Sitting of 22 November 1867

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Public Petitions appointed.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—Libel*; Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Supplemental.*
First Reading—Libel* [3]; Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Supplemental* [4].

CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND.

  QUESTION.
  MR. MAGUIREasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, What course the Government intend to adopt with reference to granting a Charter for the Catholic University of Ireland?
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, the important question of University Education in Ireland was at present engaging the most anxious attention of the Government, and he hoped that when Parliament met at the ordinary time he should be able to state the intentions of the Government on the subject.

BREECH LOADING RIFLES FOR THE ARMY.—QUESTION.
LORD ELCHOasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether the decision of the Committee composed of Officers of the Regular Army and of Civilians, which was appointed to consider and report upon the various arms submitted for trial, in accordance with the terms of the War Office advertisement issued in October last, by which "gunmakers and others" were invited to propose "breech-loading rifles which may replace the present service rifles in future manufacture," will be considered final if not, what are the

143
grounds for not accepting as final the decision of a Committee which was invited "to report upon the beat breech-loading rifle for use in the Army;" and, to what further inquiry will these arms be submitted, by whom will it be conducted, and within what period of time may it be expected that a final decision will come to as to the future service rifle?
SIR JOHN PKAINGTON: The Question my noble Friend has put to me is rather a complicated one, but I will answer it as clearly as I can. The Question refers in the first instance to the Committee which was decided on by my right hon. and gallant predecessor (General Peel) shortly before he left office, to determine a competition between breech-loading rifles, which were to be sent in on the terms contained in an advertisement. My right hon. and gallant Friend offered a considerable sum of money by way of prizes for the best of those arms. The Committee of adjudication is composed of five gentlemen—two civilians, Lord Spencer and Mr. Ross, and three military officers—Colonel Fletcher, of the Guards; Captain Rawlins, of the 43rd; and Captain M'Kinnon, of the 23rd Regiment. Colonel Fletcher was the President. My noble Friend asks me whether the decision of that Committee is to be considered as final. Now, the decision of the Committee as regards the prizes to be given cannot be considered as final in respect of the arm to be adopted, for reasons which I will explain. No doubt, at the time my right hon. and gallant Friend determined on appointing the Committee he hoped that its decision would be final, and that the arm which received the first prize would be finally selected as the permanent arm for the British service. I should observe that I find no record in the War Office of what the direct intentions of my right hon. and gallant Friend were; but I imagine that what subsequently occurred was not foreseen by him or anybody else—namely, that nearly 100 arms were sent in for this competition. Out of that number the great majority, or nearly seventy I think, did not comply with the conditions of the advertisement, and consequently the competition for the prizes was limited to a small minority of the arms sent in. The question then arises what course ought the Committee to take in reference to those weapons which are not in conformity with the terms of the advertisement? My noble Friend implies in his Question that the
144
Committee was invited "to report upon the best breech-loading rifle for use in the army." These words are not to be found in any public paper. They may have been contained in a letter from my right hon. and gallant Friend. My noble Friend goes on to ask, "To what further inquiry will these arms be submitted?" The arms the Committee have sat on will not be submitted to any further inquiry. The question then arises with reference to the course the Committee is to take with regard to the large number that were not properly admissible; and it may be desirable to have an inquiry as to those seventy weapons, many of which may be of a very valuable character, though they do not comply with the terms of the advertisement. Consequently, I have sought for information in the Office as to what were the precise intentions of my right hon. and gallant Friend, and I find the belief there to be that he intended to have the duty of the Committee confined to deciding as to what arms ought to receive the prizes. Then comes the question how this matter is to be decided. The gentlemen composing the Committee having already sacrificed a great deal of time to an inquiry which turned out to be very laborious, I could not assume that they would be willing to embark in another investigation, or that, in the case of the military officers, the Commander-in-Chief would be willing that they should do so. I believe the present inquiry will not be concluded for some time, and, no doubt, the other would also last a very considerable period. If, however, the gentlemen composing the Committee should be willing to embark in it, and the Commander-in-Chief should give his consent, I believe I could not act with greater advantage to the public service than by committing such an inquiry to gentlemen to whom the Government and the country are already so much indebted. In that case their decision cannot be arrived at in less than a year.
MR. NEWDEGATEasked the right hon. Baronet whether he would have any objection to lay on the table a Return of the number of muskets which had been converted into breech-loaders, and also the number of Enfields available for conversion?
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONbelieved that such a Return had already been laid on the table; but if not, there would be no objection to producing one.

STORM WARNINGS.—QUESTION.
COLONEL SYKESasked the Vice President of the Board of Trade, Whether any further Correspondence on the subject of Storm Warnings with the Scientific Committee of the Royal Society will be presented to the House, and whether they will be resumed?
MR. STEPHEN CAVE: There have been frequent communications on the subject of Storm Warnings during the Recess between the Meteorological Committee of the Royal Society and the Board of Trade. I hope to lay the final arrangements on the table of the House on Monday next. I had therefore better defer answering that part of the Question referring to the resumption of the storm warnings until after that day.

