Sitting of 21 March 1826

FORGERY OF BANK OF ENGLAND NOTES.
Lord Folkestonepresented a petition, very numerously signed, from the inhabitants of Rochdale, praying for an alteration of the Corn Laws, a reform in parliament, and a reduction of taxation.
Colonel Johnsonwarmly supported the

43
petition, and observed, that the measures called for by it were the only effectual ones for giving relief to the country. In this House attention seemed to be paid to all classes but the poor, who were at that moment in various parts of the country in a state of starvation. The hon. member then alluded to the new circulation of one-pound notes, and said that their baneful effects were beginning to be displayed by the convictions of six men for forgery, which had taken place at the Assizes for Lancaster. He wished to know what steps government meant to take upon this occurrence.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that he knew nothing of these trials or convictions but through the same channels of communication which were open to the public.
Mr. Grenfellobserved, that the conviction of six unfortunate men for the crime of forgery of one-pound notes was, he feared, but the recommencement of that frightful system of temptation to forgery, and consequent execution from which the country had been for some time at breathing. He begged to ask his majesty's government, whether the new circulation of Bank of England one-pound notes was to be as likely to expose the country to the frightful evils of which he had spoken, as it had been hitherto? Had the Bank done, or were they about to do, any thing which would make the forgery of their notes more difficult? He admitted the impossibility of making an inimitable note, but much could be done to enhance the difficulty of imitating those at present in circulation. It was a fact, that forgeries of country bank notes were very unfrequent. But why was this, except that the country bankers took greater pains to guard their paper against mutation? He hoped that the Bank would feel the serious responsibility under which it lay, and devise some means of diminishing the temptation to the most frightful of crimes.
Mr. Wellsagreed as to the great facility with which Bank of England notes might be imitated. It was incumbent on the Bank of England to endeavour, by every means in their power, to limit these facilities. The notes of the Bank of Ireland were not so easily imitated, and forgeries of them were comparatively unfrequent.
Mr. Irvingsaid, that the Bank of England were as anxious to put a stop to forgery as any body could be. In proof of that, they had appointed a committee to inquire into the subject, which was un-
44
ceasing in its labours for twelve months, and had examined the most eminent artists in the metropolis, at an expense of 80,000 l. But, notwithstanding all the ingenious suggestions of the persons examined, it was found to be impossible to make a note incapable of imitation.
Mr. Home Drummondthought it un-candid to charge upon the notes of the Bank of England those faults which were incident to all bank notes. The notes of the Scotch banks were not better executed; and as for the country bank notes, nothing could be more clumsy or worse executed. The frequent forgeries upon the Bank of England were, therefore, not to be accounted for otherwise than by reference to the facility of imitating the note, and he should say that the extent of circulation of that note over all others, and more particularly in London, and the quickness with which it circulated, were more plausible explanations of the disparity. Such was the ingenuity displayed in the forgery of notes, that it was impossible to prevent it.
Mr. Ellicehoped, that the fact which had been stated that night would have the effect of making the Bank pause before they proceeded to take advantage of the clause in the bill just passed, and again deluge the country with a material so pregnant with temptation to crime. For three years the public had got rid of this pernicious circulation, which as soon as it again showed its head, produced fresh crimes and fresh executions. For the sake of humanity, he hoped this would be the last instance of so prodigal a sacrifice of human life.
Sir M. W. Ridleyadmitted, that it was impossible to produce a perfectly inimitable bank note, but, from the specimens he had seen, he was clearly of opinion that the present note might be very much improved. It was certainly unfair to say, that because Bank of England notes were more often, they were therefore more easily imitated. It should be recollected, that these notes were differently circumstanced from all others. The notes of country bankers circulated within a small compass, and the handwriting of the banker was known, perhaps, to every man in trade within the particular district. But it was not so with the Bank of England note. He did not think that from any superiority in the form of the note, nor even by getting rid of a paper circulation, we should put an end to crime; for

45
when there were no bank notes, the calender of crime teemed with coiners.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, it was ridiculous to compare the quantity of crime committed by coining with that committed by forgery. For the last three years the system had had a fair trial, and what was the result? That some convictions had undoubtedly taken place for coining, but in no proportion to the number convicted of forgery during the paper system. At the same time it should be recollected, that at no period were the five-pound notes out of circulation, and that one of the cases at Lancaster was for forging a five-pound note. He was ready to admit that the one-pound note was more easily passed away, and that many would try their hand at that, who would be afraid to attempt a larger one. The question here was, whether or not the Bank were to blame? The impossibility of making an inimitable note being admitted, how could the Bank be reproached, more particularly after the statement made by one of the Directors, that in the attempt to enhance the difficulty of forging a note, they had expended no less than 80,000 l.? There could be no doubt but that the wishes of the Bank concurred with their interest in putting a stop to forgeries. These prosecutions were conducted at a great expense, and the Bank could not be insensible to the effect which they had produced on the public mind. He had always thought that, though it might be impossible to make an inimitable note, the prospect of engrafting some improvement upon the present note was not hopeless. It was worthy of remark that the Bank of Ireland notes were not forged, although the temptation as to the extent of their circulation was comparatively as great. He was decidedly of opinion that something might be done to the Bank of England note to render it more difficult of imitation.
Ordered to lie on the table.

STATE OF PRISONS IN SCOTLAND.
The Lord Advocateof Scotland said, that in making his proposed motion, he had to inform the House, that the prisons of Scotland were entirely under the guardianship of certain royal boroughs, which were not possessed of revenues sufficient for their maintenance. The consequence was, that the gaols of that country were of the worst possible description, and their management of them a disgrace to any country. The apartments were always
46
few in number; there was no classification-whatever of the prisoners; in many of them there was not even a fire-place, and the persons under confinement were exposed to the greatest of inconveniences. These unhappy persons had to undergo severities which were truly dreadful, and those severities were inflicted without distinction of age or sex. Persons, both before and after conviction, the debtor and the criminal, were all mixed together, and thrust into a space totally inadequate to their accommodation. But he had also to complain of the improper persons to whom the charge of gaols was committed. These people were often in other employments, and were sometimes shopkeepers in the town. They did not reside in the gaols; and in the event of accidents, they were totally unacquainted with what happened. In one case, the gaoler lived at a distance of sixteen miles from the prison; in another instance, the gaoler was stone-blind, and the gaol was managed by his daughter. There was a crown debtor in this very gaol for the sum of 7,000 l. The House would see that the blind gaoler could not give his eye to the prisoners; and as to the daughter, it might occur that the prisoners might be giving an eye to her. He thought the subject deserving of immediate attention, and he, therefore, moved "That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the State of Prisons in Scotland, and into the means of maintaining prisoners confined therein under criminal warrants; and to report their observations thereupon to the House."
Mr. Humesaid, he rose to second the motion of the learned lord with pleasure, because it was a disgrace to Scotland that such a system should have been allowed to continue so long. The only reason he could assign for its continuance was, that the prisons were in general empty, and the number of prisoners so few, that their condition excited little attention. The learned lord would do great good by inquiry.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that it would be highly convenient if the smaller jurisdictions of Scotland would agree to unite, six or seven of them together, in the erection of one large and convenient gaol The more extensive a gaol was, the more certain it was to be well managed; both because it could afford to pay proper officers, and because public curiosity was excited, and it was sure to be visited more

47
constantly than a small one. To maintain a sufficient and well-disciplined gaol for each of the small burghs in Scotland was impossible. He did not wish to mix their jurisdictions; but merely that they should build a gaol in common, which all alike should be entitled to the occupation of. Last year he had brought in a bill to enable local jurisdictions to compound with counties for the support of their prisoners. To attempt by any other means to obtain a good government of prisoners, was altogether hopeless.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

