any stops have been taken to prevent the recurrence of such of these evils as are due to preventable causes? The noble Lord said that he had the evidence of eye witnesses that the regiment referred to arrived at the Gold Coast at the rainy season of the year, no preparations having been made for them; and that they were quartered in the worst part of the town—the sanitary
  492
  condition of which was frightful. The consequence was that fever broke out, and that great hardships were endured by both officers and men. It had been stated by Mr. Childers that the men had been put under canvas, and that the health of the regiment had since been better; but he (Viscount Bury) was informed that the climate did not allow of men being put under canvas, and that as soon as they were so quartered the medical authorities were chiefly exercised in devising means for getting them out of it. Ho was also told that troops were landed on the Gold Coast at a season when they could not be employed up the country, and when they might perfectly well be detained at St. Helena, only a few days distant. And not only, ho believed, were the troops made to work in the hottest part of the day, but they were not allowed to carry umbrellas or other head coverings, although the thermometer stood at over 100 degrees in the shade. The rationing of the troops, too, he understood, was unsatisfactory. Necessaries were so dear that the 1s. a-day allowed to the men was not enough; and animals sent from Sierra Leone for their consumption were in such a diseased state that the men refused to eat them. Of course, he did not impute any blame to the Government for this state of things, which was no doubt due to the action of officers on the spot; but he should be glad to hear from the noble Earl opposite how matters really stood. He felt it was his duty to ask these Questions, and he believed the lives of Her Majesty's troops were dear to their Lordships on both sides of the House.
  THE EARL of MORLEY: said, that the welfare of our troops must always be a subject of great interest. In answering his noble Friend, he would recall to his mind that when the troops were sent to the Gold Coast fears existed that difficulties would arise between ourselves and the King of Ashantee. It was consequently necessary to send a large body of men to that Colony, and the Government telegraphed to the West Indies that the 2nd West India Regiment must proceed to Africa without delay. It was not possible to detain the troops at St. Helena, because it was anticipated that au attack might be made on our Colony. It was not a question of sending troops into the interior, for it would have been

  493
  difficult, if not impossible, at that season of the year to send troops into the jungle; but it was a question of defending the possessions of Her Majesty at the Coast. He ventured to say that the prompt presence of the troops which were ordered to repair to the Colony had a most useful and quieting effect. There was undoubtedly considerable mortality among the troops, the climate on the coast, always unhealthy, being specially so when they were there. But in the 2nd West India Regiment only one officer died in April. It was true that out of 55 officers 21 were on leave. The barrack accommodation in the Colony was limited, and the troops had therefore to be housed in Fantee towns, in huts, and under canvas. In the early days of the month of April the sanitary condition of the Fantee towns was pronounced to be very bad by the principal medical officer, and the troops had to be removed from them, and placed under canvas. The malaria fevers which prevailed in April and May attacked the men when they were in tents with less violence than when they were in the Fantee towns. The medical officers would call the attention of the local authorities to the desirability of trying to mitigate the unhealthiness of the Colony. In a case of great emergency it was, of course, impossible to make provisions which should be absolutely satisfactory in so unhealthy a quarter. With regard to the question of supplies, he had to say that as soon as the telegram was despatched ordering the departure of the 2nd West India Regiment, orders were also given for the despatch of a large quantity of supplies, which arrived at the Colony on March 12, and were landed on the 17th. The 2nd West India Regiment did not arrive until March 19. The supplies consisted of preserved meats, biscuits, lime-juice, and other stores. In fact, there were abundant supplies in addition to those sent from Sierra Leone. Supplies and cattle were also sent from Sierra Leone. It was known that some of the cattle on that coast was unhealthy; but the fact that the consumption of fresh meat by the troops at the Gold Coast increased in each month during their stay there proved conclusively that the disease was not so general as the noble Viscount assumed, and that there were a considerable number of cattle which were not
  494
  unfit for food. Another point that had been raised referred to the route-marching of the troops, and their employment in road-making. Well, on May 8, the officer in command of the troops said he had discontinued route-marching, as in their delicate state of health it was trying to officers and men. The road-making, he said, would continue, for the working parties were healthy, and worked willingly for the extra pay which they earned. It was clear from these statements that the officer in command was not unmindful of the health of his troops. The garrison at the Gold Coast was now almost reduced to its normal strength. The headquarters of the 2nd West India Regiment left the Gold Coast for the West Indies on June 16. He did not deny that troops ran great risk of disease and fever on the Gold Coast, especially in the unhealthy seasons. No one, however, could be held responsible for the illness which had prevailed. It was the result of natural causes, and causes which, under those circumstances, were unavoidable. He would only add, in conclusion, that on the occasion to which the Question of the noble Viscount referred most valuable services were rendered by the troops which were despatched to the Gold Coast, for though they not called upon to take the field their presence not improbably prevented serious complications.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON: said, the question was not as to the time when the supplies arrived at the Gold Coast, but as to the time when they were issued to the troops. According to the information which his noble Friend (Viscount Bury) had received, there were no stores issued during the months of March and April. As the question was a very serious one, it would be satisfactory to ascertain whether these stores when they arrived were immediately issued, or at what time they were issued.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: said, he should like to have a more full and categorical reply to the question raised by the noble Duke who had just sat down. If there was any truth in the allegations of the noble Lord who had brought this subject before their Lordships, a serious case, not only of mismanagement, but of corruption could be based upon the charges which he made. All who