THE REGENT'S PARK—THE ORNAMENTAL WATER.—QUESTION.
MR. THOMAS CHAMBERSsaid, that much apprehension was felt by residents in the neighbourhood of the Regent's Park, as to what was being done there in respect of the Ornamental Water. He wished to ask the noble Lord the First Commissioner of Works for some explanation on the matter, and as to the nature of the alteration which is proposed.
LORD JOHN MANNERS: There is no ground for the anxiety referred to by the hon. and learned Gentleman. What is proposed to be done is this:—The water will be drained off; the mud will be drained and covered with soil that has already been accumulated there for the purpose; it will then be concreted, and the whole length of the lake will be reduced to a uniform depth of about four feet. By that means we hope to prevent a recurrence of the awful calamity of last winter.

ABYSSINIAN EXPEDITION—PURCHASE OF MULES.—QUESTION.
CAPTAIN VIVIANasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any Correspondence has taken place between the War Office and the Foreign Office relating to the conduct of the British Consul at Barcelona with regard to the purchase of mules for the Abyssinian Expedition; and, if so, whether he will lay that Correspondence upon the table of the House?
LORD STANLEYreplied, that a correspondence on the subject had taken place
146
between the War Office and the Foreign Office, and between the Foreign Office and the British Consul at Barcelona. It was not completed, and he was not at present in a position to say whether or not there was any objection to its production.

Order of the Day, for a Committee on Motion for Supply, read.

STATE OF HONDURAS—TREATY OF GUARANTEE.—QUESTION.
MR. AYRTONsaid, that before the Speaker left the Chair he was anxious to obtain from the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs some explanation respecting a document issued a few days ago in the City of London by Senor Don Carlos Gutierrez, Honduras Minister in London, inviting Her Majesty's subjects to subscribe to a loan of £1,000,000 to the State of Honduras, it being alleged that a portion of such loan was to be applied to the construction of an inter-oceanic railway from Puerto Caballos, on the Atlantic, to the say of Fonseca, on the Pacific. The prospectus in question stated that this railway would, when complete, be about 230 miles in length, but that the present loan is to be applied to the construction of the first section of the railway, from Puerto Caballos to Santiago, a distance, he believed, of about forty miles. Moreover, the prospectus contained the following announcement:—
"The new Treaty between Honduras and Great Britain declares that 'In order to secure the construction and permanence of the route or road herein contemplated, and also to secure for the benefit of mankind the uninterrupted advantages of such communication from sea to sea, Her Britannic Majesty recognises the rights of sovereignty and property of Honduras, in and over the line of the said road, and for the same reason guarantees' positively and efficaciously the entire neutrality of the same; and when the proposed road shall have been completed Her Britannic Majesty equally engages, in conjunction with the Republic of Honduras, to protect the same from interruption, seizure, or unjust confiscation, from whatsoever quarter the attempt may proceed.'"
Now, if such a treaty had really been entered into by Her Majesty's Government, it would involve this country in very serious responsibilities; for though the prospectus only spoke of the raising of £1,000,000, yet if that sum were to be applied to the construction of only forty miles of the line, it might be inferred that the cost of the whole 230 miles would be

147
immense. Indeed, he believed that this section was the only portion of the line which, could be constructed at a moderate expense, as there was a large range of hills running through the State of Honduras which would render the construction of the other sections an undertaking of much difficulty. If, however, the line could be constructed at a moderate expense, it would seem that for that ostensible object a large loan was to be obtained in this country, and the character and credit of the whole transaction supported by a Minister accredited to Her Majesty's Government, quoting a new treaty alleged to have been entered into. Persons reading the prospectus would naturally believe that the scheme had been communicated to the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and that he had concurred, or tacitly acquiesced in it. A treaty seriously affecting the finances of this country ought to be laid upon the table of that House, and it was even doubtful whether it could be carried into effect without the sanction of an Act of Parliament. It was possible, however, that this Minister might be drawing more upon his imagination than upon his diplomatic relations with the noble Lord, for he had discovered that a treaty was entered into between Her Majesty's Government and the State of Honduras as long ago as the year 1856, for guaranteeing certain rights and privileges to the Honduras Oceanic Railway Company. But that treaty had sole reference to a project brought forward by that Company, and only guaranteed the immunities he had just referred to on conditions that the railway should be completed from sea to sea by that Company, and that the Company should in exchange concede certain rights and privileges to British subjects. He believed that the Company did not succeed in its undertaking, and therefore that treaty had fallen practically to the ground. At all events, it could have no effect unless the Company carried out the whole line, and gave effect to the stipulations. There was obviously an immense difference between an independent Company engaging to construct the whole line and the Honduras Government taking the matter into its own hands, because the Company furnished in itself a guarantee for a certain amount of neutrality; whereas if the railway were made by the State there would be no such guarantee. He would therefore ask the noble Lord whether any treaty had been recently concluded be-
148
tween Her Majesty's Government and the State of Honduras, and whether anything of the sort were contemplated? He trusted that the noble Lord would not be so inconsiderate as to pledge the credit of this country alone to a guarantee of neutrality in reference to anything connected with Central America. Such a proceeding might grievously offend the sensibilities of a great nation nearer to Central America than ourselves, and might provoke antagonism and opposition on the part of other great commercial nations and maritime Powers. If any step were taken at all it should be in conjunction with all the great maritime Powers of the world. Care should be likewise taken that a proper route should be selected; for every two or three years the public were informed that a beautiful route from ocean to ocean had been discovered, and that a line could be constructed at a very trifling expense. Several years ago Her Majesty's Government had acted upon the faith of a representation that a man had been to a certain point in Central America, and had stood on a hill from which he could see the Atlantic, and that, after walking a little way into a wood, he came to a place whence he could see the Pacific. A commission was sent out to verify the accuracy of this story, and they ascertained that the man, after gazing on the Atlantic, took a walk through a wood, and, turning in the direction of the spot he had formerly occupied, of course he saw the Atlantic again. Indeed, it was discovered that there was an impassable range of mountains between that spot and the Pacific. Several Englishmen unfortunately lost their lives in detecting that absurdity. He hoped, therefore, that nothing would be done in Central America until the best route was chosen by practical men. If the statements in the prospectus were correct, he should like to receive some information as to the resources of Honduras, its income and expenditure, and the value of the exports of wood referred to in the prospectus. He would add that he had no personal interest whatever in the loan, and that he had merely brought the matter forward in the interest of the public. He begged to ask the Secretary of State, Whether any new Treaty of Guarantee has been entered into with the States of Honduras, and what are the resources of that State?
LORD STANLEY: The answer which I have to give to the fair and opportune Question of the hon. and learned Gentle-