FIRST-FRUITS IN IRELAND.
Sir John Newportrose to call the attention of the House to the state of the First-Fruits Fund in Ireland, with a view to improve and render it more effectual. The right hon. baronet then proceeded to give a history of the establishment of this fund, and of the uses to which it was intended to be applied. The act of queen Anne declared that the first-fruits were to be appropriated to the purposes of building and repairing churches, providing glebes wherever they were wanting, and also for the more liberal support of the clergy. At the period when this fund was formed, there was also collected in Ireland, from the different benefices, one-twentieth, and from the different benefices in England, one-tenth of their valuation, which were to be applied to the same purposes. The valuation of that period, with respect to Ireland, had remained the same ever since, although it was manifest, that the real value of livings must have been greatly increased. The consequence was, that the sums which the clergy ought really to pay for the building and repair of churches were obliged to be supplied by the state at large. In the act of parliament which related to England, a clause was inserted, with respect to the propriety of having new valuations, at particular periods, which had not found its way into the Irish statute on the same subject; the consequence of which was, that no new valuation had been made in that country. Now, it appeared to him quite evident, that, from time to time, as the value of the living increased, the amount of the first-fruit should be increased also. This was a deduction perfectly clear in his mind; because it was a grant of the property of the Crown, made by the Crown for the better support of the church and of the church establishment, and not for
48
the private benefit of individuals. He believed that one-fourth of these benefices in Ireland had not been valued at all; and that of those which had beer, valued, the valuation was not, at the present day, a just and efficient one. He begged the House to attend while he pointed out the difference between the valuation of the benefices in the English and Irish church. During seven years, ending with the year 1824, the archbishoprics and bishoprics of Ireland contributed 910 l. to the first-fruits during the same period, the archbishoprics and bishoprics of England, yielded to the first-fruits fund, 5,419 l., independent of the sum of 8,821 l. which was the produce of the twentieths. It should be observed, that the collection of one-twentieth on the valuation of the Irish benefices had been long since removed; and therefore they were more able to pay an additional sum to the first-fruits fund. Here, however, it appeared that in seven years the Irish livings paid only 910 l., while those of England paid, under the two heads he had mentioned 14,240 l. Since he had last addressed the House on this subject, the tithe-composition act had taken effect in many places in Ireland; and the proceedings under that act proved how different, in point of fact, was the existing valuation by which the contribution to the first-fruits fund was regulated, and what the livings really were worth. In the diocess of Cloyne, 95 livings were valued at 258 l. 12 s., and 25 of these 95 had compounded for their tithes. Could the House imagine for what sum they compounded? That composition produced no less than 10,580 l. A very large sum, not less than 600,000 l., sufficient to meet every object for which these first-fruits were intended, was thus diverted from its legitimate channel. Was it to be allowed that the clergy should put so much wealth into their pockets, when it ought to be applied, as a royal bounty, to the building and repairing of churches? Were the first-fruits to be permitted to remain thus unproductive, while the Roman Catholic peasantry were obliged to contribute to the repairing and building of places of worship which they did not attend? When the Crown expressly said, "this fund shall be appropriated to certain purposes," it was highly fitting that the intention of the Crown should be strictly observed. It could not be doubted, that if this property had remained in the hands of the Crown, the Crown could have com-

49
manded a valuation at any time; and was parliament, because the Crown had divested itself of its right for the benefit of the church, to allow its gift to remain unproductive, so far as the object of the Crown was concerned? Primate Boulter, shortly after his arrival in Ireland, wrote to the archbishop of Canterbury, stating that he hoped to induce his brethren to consent to a larger payment on account of these first-fruits. Primate Boulter thought it right that the clergy should make their own especial fund productive, before they called on the state to assist them in building and repairing churches. His proposition was, however, ungraciously received, and produced no good effect. An effort was made, early in his late majesty's reign, to institute an inquiry as to the best means of making those first-fruits more productive; but, perhaps, from the same causes that operated against Primate Boulter's attempt, it also was dropped and thrown aside. The state was now from time to time called on to make grants, which he contended ought to be defrayed out of these first-fruits. The bishops lands and glebe-lands in Ireland, amounted to no less than 700,000 acres, mostly plantation acres, which was nearly equal to 1,000,000 of English acres; but the produce to the first-fruits fund was, as he had shown, scarcely any thing. He would very briefly show, from a return which had been laid before the House, the difference of the produce of the first-fruits in England and Ireland. The livings within the jurisdiction of the primate of Ireland yielded 400 l., while the see of Canterbury produced 2,680 l. The diocess of Clogher, which was worth at least 10,000 l. a-year, paid 350 l. To make the matter short, the entire of the archbishoprics and bishoprics in Ireland were valued at 3,177 l., while the archbishoprics and bishoprics in England were valued, for the first-fruits only, at 21,325 l. exclusive of the valuation for their tenths, amounting to 8,861 l. Under these circumstances, he certainly should place on the Journals —if he could not succeed in carrying it —a resolution, commencing with a statement of what the nature of the first-fruits fund was—pointing out the manner in which queen Anne intended they should be applied—showing that it was nothing more than just and equitable that grants made by the Crown for specific objects ought to be rendered efficient for the pur-
50
pose of those objects—declaring that the House would no longer allow grants to be charged on particular classes of people, by parochial taxation, or on the great body of the nation, by parliamentary votes, for purposes that ought to be met by the first-fruits fund—and calling for a committee to inquire into the whole subject, and to report its opinion thereon to the House.—The right hon. baronet concluded by moving,
1. "That the First-Fruits, or Annates, being the first yearly income of every ecclesiastical dignity or benefice in Ireland, became at the Reformation, together with the twentieth parts, or twelve pence in the pound, payable annually, a part of the revenue of the Crown, as head of the church, and continued annexed to the royal revenues until the year 1710:
"That her majesty queen Anne did, in that year, as a special act of grace and favour to the established church of Ireland, by letters patent, confirmed by authority of parliament, vest in trustees and commissioners the produce of the revenue of first-fruits, for the purposes of building and repairing churches, for the purchase of glebes were wanting, and of impropriations wherever the benefice was not sufficient for the liberal maintenance of the clergy having cure of souls; and did at the same time absolutely release them from the payment of the aforesaid twentieth parts, although a corresponding payment was retained by the queen, and still remains payable by the clergy of England out of their dignities and benefices:
"That it appears, from returns laid before this House, that, in seven years ending 1824, the archbishoprics and bishoprics contributed to the first-fruit fund of Ireland the sum of 910 l. 10 s. 11 d.; and that those of England, in the like period, paid for first-fruits 5,419 l. 9s. 10 d., and for the twentieth parts 8,851 l. 4s. 6d. making in the whole 14,270 l., and upwards:
"That the gross amount of the entire first-fruit fund of Ireland, thus vested in trust for these great and salutary objects connected with the ecclesiastical establishment, during ten years, ending January 1821, amounted to 3,752 l., from which 827 l. were deducted for salaries and incidents:
"That 467, being nearly one third part of the dignities and benefices of Ire-