  495
  knew anything of the circumstances of the Gold Coast must be aware that it was almost, if not quite, the most unhealthy station to which troops could be sent. Though in recent years there had been an improvement in the general health of the White population on the coast, no one could doubt that the health of troops hastily moved to that Colony for special purposes must be very seriously jeopardized. When he was at the Colonial Office he had in view some arrangements as to barracks; and he should recommend to the Government that such provision should be made for the better accommodation of the troops at the Gold Coast as might at any time be needed. So long as we held that station, so long should we be exposed from time to time to the dangers of sudden and sometimes very serious incursions from Ashantee and elsewhere. The employment of any White troops in that part of the world was very undesirable; and, therefore, it should not be forgotten that the West India Regiments were officered by Englishmen. He hoped the excellent practice of training a sufficient Houssa force would not be departed from. So long as they maintained that force in a state of efficiency, they would be free, as a rule, from Ashantee invasions; but if the force was allowed to deteriorate they would always be threatened with this danger.
  THE EARL or KIMBERLEY: said, his noble Friend (the Earl of Morley) presumed that when the stores arrived at the Gold Coast they were distributed; but special inquiry would be made. With regard to the general question brought before the House, he might repeat that the troops had been sent to the Gold Coast to meet an extraordinary and sudden emergency. They had not the slightest intimation of the proceedings of the King of Ashantee until they heard that an Ashantee invasion of the Gold Coast was imminent. They then ordered troops to be forwarded from the West Indies without delay to the Gold Coast, and a detachment also went from Sierra Leone. He was bound to say that the troops sent there had the effect of preventing what might have been a most dangerous and troublesome war. As to the provision of the barracks, he hardly thought it possible they could build a considerable number of barracks to be kept there only to be used in an
  496
  emergency. That would be a great burden on the Colony. Before these occurrences took place there were not more than 180 men quartered there, and at present there were not more than 350, and they would soon be able to reduce the force to its normal number. With regard to the Houssa force, his noble Friend would be glad to hear that this most valuable force was kept up to a high state of efficiency. He (the Earl of Kimberley fully recognized their value, and was not likely to overlook them, particularly as they were organized while he was in Office on a former occasion. The Houssas were men who could be thoroughly relied upon; they were born soldiers; they were temperate because Mahomedans; they were perfectly faithful and amenable to discipline. On several occasions parties had been sent far into the interior to recruit, and the response was always friendly. An attempt had recently been made to induce the Houssas to settle near the Coast, with their wives and families. The real difficulty was that there was a difficulty in procuring a sufficient number of recruits. As to the Coast, he feared the climate and the deficiency of sanitary arrangements there would lead to the loss of valuable officers; but everything that was within their power was being done to remedy the evils which existed.

PRESUMPTION OF LIFE (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 142.)
(The Lord Watson.)
PRESUMPTION OF LIFE (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 142.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for Second Reading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Watson.)
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: said, there were some points in the Bill on which it would be desirable to have explanations before the Bill was passed, as it appeared some persons might be deprived of their property if absent, even through no fault of their own, as might easily happen to officers in the Navy through shipwreck.
  LORD WATSON: said, that he hesitated to trouble the House, at that stage, with any details of what was purely a legal Bill, and that for this reason—the Bill had passed through all its stages in the other House, and

  497
  was there considered by a Select Committee composed of Scotch and English lawyers, who were very well qualified to deal with the subject. He quite confessed that there were many matters of detail connected with the several clauses of the Bill which required grave consideration, and it certainly was not his intention that the measure should be pressed through the House without receiving consideration. He could assure his noble Friend that the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and the noble and learned Earl his Predecessor in Office (Earl Cairns) had both undertaken to consider the details of the Bill before it passed through Committee. He should be very happy to receive communications on the subject from any quarter, and to consider them before the Bill passed through Committee.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: said, that the general object of the Bill was to lay down rules as to the period of time within which an absent person might be presumed to be alive. He had no hesitation in approving generally of the Bill; but whether any particular clauses might require alteration was another question.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.