149
man will be extremely short, and I hope the House will consider it satisfactory. No new treaty or guarantee has been entered into with the State of Honduras, and as far as I am concerned there is no intention of concluding any such treaty. It is, I think, quite evident that the treaty referred to in the document which has been quoted by the hon. and learned Gentleman is the Treaty of the 27th August, 1856. I do not understand how that can be termed a new treaty; and I notice that in the document referred to by the hon. and learned Member no mention is made of a fact which has a somewhat important bearing on the obligations involved in that guarantee. The additional Article of the Treaty of 1856 stipulates that, in consideration of various concessions therein enumerated—
"Her Britannic Majesty recognizes the rights of sovereignty and property of Honduras in and over the line of the said road,"—
namely, the road to be constructed by the Honduras Oceanic Railway Company—
"And for the same reason guarantees, positively and efficaciously, the entire neutrality of the same as long as Great Britain shall enjoy the privileges conceded to it in the preceding section of this Article. And when the proposed road shall have been completed, Her Britannic Majesty equally engages, in conjunction with the Republic of Honduras, to protect the same from interruption, seizure, or unjust confiscation, from whatsoever quarter the attempt may proceed.
But then the treaty goes on to say that this protection and guarantee are granted conditionally and may be withdrawn at six months' notice if any regulations be made contrary to the spirit of the treaty. That is the only undertaking into which the British Government has entered, and no new one is contemplated.
Committee on Motion, "That a Supply be granted to Her Majesty."
QUEEN'S SPEECH referred; Motion considered.
(In the Committee.)
QUEEN'S SPEECH read.
Resolved, "That a Supply be granted to Her Majesty."
Resolution to be reported on Monday next.

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On Motion, "That the House, at its rising, do adjourn to Monday next:"—
ARRESTS OF ENGLISHMEN IN FRANCE.

  QUESTION.
  MR. DARBY GRIFFITHrose to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, on the 4th day of November, at the Calais Railway Station, a gentleman named Coventry was threatened with arrest by a French policeman for not being provided with a passport; and that, on the English Consul coming to his assistance, he was told by the policeman that he could arrest the Consul himself on suspicion, for not having a passport, if he chose? While England had, in all past time, been noted for her love of personal liberty, it had been rather the fashion with our friends on the other side of the Channel to prefer equality, and to sacrifice personal liberty to it; and this was so, whether under the old Royal dynasty, after the restoration of the Bourbons, or under a Republic, or the former or present Empire, Some few years ago the present Emperor abolished the use of passports in the case of English travellers in France; but if this liberty were to be interfered with arbitrarily the privilege would cease to be an advantage, and would, in fact, be converted into a trap. The other day there appeared in The Times newspaper a statement, signed "H. W. C.," to the effect that the writer was standing at the Calais Station, about to leave by the night train, when he was called on by a porter to interpret for an Italian; immediately after doing which a French detective demanded his passport, and on his replying that a passport was not necessary in the case of an Englishman, the Frenchman said, "You are the very man I have been looking for; you are not an Englishman, but an Italian." The writer, therefore, called the porter who had asked his assistance as interpreter, and who confirmed his statement of what had happened; but the policeman, in a loud voice, and with sneers and taunts, said he was a thief and a spy; that the police knew him well, and that he was a prisoner. At this juncture the Vice Consul came forward, and assisted the gentleman in getting out of the clutches of the police, which he did with some difficulty. The writer further said that the policeman declared not only that he could arrest the gentleman, but that he could arrest the Consul himself, on suspicion, for being without a passport. He (Mr. Darby Griffith) had written to the Vice Consul, who confirmed the statements of Mr. Coventry, especially as to the boast of