51
land, have never been rated or valued for payment of first-fruits, and 366 more, from the low rate at which they were valued in an early period, do not contribute to the fund, and that the whole of the archbishoprics and bishoprics of Ireland are estimated, with the other ecclesiastical dignities, in that early valuation, as being of 4,427 l. annual value:
"That it appears just and equitable that this branch of royal revenue, liberally appropriated by the Crown for salutary objects, specially connected with the maintenance of the church of Ireland (at the same time that a great remission of burthens affecting the clergy thereof was granted by the royal munificence), should be rendered actually efficient for the attainment of the valuable purposes for which the grant was made, and that the deficiency created by this inadequate valuation should be no longer supplied by the imposition of additional charge on the body of the people by parochial taxation, or on the funds of the United Kingdom by parliamentary grant."
2. "That it be referred to a select committee to consider whether any and what legislative measures may be necessary to effect these just and salutary objects; and that they do report their observations and opinion thereupon to the Mouse."
The first resolution being put from the chair,
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that, as this question had already been under discussion four different times, he might perhaps be excused, if he abstained altogether from following the right hon. baronet through the course of argument which he had thought proper to pursue, and trust to the opinions which the House had formerly expressed upon the subject. The principle upon which the right hon. baronet wished to act would involve the interests not only of the clergy of Ireland and England, but also the interests of many other orders of the state. The principle upon which the right hon. baronet wished to act was this, that the clergy of Ireland should be obliged to build and repair all the churches in that country, out of the incomes which they received as a reward for the discharge of their sacred duties. The right hon. baronet stated, that the archbishops of Ireland did not pay an equal portion of first-fruits with those of England; and therefore he proposed going into a committee to throw back
52
upon the Irish clergy a burthen which ought always to be borne by the public at large. He could consider the resolutions of the right hon. baronet in no other light than as an attack upon the established church [hear, hear!]. He repeated, that he could look upon the resolutions in no other light than as an attack upon the established church; and he should make it appear, before he sat down, that it was so. He should first point out the inaccuracy of the right hon. baronet's facts; and secondly, he should show the incorrectness of his law; and after this, he would leave it to the House to form their own conclusions. And first, if the right hon. baronet meant to say that the pope (for it was necessary to go back to the origin of these first-fruits)—if the right hon. baronet meant to say that the pope ever exacted first-fruits upon the full value of benefices, he was greatly mistaken. On the contrary, if he turned to the law authorities, he would see, that even at the time of the most extravagant demands of his holiness, the valuation was taken only upon one half, and that even then it was considered a great grievance. The same argument held good when the first-fruits became vested in the Crown; and if the right hon. baronet entertained a contrary opinion, he would find himself unable to support it. Again, the right hon. baronet was incorrect as to his law. And here he had to regret the absence of his right hon. friend, the attorney-general for Ireland, who had on a former occasion so clearly demonstrated to the House, the fallacy of the right hon. baronet's arguments, and had proved to their satisfaction, that the statute of Henry 8th did not bear the construction put upon it by him. His right hon. and learned friend had clearly shewn, that the valuation at that time was taken upon such fair composition as might be agreed upon by the parties, the 28th chapter of the act of Henry 8th made special provision, that the valuation; should be made strictly in this way. One clause directed, that the chancellor, the master of the Rolls, and the lord treasurer, should be enabled to regulate and compound the first-fruits, and should search out and determine the true and proper valuation upon which they ought to be paid. He did not wish to fatigue the House by going through the whole clause of the act, but it was sufficient for his argument to show that such was its

53
intendment. By the 26th of Henry the 8th, it was provided, that the pope should compound for the first-fruits; and if the pope refused to do so, then the king was to take the first-fruits into his own hands, and arrange a fair and equitable composition. He was aware that a subsequent statute had been passed with a view to the tenths; but that appointed a committee to inquire into the details in the different parts of the country, and was, in principle, totally different from the other. If he was correct in his opinions upon this subject, then the right hon. baronet must be mistaken in his statement relative to the first-fruits; and if it appeared that the statute of Henry the 8th had no reference to a new valuation, then there was at once an end to the right hon. baronet's argument. The plain question for the consideration of the House was this—Were they now to adopt a new valuation of those first-fruits; or, in other words, was the House in a situation to say that the incomes of the clergy ought to be taxed, for the purpose of building and repairing all the churches in Ireland? He could never allow it to be said, that the churches were erected more for the benefit of the clergy than of the community; and it being admitted, on all hands, that churches were necessary, were they to be built by the clergy only, or by the community at large? The right hon. baronet had adverted to the difference between present and former valuations in particular instances. He admitted that the valuation of first-fruits had been fixed by the statute of Henry 8th, and that they had gone on for a period of nearly three hundred years at that valuation, without any alteration either in England or in Ireland. But he would ask the right hon. baronet, were there no other changes which would, upon his principle, make similar alterations necessary? Did there exist no feudal tenures in Ireland which might be altered upon grounds as plausible? Could he carry into effect his proposed project without making a similar alteration with respect to head rents? And then the right hon. baronet had pointed out the difference between English and Irish first-fruits. No doubt that difference did exist. Tenths had been levied in England, while only twentieths had been called for in Ireland. It should be remembered, however, that at that period Ireland was considered to be entitled to particular indulgence, and that
54
indulgence was further shewn by taking off the twentieths in Ireland, while the tenths were continued in England. But when the right hon. baronet talked of these differences between English and Irish sees, he proved too much; for as great, if not a greater difference, could be shewn between English sees, as compared with each other. He would instance those of St. Asaph's, Chester, and Bangor, in illustration of his argument. If the impropriety of granting money by parliament, for the purpose of building churches were to be made a ground for adopting the course proposed by the right hon. baronet, what protection had the English clergy against being called upon to build and repair the English churches? For himself he repeated, that he never could allow it to be said, that churches were built more for the benefit of the clergy than of the public at large. Religion was the duty and the comfort as well of the poorest peasant, as of the highest order of clergy; and that which was equally the duty and the comfort of all ought to be equally paid for by all. But the right hon. baronet would provide places of religious worship for all, by imposing a heavy tax upon one branch of the community; namely, the clergy. As well might be urge that public officers ought to build all the public offices, that soldiers ought to build the barracks in which they live, or that any other class of persons ought to erect the establishments in which they were engaged. If the House should come to the determination of adopting the resolution of the right hon. baronet, it would lower itself in the eyes of the public. He should resist the motion in whatever shape it might be brought forward, as he never would consent to burthen the clergy with the erection and repair of all the churches of the empire. To attempt to load them in this way was most unjust in itself, and contrary both to the letter and the spirit of the law; and in the case of Ireland, the effect would be so to reduce the incomes of the clergy, as to render them unable to discharge their high and sacred functions.
Mr. Spring Ricecomplained of the mode of argument taken up by the opposers of the motion, and observed, that in reference to what were called the usurpations of the older times, no notice was taken of the usurpations by the clergy of those divisions of the tithes which were appro-

55
priated to the building and repair of the churches, and the entire maintenance of the clergy.
Mr. Dawsonsaid, that the proposition of the right hon. baronet was equally opposed by law and by justice. He had read over the statutes, and, though he did not presume upon giving a competent opinion, it appeared to him that they bore no construction like that put upon them by the right hon. baronet. It was never the intention of the legislature to impose frequent valuations of livings upon the clergy. There had, in fact, been no more than four valuations of livings from the time of Henry 8th down to that hour; and all those valuations were of livings which had never been valued before. The commission in the reign of Henry 8th related only to a small portion of Ireland; that under Elizabeth included merely livings not before valued; that in the reign of James was made under similar circumstances; and that under Charles was occasioned by certain livings having previously escaped valuation. The commission in the time of James 1st contained positive directions not to touch the livings which were valued before, and not to go to the full valuation of any livings. There was no question but that the right to the first-fruits was the settled possession of the Crown, and being then so settled, it was equally plain from those instructions, that the king only wished to have the sums fixed which were to be paid into the Exchequer, and that those were to be the sums to be paid in from that time for ever after. Moreover a great portion of the livings at the time of the valuations taken under queen Elizabeth were under 6l. value, and those were excepted by law from valuation. It would be a hard measure of justice, indeed, because they had considerably improved, to endeavour now to lessen their productiveness. The motion was founded in injustice. But, if it had justice on its side, it must be as applicable to the property of the English as of the Irish church. There was nothing in the question of the first-fruits of one church which was not as applicable to the first-fruits of the other. It would not be possible, however, for any member of that House to proceed in the same manner against the property of the English church n and yet he thought that, if any distinction were to be allowed, it would rather encourage interference with
56
the English than with the Irish church. By the statute passed in the 26th of Henry 8th, not only the first-fruits of rectories, deaneries, bishoprics, were granted to the king, but likewise the first-fruits of all abbeys, monasteries, and hospitals; for the act for the destruction of monasteries did not pass until two years afterwards. It was well known that lands, which were then held by ecclesiastical bodies of the latter description, were now in the hands of lay persons; so that the measure, if adopted, might reach to them. Should the resolutions pass, many persons in Ireland, who had impropriated lands, would be subject to have them valued. Now, he was persuaded that the House would never consent to such injustice. Before he sat down, he begged to bear his testimony to the conduct of the clergy of Ireland. No body of men could have conducted themselves, on all occasions, with more honour, more liberality, and more Christian charity towards all mankind. He had not heard of any thing on this subject which had laid the foundation for inquiry; and for this reason, he was not prepared to give the motion his support.
Mr. Lockhartsaid, he had expected the right hon. baronet to make out a very strong case, and was now prepared to acknowledge, that, from the weight of argument on the other side, he felt convinced that the proposition could not be adopted. Why should they seek for a principle to justify them in that which was on every side called the usurpation of the pope? If the pope had usurped any portion of the property of the church, like that of the first-fruits, the Crown did right in resuming it; but then it ought to be given back to the church. It was upon this feeling that the Crown seemed to have acted. Unquestionably, the rightful possession of that property, after the resumption, was in the Crown. Henry 8th had given up a part of it to laymen, from whom it could not be reclaimed; and the right of the Crown to the remainder had been qualified by the sovereigns who came after him, until it had been settled on its present footing. It would indeed, be taking a heavy stride now to revive the claim of the Crown to the utmost amount of valuations to be taken in the present day. Reference had been made by the hon. member for Limerick, to what he called other usurpations by the clergy upon the four-fold division of the tithes. But then the law and the cir-