  151
  the sergent de ville that he would arrest the Consul himself on suspicion, unless he were specially protected by a passport. The noble Lord the Foreign Secretary would, perhaps, concur in the view that it was undesirable an officer with so little discretion should be stationed at such an important place as Calais. He trusted that the noble Lord would not allow a case of this sort to pass without a thorough apology being rendered, and sergens de ville taught that they were not in this way to insult Englishmen. This case, however, was by no means the only recent one in which Englishmen had suffered annoyance, detention, and loss. His attention had been called to several occurrences of a more outrageous nature. A few weeks ago the secretary of an English Bishop went to Paris to make inquiries as to the conduct and operations of the small markets. He soon perceived that wherever he went he was followed about by a well-dressed man; and on the second morning, on getting out of an omnibus at the door of his hotel, he was seized, accused of stealing cigars, and taken to a police-station. The secretary wrote to the Embassy, but his letter was not delivered until the following morning, when two Attachés went to the station and liberated him. The next case he would mention was one of a still more despotic character. A clergyman connected with a parish in the North of England, while taking some refreshment on the premises of a marchand de vins, was seized, and, although he gave his name and address, was conveyed to a police-station. He wrote to the Embassy, but his letter was not delivered for three days. An Attaché then called upon the clergyman, but could do nothing for him, because the rev. gentleman was not known personally to any one at the Embassy—which was not at all surprising. Ten days were taken to correspond with the references which the rev. gentleman gave in his own parish. All that time he was kept in the lock-up and treated as a prisoner awaiting his trial, so that he was thirteen days a prisoner for no fault except that of being personally unknown to any one at the Embassy. There was also the case of another Englishman, who signed his name "H—d," who was detained twenty-four hours, and then liberated with an apology. He hoped to hear the course taken, by the noble Lord in all these cases.
  LORD STANLEY: In consequence of the notice of the hon. Member, I called on the Vice Consul at Calais for a Report. It appears that Mr. Coventry was seen and heard speaking in Italian to an Italian fellow-passenger. This was an individual whom, for some reason or other, the French police considered they had cause to suspect. Mr. Coventry, who had been seen in company with him, was asked for his passport. He answered that he was an Englishman, and was entitled to travel without a passport. He was then asked whether he could produce any papers which could prove his nationality. I ought to mention that the privilege of dispensing with passports is confined to British subjects, and is often claimed by persons not entitled to it. It is not therefore unreasonable or improper that when any difficulty arises British subjects should be called upon to give some evidence of their nationality. Mr. Coventry appears to have given an answer—whether a sharp one or not I do not know—which provoked the police agent, and something in the nature of a dispute ensued. The Vice Consul interfered, and then the police-officer, having somewhat lost his temper, did use towards the Vice Consul an expression which was certainly not courteous or consistent with the respect due to his official position. It does not appear that Mr. Coventry was detained, and therefore the person most aggrieved in the matter is the Vice Consul. That gentleman, however, has written to me that the objectionable words were used by the police-officer in the heat of a dispute which had arisen with another person; that the police-officer is in general remarkably civil in his language and conduct; and that, though large numbers of English people have passed through Calais lately, he is not aware of any complaint having been made before against this person. Under these circumstances, an explanation and apologies having been offered to him, the Vice Consul does not desire to take any further notice of the matter. That is a very reasonable and proper conclusion, and I do not therefore mean to make any representation on the subject. With regard to the other cases mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, as he gave no notice respecting them, I must ask him to give me the names and particulars, so that I may make inquiry.
  Motion agreed to,

  LIBEL BILL.
  On Motion of Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN, Bill to amend the Law of Libel, ordered to be brought in by Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN and Mr. BAINES.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 3.]

  DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND) SUPPLEMENTAL BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. HUNT, Bill to confirm a Provisional Order under "The Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Act, 1863," and the Acts amending the same, ordered to be brought in by Mr. HUNT and The Earl of MAYO.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 4.]

  PUBLIC PETITIONS.
  Select Committee appointed, "to whom shall be referred all Petitions presented to the House, with the exception of such as complain of undue Returns, or relate to Private Bills; and that such Committee do classify and prepare abstracts of the same, in such form and manner as shall appear to them best suited to convey to the House all requisite information respecting their contents, and do report the same from time to time to the House; and that such Reports do in all cases set forth the number of signatures to each Petition:—And that such Committee have power to direct the printing in extenso of such Petitions, or of such parts of Petitions, as shall appear to require it:—And that such Committee have power to report their opinion and observations thereupon to the House:"—Mr. CHARLES FORSTER, Mr. BONHAM - CARTER, Major GAVIN, Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN, Mr. HASTINGS RUSSELL, Mr. Alderman SALOMONS, Mr. OWEN STANLEY, Mr. KINNAIRD, Mr. REGINALD YORKE, Mr. ROBERT TORRENS, Mr. M'LAGAN, Mr. SANDFORD, Sir CHARLES RUSSELL, Mr. DE GREY, and Mr. HENRY EDWARD SURTEES: Three to be the quorum.
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, till Monday next.

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament—The Lord Fitzhardinge, after the Death of his Father.
DIOCESE OF SALISBURY—CHARGE OF THE BISHOP OF SALISBURY.

  PETITIONS. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD PORTMANrose to present two Petitions of Members of the Church of England in the Diocese of Salisbury, complaining of a recent Charge of the Bishop of that Diocese, and praying for the Establishment of some Tribunal for the speedy and inexpensive settling of all Cases of controverted Doctrine or Practice. The noble Lord said, he had been requested to present these Petitions, which were signed by more than 3,000 people living in the diocese of Salisbury, and the Petitioners were some of them clergy, some of them the largest owners of property in the diocese; and there were also a great mass of yeomanry and owners of small property, a great body of churchwardens, a large number of justices of the peace, and many of the large and small farmers and tradesmen in that diocese. He would have preferred that any other than he had been charged with the matter, as it placed him in a most painful position; but the importance of the questions involved constrained him to pursue the course which he proposed to adopt. He was told that the Petition was signed by only a few, if any, Dissenters; but that some of those who signed the Petition were called Dissenters by the clergymen who resided in their districts, because they had left the churches when changes had been introduced which were distasteful to them; but he (Lord Portman), for one, did not regard such persons in the light of Dissenters. The Petitioners complained of the Charge which had been delivered by the Bishop of Salisbury, and of the following doctrines taught—namely,
  "That the Bishops of our Established Church inherit from the Apostles an authority to confer on all who are fully ordained certain extraordinary powers. 1. A miraculous sacerdotal power to produce by certain words and actions an external objective presence of Christ's body, and of Christ's blood, in every celebration of the Lord's Supper. 2. A supernatural sacerdotal judicial power either to retain sin by excommunication, or to remit sin by the ordinance of absolution necessitating a previous confession. Your Petitioners, therefore, protesting against these doctrines as contrary to the plain teaching of Scripture of our Protestant Church, and of its great divines, humbly pray that your Lordships may devise such measures as may avert the evil consequences of the doctrines set forth in the aforesaid Charge, by appointing some tribunal which shall afford a speedy and inexpensive means of settling all cases of controverted doctrine or practice."
  He should be failing in his duty to their Lordships' House if he entered for one

  131
  moment into any question of doctrine, or into any theological discussion, and he had only read the words of the Petition in order that their Lordships might be made acquainted with the nature of the complaints. He felt that he had no right to say to their Lordships that the opinions held by the right rev. Prelate were right or wrong. For himself, he believed that what each man thought right that he had a right to hold. But their Lordships would not be surprised to learn that great consternation had been caused in the diocese of Salisbury, because it was generally believed that no Bishop in the Established Church had previously put forth such doctrines as belonging to the Protestant Church of England. He was anxious to avoid saying anything which could be offensive to the right rev. Prelate, because all those who were acquainted with the right rev. Prelate, as a Christian man and apart from his position in the Church, held him in great esteem and regard. His business now, however, was not to enter into anything personal or individual, but simply on behalf of these Petitioners to speak of the right rev. Prelate in his official capacity. And he thought it but fair to the Petitioners that he should read to their Lordships one or two paragraphs in the Charge to show that they were not making statements unadvisedly. The right rev. Prelate, in pages 74 and 75, said—
  "And what, my brethren, is that effect which our Church teaches us to look for from the consecration of the elements in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper? I answer without hesitation, because I think the evidence I can produce is very clear, that our Church witnesses that through consecration the body and blood of Christ become really present, and by this I mean 'present without us,' and not only 'in the soul of the faithful receiver'—objective and not subjective only."
  He (Lord Portman) would now come to another matter—for he was anxious to avoid as much as possible all discussion on matters of doctrine. In pages 108 and 109 were the following passages:—
  "The Church of England may be disestablished, and when she has lost all the manifold blessings (and they are priceless ones) of her present position, she may be driven by her very weakness to throw herself upon other principles of a better strength; and then conscious of the soundness of her ecclesiastical position, and resting her claims both on authority and on her oneness in doctrine with the undivided Church, she may trustfully, tenderly, and yet with the firm authority of one whose Magna Charta is that large and unconditional promise which our Lord added to His commission, employ, and direct, and control the energies of the eager faith and the ardent love of
  132
  her members. The great increase of the devotion and zeal which have, I am told, become one of the characteristic marks of many of her younger members, under even our present circumstances, would make the condition of a free Church a very hopeful one.
  "The remedy for our present ills and the escape from our present danger may, I think, be included under the one large head of changing our past defensive policy into a constructive one—the taking and wielding 'the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left;' not only the shield for defence, but the sword and spear of the spirit wherewith to contend against all who oppose themselves."
  THE BISHOP OF SALISBURYsaid, he was perfectly prepared to discuss the whole matter, paragraph by paragraph; but he thought it scarcely fair that the noble Lord should cull extracts from the Charge, as he had been doing, without alluding to other passages by which they were balanced.
  LORD PORTMANsaid, his only object was to save their Lordships' time. In the 120th page of the Charge the right rev. Prelate warned the clergy not to be afraid of the "offence of priestcraft," or of the ignominy which in the present day attached to the word "sacerdotal." Those were matters they could all understand. A great many who knew very little about matters of doctrine were still scarcely prepared to submit to a constructive system of priestcraft—such a system as would be calculated to bring us back to the dominion of the Church of Rome. He did not know whether the right rev. Prelate desired to inaugurate such a system; but judging from the statements contained in his Charge, it might be inferred that he was about to embark in a constructive policy upon an extended sacerdotal system which was commonly called priestcraft; but as the right rev. Prelate had signed the document which had emanated from the Pan-Anglican Synod, he trusted that he had seen fit with time and reflection to modify some of the views expressed in his Charge. Now, the right rev. Prelate in the autumn of last year did that which to many of them appeared to be scarcely prudent—he answered a letter which was published in The Times, signed "S. G. O.," in which the question arose as to the claims of the clergy, and a comparison was made as to the rights which the clergy of the Eastern and Western Churches claimed for themselves, He claimed the same powers which the Priests of the rest of the Catholic Church, both in the East and West, have ever claimed as their inheri-