57
cumstances of society had materially altered. The poor were entitled to the fourth of the tithes; and he was aware that the statute of Richard 2nd sought to secure the appropriation of the fourth part to that object; but the law had long since fallen into disuse. The poor were maintained by the poor-rates; with the payments of which the agricultural property and the tithes were mainly chargeable. But, if the law had not fallen into disuse by this method, the claim of the poor to the fourth must have been void; because the Reformation brought with it to the clergy the right of marrying; and that implied, ex necessitate rei, the duty of providing for their families. Upon the whole, therefore, he could not think it safe to entertain this proposition.
Mr. Humesaid, that the two honourable Secretaries had not argued this question with their usual candour. The one had contended that the motion was consistent with neither law nor justice, and the other had endeavoured to lead the House away, by calling its attention to the danger to which the resolutions exposed every other species of property. Now, he could remember when it was asserted in that House, that every question should stand by itself, and upon its own peculiar merits; and that no other should be decided by it, unless the circumstances were precisely similar. Now, nothing could be more unlike than the circumstances of the two churches of England and Ireland. It was not for him to decide whether Henry 8th was legally entitled to act as he had done, and to appropriate ecclesiastical property at the Reformation, but certain it was, that the practice of the country had confirmed him in the possession of it. He gave portions of it to laymen, whose representatives still retained it; and other portions to the church, which derived its title only from the donor. The question, then, reduced itself to this —Did any subsequent sovereign of this country, queen Anne for instance, relinquish what she was entitled to in this respect, as far as regarded Ireland, for certain purposes, or did she not? Now, that queen gave up her claim to first-fruits and twentieths in Ireland, for the express purpose that the money should be applied to the erection and repair of churches. He asked, then, whether it had been so applied, or whether it had not? The answer was, that to the extent to which the collection had been made, the money
58
had been so applied; but the point in dispute was, whether there existed a right to re-value the livings, in order to ascertain the true amount of the first-fruits?— The clerk of the first-fruits had authority by his patent, according to the opinion of respectable counsel, to value the livings at different times; and they had, in point of fact, been valued at five or six different times. But then the right hon. Secretary for Ireland talked of the injustice of thus trenching on the church property; but, if the church had been provided with funds for the building and repair of churches, and the clergy instead of applying them to that purpose had applied them to their own use, it was perfectly consistent both with law and justice to resume these funds, and to apply them to the purposes for which they were originally intended. This was said to be an attack on the property of the church. If it was, it was a just attack: for if the money destined for the building and repair of churches was withheld and used for the benefit of the clergy, it was strictly just so far to attack church property as to turn a portion of it from an improper to a proper purpose. There was no danger to any other kind of property from this proceeding. It was said, that the same principle would apply to church of England property. If it did, then church of England property ought to be dealt with accordingly. But, to say that this would endanger his, or any other gentleman's private property, was a preposterous proposition. It was only a proof that the right hon. Secretary had no good argument when he resorted to this method of endeavouring to create an alarm for property, to which the principle had no just application. His speech was merely an attempt to protect the church property of Ireland, and to continue and uphold the abuses to which it was at present subject. It was certainly true, and he was happy to have it to say, that he believed, within the last three or four years, the character of the Irish church had been considerably improved. He was happy to have it in his power to bear testimony to this improvement. But if it had improved, the public had not to thank the clergy for it. It was owing to the motions and discussions in that House, and the public sensation excited in consequence; and that was the only way of producing improvement where the law could not be brought directly to bear upon abuses. But a great deal more

59
must be done, before the church of Ireland would be on the footing on which it ought to be placed. Then it was said, that soldiers might as well be called upon to maintain their barracks, or government officers their houses of office, as the clergy to maintain their respective churches. It was not contended that the clergy were bound to maintain the church. Nothing more was asked, than that a certain fund, designed for a special purpose, should be made available for that purpose. If you are obliged to tax the country, poor as well as rich, for the rebuilding and repair of churches, surely you ought to wait until you have exhausted all those just and appropriate resources. Did the right hon. Secretary really mean to say that there was any reasonable comparison between this case and that of soldiers with their barracks, or that of officers of state with their government houses? Was any part of the pay of soldiers given them for the purpose of building or repairing barracks, or was any part of the salaries of government officers given them for the building and repair of government houses? If so, the Irish Secretary ought to pay for building and repairing his office; the chancellor of the Exchequer ought to pay for building and repairing the Treasury; and the right hon. President of the Board of Trade ought to pay for the new buildings now going on. He presumed they did not pay; and for the very good reason, that they received no allowance for that purpose. The gentlemen opposite had evinced a wise and liberal policy in correcting many mistakes and abuses in other cases; and he hoped the time was not far distant when the Irish church would be made to correct many of its abuses, and to apply the funds in its possession to their proper destination. The right hon. Secretary had contended, that there was no law to compel the valuation of the livings. But he had in his hand the opinion of a respectable counsellor, Mr. Allan, that by the words of the patent, the patentee had the right to re-value the livings at any time; and that learned counsellor concluded, that the present patentee was empowered to re-value all the livings whose value had not been fixed by statute. But then it was answered, that the opinions of the Crown law-officers were opposed to this, and that they had declared that the patent was not under the great seal, under the act. It was true, the Crown lawyers had so declared; and it had been
60
further stated, on the part of government, that if the patentee persisted in bringing the question before a court of law, his patent, being held only during pleasure, would be revoked. Thus the patentee was deterred, by what might be considered as a threat, from bringing the question before a competent jurisdiction. The patentee's conduct in the transaction certainly did him high credit. He could not say so much for the conduct of the right hon. gentleman and his co-secretary. It would have been much better if they had acted upon the advice of Mr. Allan; who further stated, after seeing the opinions against him, that the Crown officers agreed with him that the power of re-valuing was in the Crown; and if so, there could not be a better opportunity than the present for exercising that power; for he was certain that there never was a case so clear and satisfactory as that which had been laid before the House that night, by the right hon. baronet. It was deeply to be regretted that the same liberal line of policy which had marked the proceedings of his majesty's ministers on other occasions, was not visible on the present. The thanks of the House were due to the perseverance and public spirit of the right hon. mover of the question. The subject, however it might be now disposed of, would sooner or later be attended to by his majesty's government, and he had no doubt but that success would ultimately crown his exertions.
Sir R. H. Inglisobjected to the statement of the right hon. mover, that the church lands of Ireland amounted to 700,000 acres; but admitting that amount to be correct, the right hon. baronet must be aware that the greater part of that land was held under long leases, sometimes of fifty, sixty, or a hundred years. His sentiments on the present question had been so fully anticipated by his right hon. friend the secretary for Ireland, and so clearly and eloquently stated by him, that he would add nothing in support of those observations, but should content himself with saying, that he entirely concurred in the view which his right hon. friend had take a of the subject.
Sir J. Newportsaid, in reply, that the question came to this simple point—whether a certain revenue given by the Crown to the church for a specific purpose, was to be rendered available for the purpose for which it was intended, or the people