  133
  tance. That answer of the right rev. Prelate sounded the first alarm in the diocese of Salisbury, and a meeting was held in the western part of the diocese to protest against the position which their Bishop had taken up, and which had so much alarmed the clergy and the laity of the district. The answer given by the right rev. Prelate was that when the proper time came he meant to explain more fully—and this he had done in his Charge—what he really meant. The next step was the publication of the Charge, and he believed the right rev. Prelate had had the opinion of a great body of clergy expressed to him on the subject. He was not aware that the Bishop had endeavoured on any occasion to force his clergy to accept his views; but there were men who always yielded to one in authority, and who would endeavour to do what was agreeable to the Bishop, even though it might bring into his parish discord and confusion; and therefore it might become absolutely necessary that steps should be taken to ascertain the soundness of the positions which had been put forward by the right rev. Prelate, or else novelties introduced into parishes might lead to discord and strife, without the possibility of obtaining any legal decision to guide the parties. The great grievance of those who entertained views contrary to those held by the Bishop was that there was no tribunal in existence wherein the questions raised might be speedily and inexpensively decided. The process in the existing Ecclesiastical Courts was so ruinously expensive and so slow that no one, except under the most extraordinary pressure, would think of commencing proceedings in them in relation to subjects similar to that he had brought under their Lordships' notice. The right rev. Prelate had furnished his diocese and the country with an example of the working of the Ecclesiastical Courts by instituting proceedings in them against one of the authors of the book which was well known under its title of Essays and Reviews. Probably if less had been said about that work it would have been forgotten much sooner than it had been; and, had it not been for other matters mixed up with it, perhaps it would have been better to have left the right rev. Prelate's Charge without further comment being made upon it; for in his (Lord Portman's) opinion it, in truth, was worth little more than the paper and ink spent upon it. The Charge delivered by the right rev.
  134
  Prelate had caused great grief and sorrow; but it was impossible that the religion of the people of this country, which was founded upon the Rock of Ages, could be affected by such a Charge as that of the right rev. Prelate: the Charge would, in all probability, lead to discord and strife in many parishes, and some persons have already expressed their doubt whether they could conscientiously approach the Holy Table when the right rev. Prelate was officiating, lest it might be supposed that they participated in the opinions he had promulgated. Under these circumstances, the Charge could not be passed over altogether without notice. He would refrain from saying more upon this part of the subject. But there was another point, not affecting the right rev. Prelate, to which he wished to draw the attention of their Lordships, and more particularly that of the noble and learned Lord upon the Woolsack. The Petitioners prayed for the establishment of a tribunal which could do justice speedily and inexpensively. He did not pretend for a moment that any suggestion he could offer to their Lordships would be of the least value; but he thought it right to lay before the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack for his calm consideration his proposition, that the noble and learned Lord might consult with the members of the right rev. Bench as to the possibility of establishing some such tribunal as he was about to indicate. Both the civil and the criminal laws were administered by such tribunals, and facilities had been provided that after a cause had been heard in a lower Court, it might be brought before the supreme tribunal, so that it might be disposed of with promptitude, and he could not see why the same system should not be established in the case of the Ecclesiastical Courts. In civil and in criminal matters the case was first brought before an inferior Court, which ascertained the facts and gave the best judgment it could upon those facts; but if that judgment were called in question, it was reviewed, on a case carefully stated, by the Court above, which decided upon the question of law, and then sent the case down again to the inferior Court to deliver the judgment as directed by the superior tribunal. The whole matter was thus reduced to a nutshell, and the case was decided speedily and inexpensively. If such a system were good in the administration of the civil and the criminal laws, why should not it answer