61
were to be taxed by annual rates to supply, not the deficiencies, but the place of that fund? The right hon. Secretary had put himself completely out of court by the steps which he had taken, in refusing to allow the question to be brought to a regular trial, and threatening the proper officer with the loss of his patent, in case he persisted in that course. The hon. baronet who spoke last imagined that he had forgotten that a great proportion of the Irish livings had not been valued at all. Why, he knew it perfectly well. He knew that 1,535 livings had been valued, and that of these alone a thousand had not then contributed, as being under the value of 5l. But 944 parishes had never been valued at all; and did the hon. baronet mean to say that they ought never to be valued? Primate Boulter had called upon the church to contribute to the purposes which he now had in view; but he had stated in his letter, that he very much doubted whether his brethren would concur with him on the subject. They did not concur with him; and there the matter dropped. The right hon. Secretary professed his attachment to the church. He could assure the right hon. gentleman, that he was as warmly and as faithfully attached to the established church as he could be. The only diversity in their sentiments consisted in their different modes of showing them. He evinced his anxiety for the interests of the church, by exerting himself to correct the abuses which had crept into its management; while the right hon. gentleman opposite endeavoured to show the sincerity of his professions, by countenancing those who were guilty of such abuses, and who perverted to purposes of private emolument the funds appropriated by the bounty of the Crown, to the objects of religion. The lengths to which this perversion of the royal bounty had been carried were monstrous. Out of the mismanagement and neglect of their livings by the clergy arose the necessity of uniting parishes; and thus many who were entitled to receive the benefits of religion were removed beyond the reach of the church. The clergy in Ireland suffered their churches to fall into decay, and then called upon the body of the people (who, be it observed, were of a different persuasion) to rebuild them. Thus was the royal bounty perverted from the purposes to which it was destined. He had been taunted by the right hon. Secretary,
62
that the present was the fourth time he had been called upon to answer him on this subject. He believed the right hon. gentleman somewhat overrated the reality; but he was not at all averse to have it stated, that this was the fourth time he had called for some satisfactory information on this head; and he assured the right hon. gentleman, that as long as he had a seat in that House, he would continue to bring the subject under the consideration of the legislature. He would still endeavour to protect the public against the usurpation of their rights and their property. He had been long enough in that House to know, that his perseverance, in many instances, had led to the results which he wished to accomplish; and that, although he did not succeed in carrying the measures on his own motion, the right hon. and honourable gentlemen opposite, who had been vehement in their reprobation of them, afterwards took them up, and brought them to perfection. He was not, therefore, ashamed of his perseverance in the present instance. It was for those to be ashamed who did not do their duty. He hoped that truth would still prevail; and that those who now stigmatised his endeavours would ultimately adopt them. He would renew his remonstrances, until he should succeed in convincing the House, as he believed he had already convinced the public, that his proposition ought to be adopted.
The House divided: For the Resolution 21; Against it 48; Majority 27.

List of the Minority.

Abercromby, hon. J.

Ord, W.

Calcraft, J.

Palmer, C. F.

Fitzgerald, M.

Philips, G.

Grattan, J.

Robinson, sir G.

Gordon, R.

Rice, T. S.

Griffith, J. W.

Smith, J.

Hamilton, lord A.

Sebright, sir J.

Hutchinson, hon. C.

Tierney, rt. hon. G.

Hume, J.

Whitmore, W.

Milton, visc.

Martin, J.

TELLER,

Marjoribanks, S.

Newport, sir J.

The second resolution was negatived without a division.

CHARING CROSS IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Mr. Arbuthnot, in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill for making several Improvements in the neighbourhood of Charing-cross and the Strand, said, that, before he entered into any statements connected with those improvements, he

63
felt it necessary to state, that those which he should propose would be carried into effect by the same architect whose designs in the formation of Regent-street had received such deserved commendation from the public; he meant Mr. Nash. It was almost impossible for him to give the House a correct detail of the proposed improvements, without maps or plans being before them, and therefore he hoped for their indulgence while he detailed, as well as he could, what was intended to be done. In the first place, he must state, that, should the House consent to the project, it was intended to purchase that tract of ground which joined to the present King's-mews at Charing-cross, and extended to St. Martin's-lane; and also it would be necessary to have power to purchase the whole of that tract on the east side of St. Martin's-lane, which was bounded on the north by Chandos-street, on the south by the Strand, and which terminated in the eastern point at Castle-court, near to Bedford-street. The effect of this alteration would be not merely to embellish and adorn the metropolis, but to create a more convenient communication between the east and west ends of the town. He should now endeavour to explain the mode in which it was intended to carry the plan into execution. If permission should be granted to purchase that tract of buildings between St. Martin's-lane and the Mews, it was contemplated, that a large splendid quadrangle should be erected, the west side of which would be formed by the College of Physicians and the Union Club house; the east side would correspond with that already existing; namely, the grand portico of St. Martin's church; and on the northern side a new line of buildings would be erected; the effect of which arrangement would be to throw open to those in Pall Mall a full view of the magnificent portico of the church. He could certainly wish that this quadrangle should contain a Gallery for our national paintings and statues. If such a plan were executed, the statues and paintings would be much more easy of access than at the Museum, whilst, at the same time, they might remain under the guardianship of the trustees of the British Museum. It was also in contemplation that a Royal Academy should be built in the centre of the quadrangle; but it was the general opinion that it would be preferable to leave it an open space. He mentioned
64
this, as the point was yet undecided, and would be left for the consideration of the House. The south side of the quadrangle would be open to Charing-cross, giving a view of Parliament-street and Whitehall. The extent of it would be 500 feet from the statue at Charing-cross to the present stables. Its extent on the other sides would be made to correspond as nearly as possible. The reason why it was proposed to carry on the improvement to Bedford-street was, that the Strand up to that part might be widened from its present width, 35 feet, to nearly 60 feet. The narrow passage in this part between Charing-cross and Bedford-street was a source of great inconvenience to all persons going from the west, and to the city; and in this respect he had no doubt that the new plan would meet with general approbation. At present, all the stage and mail coaches, coming from Piccadilly to the east end of the city, and returning from thence to the west, were obliged to come down by Charing-cross, and pass through this narrow gut, as he might call the space between Charing-cross and Bedford-street; so that, by the crowd of vehicles of all descriptions, there was sometimes a stoppage which often interrupted for a considerable time the communication between one end of the metropolis and the other. Should the House approve of his proposition, the whole of this inconvenience would be avoided. Persons going to the city from, and returning to, the west end, would have access, not only by the widened carriage way of this part of the Strand, but also by new carriage ways running parallel. There would be an additional carriage-way across the upper part of the quadrangle into a street on the south side of St. Martin's church, which would run diagonally into the Strand, towards the end of Villiers-street; so that a great part of the crowd at present entering the Strand by Charing-cross would be avoided. But this would not be all. The means would likewise exist of forming another street from Leicester-square, by Hemming's-row and Chandos-street, which would fall into the Strand by Bedford-street. This would be the least wide of the three communications; but still it would give a great additional convenience, and, by taking off part of the throng of carriages that would otherwise have access to the Strand only by Charing-cross, would very much relieve that part from the crowd which daily pressed along