  135
  in the administration of the ecclesiastical law? The fact was that the rules governing the Ecclesiastical Courts were established some 200 or 300 years ago, and were not fitted for the present time. Men's eyes were beginning to be open to the condition of things, and they were no longer prepared to submit to them. He felt that he had occupied more of their Lordships' time than he was justified in doing; but he hoped that he had said nothing which was personally offensive to the right rev. Prelate, or that was not strictly relevant to the subject he had brought under their Lordships' notice.
  On Question, that the Petition do lie upon the table,
  THE BISHOP OF SALISBURYsaid, the noble Lord (Lord Portman) had not raised the question whether this was or was not a matter of heresy, and their Lordships' House a fit tribunal for trying it, and he himself should not seek to do so, because he was sure that he should be doing what would be very distasteful to their Lordships; at the same time, although he entirely denied that their Lordships' House was a Spiritual Court of Heresy, he was perfectly prepared, if their Lordships desired it, to enter into a discussion of the whole subject before them. He must say that he felt some pain that during his not very long episcopate their Lordships should have been called upon by the noble Lord on two occasions to investigate charges against him. On the first occasion their Lordships appointed a Committee to investigate the complaints which had been made against him, and the result was that the House had been convinced that they were groundless. And here he could not refrain from reminding the noble Lord opposite that he had not helped him to carry out the resolution come to by that Committee. But, on the other hand, there were reasons which made him glad that this discussion had been brought forward. In the first place, the noble Lord had not mixed up personal matters in the question he had brought before their Lordships' House; and, in the next place, he was glad to have the opportunity of giving some explanation, not on particular points of doctrine which, as he said, he felt would be distasteful to their Lordships, but on several other matters which did not touch doctrine. But before he did so, he must take the opportunity of stating most distinctly that with regard to points of doctrine—such as the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, abso-
  136
  lution, confession, the ceremonial or ritual of the Church—he adhered to every syllable he had expressed in his Charge. After the gravest consideration he could give to the subject since the notice of the noble Lord had been given to bring this subject before their Lordships, he most distinctly re-asserted that he adhered, as a strong English Churchman, to the whole exposition he had given in his Charge. He withdrew not one single statement. The noble Lord particularly objected to that part of his Charge which related to the policy of the Church of England—what she ought to do under her present difficulties. And he thought he had reason to complain, that while there were many passages touching that subject, the noble Lord had quoted only a single sentence. He was most anxious that their Lordships should be enabled to form their own opinion on this point; and he therefore purposed sending to each a copy of the Charge, with an earnest request that they would do him the justice to read it and form their own judgment in regard to this particular portion of it. But there were one or two other points to which he desired to call the attention of the House. A Petition had lately been addressed by a number of clergymen and churchwardens in his diocese to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and he had informed his Grace, who had just left the House, what remarks he intended to make upon it. One of the complaints there made was that he, as Bishop, had used the opportunity of his Charge of making authoritative declarations of what were called erroneous doctrines. But he had not done so. He entirely denied that a Bishop's Charge was an authoritative declaration like that of a synodal decision pronounced by the Bishop. He always kept distinctly before his clergy and churchwardens, when addressing them, that he was speaking to their consciences; that he was doing what every clergyman did every Sunday of his life—namely, witness what he believed to be the truth of God. Then there was another point—namely, the state of his diocese. Their Lordships might suppose that his diocese was in a constant state of turmoil and of disaffection towards him, instead of which there was not a more peaceable diocese in the kingdom. Nor had he allowed anything to be done in vindication of himself which might disturb this state of quiet and peace. He was quite content to bide his time, persuaded that Englishmen would deal by him honestly, read his Charge, and

  137
  judge for themselves. His Grace, in answer to the address already referred to, used these words—
  "In conclusion, I must express a hope that the novel variations from the established usage of our Church, which you intimate have caused the alienation of many of its attached members in the diocese of Salisbury, will not be continued after the Report of Her Majesty's Commissioners."
  Now, he asserted most solemnly that he did not believe that there was another diocese in the kingdom where there was so little Ritualism as in his. He stated most distinctly that in only one small parish, with about 150 people, or not so many, had there been any attempt at what was now generally understood by the word Ritualism. He had lived thirty years in Salisbury, and he had never made one single alteration in established usage in the cathedral, or parish churches in the cathedral city; he had never done anything to disturb the minds of the people on this subject. Yet it was said he had caused the alienation of many of the Church's attached members by these novel variations. A wrong issue had been raised in his diocese. There was less "Ritualism" in his diocese, he repeated, than in any other diocese in the whole kingdom. With regard to his teaching, he honestly professed he was a very High Churchman. He had never disguised it. Any one who regarded him as other than a very High Churchman would thoroughly misrepresent his deepest convictions. But though he was a very High Churchman he appealed to the noble Lord to say whether during his episcopate he had ever shown any want of toleration. Of course, it was very painful to speak of himself; but he was perfectly satisfied that not one single clergyman, not one single layman, in his diocese, could say that he had ever shown any want of tolerance or consideration for the opinions of others. [Lord PORTMAN said, he had not said so.] He believed the noble Lord would give him credit for allowing others to maintain their own principles even as he desired to maintain his own. But he must now give their Lordships some account how any disturbance of the peace of his diocese which had occurred had been brought about. One instance was as follows:—When he became Bishop of the diocese and went to consecrate a new church, or one renovated or re-built, he not unfrequently found everything very carefully arranged for, except the Communion Table. This he considered most
  138
  unseemly, and determined to remove such offence at his own cost. He accordingly wrote to an excellent friend of his—an architect—asking at what rate he could supply a new Communion Table, not a very expensive one, but a solid one—intending to make a present of one to any new or reconstructed church where it might be acceptable. This excellent architect having provided him with plans, he had for many years had the privilege of giving these Communion Tables to church restorers and builders, whether High Churchmen or Low Churchmen. But this year he was charged with attempting to introduce through such offerings new doctrines, and to his very great surprise he found that a pamphlet was being circulated throughout his whole diocese, warning Churchmen against his Communion Tables. Surely that was a very paltry way of carrying on warfare. However, the result was that for the future he should withhold, unless urged to give it, any such aid. Another means used to oppose him had been to organize a Lay Association, and he could supply the House with some remarkable details of the workings of this society, but he would not trouble their Lordships with them. But he protested against parties going into every parish and stirring up every kind of ill-feeling. Many of these persons came to Salisbury; but as he had lived so many years there, and was well known, agitation against him was not countenanced by the inhabitants, and the use of the Council Chamber of the city as a place of meeting was refused to them. Those parties came to the place in order to make his residence as uncomfortable as they could; but he was happy to say that the attempt was an entire failure. He had, on every public occasion, met with every mark of respect and dutiful attention which a Bishop could desire to receive from the residents of his cathedral city and they thought it wrong, after he had acted with the greatest consideration to the feelings of all, that parties should come down and try to disturb him in his home there. The noble Lord had referred to a letter, published in The Times, with the well-known signature of "S.G.O.," and which he had felt bound to notice. Now, if there was one man more than another to whom he was bound by feelings of the deepest affection personally, it was the writer of that letter, who, in the private relations of life, had done him acts of kindness which he never should forget, and had he not been moved by a feeling of