65
it. Thus there would be three carriage entrances from the western parts of the metropolis into the Strand. That from; Leicester-square, by Hemming's-row and Chandos-street, falling in near Bedford-street; that by the south-west side of St. Martin's-church; and that along the widened end of the Strand itself. These would not only produce a great benefit to the metropolis in the way of free communication from one end to the other, but would also have the advantage of getting rid of a vast number of bad and unsightly houses, which were at present crowded together in the vicinity of St. Martin's-church, which would add considerably to the beauty of that part of the metropolis. —He would now say a word as to the expense which would be incurred by these improvements; and no doubt it would be satisfactory to the House to learn, that, unless the building of a Royal Academy or National gallery in the site to which he had already alluded should be determined on (in which case it would be necessary to come to the House for a grant), he should not have to apply to the House for a shilling. He would not at that moment enter into the details of the means by which it was intended to carry these plans into effect. It would be sufficient to state generally, that, by the exchange of Crown lands in some instances, and the sale of them in others, the department with which he was connected would be enabled to meet the greatest part of the expense. It would, however, be necessary, should the House approve of his plan, that in the bill which he would introduce, power should be given to borrow a sum of money on mortgage of a part of the new street; but, this it should be observed, would be only a continuation of the powers of an act already passed for the erection of the buildings in Regent-street. Looking at the whole of what he had detailed as one plan, he could not anticipate any objection to it, as a general measure. It was, he thought, highly desirable to get rid of the unsightly appearance which would be presented, by allowing some of the houses in the neighbourhood of Charing-cross to remain as they now stood. If the House should disapprove of carrying the alterations to the extent that he had proposed, why then it would be necessary to have the intended quadrangle on a much smaller scale He thought, however, that such an opportunity as the present ought not to be lost; for such
66
another might never present itself of making those desirable improvements. Looking to the probable result of this plan, the House, in order to form its judgment, might be glad to learn what was the result, as to expense, of the splendid undertaking—the building of Regent-street. That, it should be remembered, was undertaken in a time of war; and such as it now was, he did not believe that it was regretted by one man in the country. Taking the expense of that, and the opening to the Regent's-park, in the purchase of good-will of premises, and in the awards given by juries, the result was, that, while a great part of the Crown land was improved, and an interest created which did not exist before, the interest on the whole of the sum laid out produced within a fraction of three per cent. He did not say that the expense of the improvements now proposed would be as great; but, for the space to be acquired, they would be comparatively greater; for, in the former case, there was erected on the site of the houses pulled down, a continuity of buildings which were now productive; but a great part of the site of the houses now to be removed would remain unoccupied, and would of course produce no return for the sum laid out; but, making allowance for this unproductive space, he did expect that an interest of 2¾ per cent would be returned on the money expended. This, considering the great advantage to be derived from the more open communication between the two quarters of the metropolis, and the splendor of forming such a magnificent quadrangle, would be a fair return. But the ornament of the proposed quadrangle, would not be its only advantage. The leaving such an open space in a neighbourhood so thickly surrounded with buildings would be a great benefit, by contributing to the health of the inhabitants of the vicinity. He would now move, that the bill, if the House consented to its introduction, should be read a first time that night, and a second time to-morrow; and that it should be printed, and referred to a committee up stairs, to examine the plan, and report whether it could conveniently be carried into effect. The right hon. gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill," To extend to Charing-cross, and places adjacent, the powers of an act for making a more convenient communication between the east and west ends of the metropolis, and to enable the

67
commissioners of land revenues to grant leases of the site of Carlton Palace."
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, he did not mean to oppose the motion; but merely rose to suggest the propriety of improving that part of the Strand called Exeter Change, which required improvement more than any other. Every person acquainted with that building must have marked the great inconvenience it occasioned to the trade of the metropolis, and he was satisfied that no man could deny that it was a grievous nuisance. When such extensive alterations were about to take place in the very neighbourhood, he put it to the right hon. gentleman, whether he could pass over the obstruction which this building occasioned, and whether it would not be most desirable to introduce such alteration in his intended bill as would have the effect of including it in the purchases about to be made, for the ornament and advantage of the metropolis? Such an alteration would, he was convinced, meet the approbation of parliament and the public. While he was on this subject, he would call the attention of the right hon. gentleman to a letter which had appeared in several morning papers, signed, "An old Inhabitant of Mary-la-Bonne." Every one would acknowledge, that all due precautions should be taken to preserve the trees in those plantations which adorned the park at the northern extremity of the town. But still it appeared to him, that a reasonable care of those plantations was by no means incompatible with the admission of the public to those enjoyments of pure air and exercise in which they had formerly been indulged; and he hoped that those who had the superintendence of the improvements would take the subject into consideration, and adopt some means of laying the park open to the public. Before he sat down, he begged to observe, that the style of building in Regent-street, which had been formed from the plans of that able architect who was to conduct the projected alterations at Charing-cross, deserved his unqualified approbation. There might be some difference of opinion upon particular erections; but, taking it in one view as the principal street of the metropolis, he was convinced there were few who would not confess, that it reflected high honour on the architect, and afforded a satisfactory proof of his taste and judgment.
Mr. Arbuthnotsaid, that he did not
68
disagree with the hon. baronet in his observations respecting Exeter-change; but, as that was the private property of lord Exeter, difficulties would arise in effecting the alteration suggested; for whilst the House were providing for public improvements, they ought to be particularly attentive to private property. He understood, that, as soon as the leases of the property about Exeter Change bad run out, it was the intention of lord Exeter to make very great improvements there; and he could assure the House, that if his assistance should be at all required towards the advancement of such improvement, he would gladly co-operate in so laudable an undertaking. He could also assure the hon. baronet, that what had been observed by him respecting the Re-gent's-park had not escaped his notice. It was, however, a mistake to suppose that the annual rent which government received on account of the herbage of this park was only 100 l. for, in point of fact, it amounted to 1,800 l.; but, still this would not at all operate as an inducement with them for excluding the public from the full enjoyment of this park one moment longer than the state of the park itself absolutely required; but at present, although the pasturage was extremely good and luxuriant, the surface of the soil was not in a proper condition to be walked upon; neither had the trees arrived at sufficient maturity to render it safe that the fences which protected them should be thrown down. He hoped that these obstacles would at no distant period be removed, and that the public might then have a free and unrestricted access to all parts of the park; for he felt as sensible as the hon. baronet himself could possibly do, that it was the duty of those who presided over matters of this nature, to prefer the public health and convenience to every other consideration. Before he sat down he would take the liberty of alluding to the very important improvement which had recently been made in Hyde-park; and which must necessarily have afforded the public a most considerable additional accommodation; he did this the more readily, because it had been granted at the express command of his majesty. When he had waited upon his majesty to submit the plans of the new improvements, his majesty had himself pointed out the necessity of widening the carriage-way, for the pleasure and convenience of the public, and had suggested

69
those other alterations which had since been carried into effect.
Mr. Humedid not object to any portion of the plans of the right hon. gentleman; all he would say was, that he hoped they would not require any portion of the public money. He was satisfied that the whole could be done by the sale of Crown lands without any other assistance. In the absence of the hon. member for Westminster, who meant to call the attention of the House to the subject, he begged to protest against the continuance of any barracks in the centre of Westminster. Every person in the neighbourhood considered those barracks a downright nuisance.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

CIVIL CONTINGENCIES—DIPLOMATIC SERVICES.
The report of the committee of Supply was brought up. On the resolution, "That 200,000 l. be granted to his majesty to complete the sum necessary for defraying the charge of civil contingencies for the year 1826,"
Mr. Humesaid, he could not refrain from entering his protest against charges for diplomatic services. The expense which we were at in this department would appear immense, if contrasted with the expense which other countries incurred in this particular. The embassy at Paris, last year, cost the country no less than 30,000 l., a sum equal to the salaries of the whole civil establishment in America. Indeed, England was the most expensive government on the face of the earth, although, from our being so burthened with debt already, we were so little able to bear any superfluous expense. Our expenditure in this department had been increased to four times the sum it amounted to in 1792. He should therefore move, that the following be added to the resolution by way of amendment:— "That it appears by a return (No. 285 of 1822) on the table of this House, that the total charge for his majesty's diplomatic service and consuls abroad, for the year 1792, including special missions, outfit, and equipage extraordinary, and incidental expenses, pensions to retired ministers and consuls, was 113,989 l., and that the charge for the same in the eight years, 1818 to 1825, both inclusive, exceeded the sum of 2,500,000 l.; being an average of these years 313,000 l. each year.— Resolved, That, in the opinion of this House, it is expedient, in order to relieve the burthens and support the pub-
70
lic credit of the country, to lessen the public expenditure by every practicable means consistent with the safety and good faith of government; but that so large an expenditure for the diplomatic service of the country, and in particular in the last year, is at variance with that course, and deserves the censure of this House."
Mr. Canningwished to know whether it was the hon. member's object to negative the resolution, or merely to record his opinion that this expenditure was deserving of censure. If the latter, he conceived the hon. member was proceeding in a wholly informal manner.
The Speakerobserved, that, from the expressions of the hon. gentleman's amendment, he conceived it was not possible for him now to propose it. They were considering the report of a committee which had taken the resolution into its consideration before, and the hon. gentleman would see that they could not introduce into the resolution adopted by that committee, any matter which had not then been submitted to its examination.
Mr. Humesaid, that as there seemed to be some irregularity in his amendment, he would withdraw it.
The resolution was then agreed to.

IRISH CHARTER SCHOOLS.
The Bishop of Ferns The Bishop of Ferns moved, that there be laid before the House Copies of all Letters received from Charter-schools of Ireland by the Secretary of the Incorporated Society of Dublin, and transmitted by him to the Commissioners of Education, since the year 1824.
Lord King,after adverting to the voluminous evidence of the committee of 1815, complained that the Incorporated Society had not attended to the recommendations in the report on that occasion. It appeared that the usher of Stradbally school who had been dismissed at the instance of Mr. Leslie Foster, one of the commissioners, had since been promoted to a more lucrative situation. In the memorial which the usher had sent to the Board in Dublin he spoke of the gentleman by whom he had been dismissed, in very disrespectful terms, describing him as "a Mr. Leslie Foster." The members of the board, however, seemed resolved to encourage him, their object being to decry every one who wished to correct abuses. The cause of the usher's dismissal was cruelty to the children. But how had the board acted? They advanced him to a more lucrative situation, instead of marking their sense of his conduct in the way that it deserved.
The Bishop of Fernsadmitted, that the conduct of the individual in question had been very censurable. Three indictments for cruelty had been preferred against him, and he was tried the other day before the lord chief baron in the town of Maryborough. The jury was composed partly of Catholics and partly of Protestants, and they acquitted him on the first and second indictment without leaving the box, and the third was consequently abandoned. He did not know that in point of form he could move for the judge's notes of the trial, but if that were allowed, he should wish to do so. The

35
usher had been too severe over the children, and he was removed to a school where he could not exercise his severity, but where his talents, as a practical mathematician, might be highly useful. He had been sent to a school expressly intended for the education of parish clerks and schoolmasters. Another serious charge contained in the report was, the want of religious education in the different schools. It was stated in that report, that in a school in the diocese of Leighlin and Ferns there were twenty of the senior boys who had never heard of St. Paul.
But he would only refer to the passage in the report where the charge was made for its own contradiction. It was there stated, that the scholars were not only acquainted with the church catechism, but with the explanation of it, in which references were made to St. Paul not less than thirty times.
Lord Kingthought it much better that the right rev. prelate should give notice of a regular discussion on this subject than indulge in desultory observations with regard to it. It was said that there were twenty boys who had heard references made to St. Paul, but in his opinion there were very few who had heard one word about Job. He could see no advantage whatever that was likely to result from this sort of superficial knowledge.
The Marquis of Lansdownsaid, he had B motion connected with this subject to submit to their lordships, which would have the effect of bringing one part of the information required before them. He wished to see a return laid on their lordships' table of the number of scholars in all the charter schools of Ireland, distinguishing the different religious persuasions. He agreed with the noble lord, that this question ought not to be discussed without a regular notice, and he should therefore abstain from making any remarks. He must, however, express his hope, that some satisfactory explanation could be given of what had been stated in parliament of the past proceedings in the chartered schools; and which showed the existence of a degree of cruelty and mismanagement quite extraordinary and, when it was recollected under what system of inspection those schools had been placed by parliament, quite unexpected. He thought an inquiry was necessary, and he hoped it would be an effectual inquiry. Something was necessary for the satisfaction of the individuals themselves,
36
and of the public. It could not be, he thought, that all those abuses had taken, place under the inspection of distinguished characters; abuses which, if true, were calculated to throw discredit on the national church, and on all those engaged under the system. He had read with indignation, the accounts of these abuses, as contained in the recorded votes of the other house of parliament; but he hoped to see those statements disproved. The noble marquis concluded by moving for the return, which was ordered.

CORN LAWS.
Lord Kingsaid, he had to present to their lordships a petition against the Corn-laws from one of the largest parishes in the metropolis. The petitioners stated, that they had confidence in the good intentions of his majesty's government. He also had confidence in ministers, and he was glad to see that they were likely to receive real support from without; for otherwise they might expect little from within parliament. He sincerely trusted they would not be deterred from proceeding in their course, and that the public would not slacken their efforts; for, unless ministers were supported by petitions, it would be impossible for them to carry their good intentions into effect. In consequence of the part he had taken on this question, a great deal of advice had been offered to him by different persons. Some had requested him to desist, hinting that his speeches were like sermons in Lent, and repeated as often. Others were of opinion that he had a vicious propensity to make corn cheap; and as they thought that a vicious propensity in him, he must suppose that they considered a disposition to make corn dear a virtuous propensity. A third party complained that he treated these worthy Corn-laws like a miscreant at the bar of the Old Bailey, giving them all kinds of bad names. He was blamed for stigmatizing them with more aliases than ever was given to a thief on his trial: for he had called them the Corn-laws, alias the bread-tax, alias the dead-weight, alias the landlords' tax, and, worst of all, alias the job of jobs. Now, as so much kindness had been shown to him in the way of advice, he wished to give the House some good advice in return. In the first place, he would beg of noble lords to reflect what the situation of the country would be if the price of corn were to rise considerably? That such an event might happen

37
was no vain fear. He could state it as matter of fact, that there was at this time less corn than usual in granaries in the country; that the markets were less crowded with supplies; and that in the warehouses there was less corn than had ever been known at any former period. Now he would seriously ask the House to consider what the state of things would be if corn were to rise considerably before harvest? By such a rise, this country would be thrown into a state of much greater difficulty than it experienced in 1796, 1797, and 1801, because the population was now much greater than at that time; and because there had been for a long time past no importation from abroad. Besides, he believed that a sufficient supply could not be at once obtained by importation; for he understood that it would appear from the report which the noble lord opposite had promised to Jay on the table, that the state of the foreign markets did not hold out much expectation of large importations, and, at least, that they could not be looked to for any sudden supply to a large extent. But it was above all things to be recollected, that according to the present law, our ports could not be opened, and no foreign corn could be admitted, until the price rose in this country to 80 s.—to an amount which, in the present state of things, would be a starving price, indicative of a period of famine. He had lately seen a report made to the French minister of the interior, in which the average price of corn in different countries was stated. The price was given in franks, but the proportion showed the difference in several parts of Europe. According to this statement, the price in England which was 27 f. 32 c., was higher than in any other country. At Amsterdam the average was 12 f. 32 c. In France it was higher; the average there being nearly 16 f. The only place in Europe in which the price of corn approached the height at which it stood in England, was Spain, under the misgovernment of Ferdinand. Thus their lordships divided between them and that despot the disgrace of making corn dearer in England and in Spain than in any other country of Europe. How was this disgrace to be wiped off, and the evil of high prices to be corrected? The only resource their lordships had for accomplishing that object, was a revision of the Corn-laws. That, however, he believed, would not be done until the noble earl
38
opposite was resolved to clear away all the lumber and cobwebs which embarrassed and darkened the cabinet—until he dismissed all useless members, to go, if they liked, to king Ferdinand, whose ministers they were well fitted to be. If the noble earl would take this advice, he would, when he came to the task of revision, find that House as plastic as a piece of potter's clay. But if he did not choose to do this, there was another way in which the business might be managed. When the usual circular at the commencement of next session came to be written, the noble earl had better address his old friends in these terms:—"My lord, parliament is to meet for the despatch of very important business on the 3rd of February next, when your lordship's absence is most earnestly requested." All that was needful was to get his old friends to stay away. This was his advice to the noble earl; but he had said that he would give advice to the House, and he would now give it in one word. His advice to them was simply "Do justice." What right had that House, or any legislative assembly, to devise means to raise the price of food? It would be a breach of trust, if it could be supposed that so monstrous a proposition was acted upon by any parties in parliament, as to make corn dear for their own advantage. Such a course, if persisted in, was calculated to bring on one of those political convulsions, in which a lawless power might step in, as was once done in another place, and say to one, "You are an extortioner," to another "You are a tithemonger" "Get you gone, and give place to honester men."
Lord Calthorpethought, that the discussion of the subject had better be postponed to the next session. He did not think it was for the interest of the landlords to maintain the present Corn-laws, but that importation, under a moderate duty, would be more to their advantage. He did not conceive that those laws had been proposed from any interested motive* On the contrary, he believed that they were submitted to parliament under the honest conviction that they were not only good for the landed interest, but for the public at large. There certainly would be great evil in allowing the question to remain long in its present state. If any delusion existed on the subject, the best way to remove it would be to submit the question to the investigation of a com-

39
mittee. The noble earl had very properly taken this course on a recent occasion. To neglect to institute an inquiry was not so much abstaining from discussion as shutting out that light which it was their lordships' duty to seek. He thought he was not reflecting on the agricultural classes of this country, when he said that they were not so enlightened, or so ready to form just views on great national questions, as other classes of the community. Ministers ought not to hesitate to enter upon a revision of the Corn-laws; for if they were even to be defeated in both Houses of parliament, the attempt to lower the duty would raise them still higher in the public esteem. He did not expect that any great difference in the price of corn would be the result of an alteration of the law; but he regarded that alteration as an indispensable step in the system of wise policy which ministers had adopted with respect to commerce.
The Earl of Limerickthought, that the first noble lord's obvervations, though very inflammatory, carried with them their own cure. He was struck with the singular coincidence between the noble lord's speech, and the name of the place whence the petition came. It was the petition of the parish of St. Luke, and much of what had fallen from the noble lord appeared to be strongly impregnated with the quality which was generally supposed to abound in that parish. The noble lord had been very free with his advice; but he was satisfied that both his majesty's ministers and the House had too much sense to take it.
Lord Clifdenapproved of the determination of his majesty's ministers to postpone the discussion of the corn question to the next session. The consideration of the currency occupied parliament to such a degree as would render it very inconvenient to enter upon a revision of the Corn-laws. He hoped, however, that the subject would be brought forward early next session, and that importation on a moderate duty would be allowed. He understood that the gentlemen who had been sent abroad to make inquiries, were of opinion that no such quantity of foreign corn could be introduced as would hurt the agricultural interest. Some gentlemen said that the agricultural interest would be ruined by importations. He did not believe this. The ports had been opened for barley, and since that period, barley had been at 52 s. per quarter.
40
It had afterwards fallen to 32 s., but that was not in consequence of importation. He was in Munster when the ports were opened for the admission of oats, and there the people all expected to be ruined. They were horror-struck, and said that oats would be down to 5s. the barrel or 15 s. a quarter; but this was not the case. He was not one of those who thought that corn must be very cheap before the labourers could be comfortable; but until they had the value of a bushel and a half of wheat a week, they could not be comfortable. As long as they only received about 7s. a week, when wheat was at 10 s. a bushel, their lot must be miserable. This, or worse than this, was the case in the south and west of England. The farmers gave the labourers 5s. a week; and made up their wages out of the poor rates.
Ordered to lie on the table.

BANK NOTES PAYABLE WHERE ISSUED.
The Marquis of Lansdownrose to call their lordships' attention, and particularly the attention of the noble earl opposite, to a topic which had been mentioned on a former occasion. He alluded to the practice of many bankers issuing promissory notes of making them payable at some place distant from where they were issued. This was a practice which could not be defended. He knew that by the bill which had lately received their lordships' sanction, bankers would at the end of three years be obliged to make their notes payable at the place where they were issued; but he thought this evil ought not to be allowed to continue so long. When the practice had been mentioned on a former occasion, the noble earl opposite had doubted whether it was so extensive as was stated. Now, he had heard of fifty-five banks which issued promissory notes that were not payable out of London. He had heard, indeed, that one bank, as far off as Aberdeen, made its notes payable in London. The branch banks of the Bank of Ireland issued the notes of that Bank payable only in Dublin, and circulated them all over the south of Ireland; at present those notes were at a discount, and in the large towns of the south, such as Cork, could not be disposed of without the loss of 4d. This he knew was the case within the last fortnight. Great mischief must result from this practice, and the legislature ought not to allow its existence. He was at a

41
loss how to frame a motion on the subject, so as to produce any information to be laid on their lordships' table; but if the noble earl opposite would give him assistance, he might, perhaps, accomplish his object. At present, he did not know to what office an order, requiring to be laid on their lordships' table, an account of the number of banks issuing notes not payable at the spot where they were issued, could be sent, or he should certainly make a motion to that effect. Their lordships must recollect, that it was not only one and two pound notes that were so payable, but larger notes; and he thought the names of the bankers who did this ought to be known to the public. Though he should not conclude by making any motion, he was glad to take that opportunity of calling the attention of the noble earl opposite to the subject.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, he should be very ready to give the noble marquis any assistance in his power in obtaining the information he wished, but he did not know how it could be accomplished. It was desirous on many accounts to correct the evil he had pointed out; but, as the law stood, he did not see how it could be immediately corrected. A clause had been added to the bill, which had lately received their lordships' assent, and which would in a day or two receive the royal assent, by a noble friend of his, compelling all banks, at the period when that act came into operation, to pay their notes at the places where they were issued. But it was not supposed possible, with any regard to what he might call vested rights, to make that clause immediately operative. If the notes were now to be stamped, he should say, certainly, that none should be issued to bankers who did not come under that obligation; but the notes were already stamped, and most of those which were to circulate for the next three years were most probably already in circulation. It had, therefore, been thought, that the clause could not be brought into operation before the period assigned for the act to take effect. Agreeing in principle with the noble marquis, he thought their lordships might, in any bill which was brought in to regulate the issues of notes either in Scotland or Ireland, make such a clause a part of the bill, and it might be brought immediately into operation. Even if they were not to legislate in other respects for Scotland and Ireland, they might legislate in this.
The Marquis of Lansdownsaid, he was sensible that there was a difficulty in the way of any proposition on the subject with respect to England; but as to Ireland and Scotland he saw none. As much evil might arise in those countries from the circulation of small notes not payable at the place where they were issued, he would, after the Easter recess, call their lordships' attention to the subject. This he considered indispensable, whatever might be the nature of any measure which might emanate from the committee.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that in the last session but one, a case had been brought before their lordships by writ of error, in which a promissory note or bill of exchange had been made payable in London. A question had arisen, whether it was sufficient that a demand for payment of that note had been made in the country, or whether it must be made in London? On this subject the judges were divided; several of them thought it was not necessary that the demand should be made in London; but the majority, and their lordships were of the same opinion, thought that it was necessary to make the demand in London, and that the declaration should contain an averment that it had been made. But since that period, an act had been passed, making promissory notes payable in London, demandable elsewhere, unless it was expressly stated on the note that it was payable only in London. If this were the case, country bank notes fell under this law; and if not made payable only in London, payment of them might be demanded at the place where they were issued. He would examine the law on the subject, to see if the opinion he had thrown out was correct, and would report the result to their lordships.
The Earl of Limerick,as an Irishman, was thankful to the noble marquis for having brought this subject before their lordships. The notes of the Dublin Bank were payable only in Dublin.