  139
  the highest sense of duty to vindicate the honour of his clergy, whom the writer of the letter had tried to caricature, nothing would have induced him to take the line he did in reference to one he loved. But he did not regret what he had done, for it was done not without consideration and under the influence of honest convictions. Now, all he had to say, in conclusion, was that he intended to persevere in the course he had hitherto adopted, because he was satisfied that the teaching of the High Church party gave what was the most natural and plain and honest exposition of the meaning of the formularies of the Church of England; but the principles on which he intended to administer his diocese he had expressed in a few words in the following passage of his Charge:—
  "I have more faith in another and a simpler remedy, and that is the remedy of patience and charity. I would not question the loyalty of those Churchmen, be they what is called High or be they what is called Low; but I would cling to the belief that continued fatherly kindness on the part of those in authority, and the careful abstinence on all sides from bearing false witness, would do very much to lessen our difficulties, by constraining with the cords of love all, and especially the young, to deal with others, whether above them or below them, with consideration and sympathy, and to temper zeal for God's truth, even when purified of all dross of mere human passion, with the healing waters of charity."
  He had nothing more to say in his defence, and had only to repeat that he would take the earliest opportunity of sending to each of their Lordships a copy of his Charge.
  THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'Ssaid, he did not think that there was more than one single point raised in the course of the discussion with which it could properly be said that their Lordships' House had anything to do. So much was admitted by the noble Lord who presented the petition, and doubtless the noble Lord therein expressed the general opinion of the House. But there was one single point, and one of great importance, with which their Lordships could very properly deal, and therefore he rose to express his earnest hope that the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack would not yield to the temptation which had been held out to him of illustrating, as it was termed, his term of office in the way suggested by the noble Lord who presented the Petition, and that he would not apply his great abilities or take counsel with the most rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Canterbury), whose absence
  140
  from, the House at the moment he regretted, for the purpose of framing any measure for the establishment of fresh Ecclesiastical Courts, in order that spiritual suits might be multiplied to any extent. The multiplication of such suits might be, in the opinion of those who signed the Petition, and in the opinion of the noble Lord who presented it, advantageous to the Church; but he (the Bishop of St. David's) thought that few of their Lordships would think it an unmixed good. In his humble opinion, it would be an unmixed evil.
  LORD PORTMANsaid, that it had pained him very much to hear the right rev. Prelate state that he adhered to every word he had written, and that he intended to persevere in the course he had adopted. This made it the more necessary to improve the procedure in the Courts, as the remedy would be needed. He would warn the right rev. Prelate to beware how he continued to support the plan to consecrate a second Bishop in the diocese of Natal. Bishop Colenso cannot be deposed from his temporalities, and it is believed that Bishop Hamilton cannot be deprived of those of Salisbury; but if he succeeds in his efforts to obtain a second Bishop in Natal, the Petitioners may claim a second Bishop in the diocese of Salisbury—what is good in a colony may be equally good at home; but in the opinion of most men, in which he (Lord Portman) agreed, it would be an unmixed evil. In reply to what had been stated in reference to the establishment of new Courts, he explained that he did not ask for the establishment of any new tribunal. All he asked for was that what was permitted in Criminal and Civil Courts might be done in Ecclesiastical Courts.
  THE BISHOP OF LONDONsaid, he should feel sorry it should be supposed that the right rev. Bench generally were desirous of perpetuating legal processes which were at once cumbrous and expensive. He heartily concurred with his right rev. Friend who spoke last but one (the Bishop of St. David's) in the opinion that it would be a very great misfortune if a number of cases involving questions of doctrine should be continually coming before our Courts; but he could not, at the same time, help thinking that to make such cases cumbrous and expensive was an inconvenient mode of restraining them. While, therefore, he was as anxious as his right rev. Friend could be to prevent the multiplication of those cases, he trusted rather

  141
  to the good feeling and good sense of the clergy throughout the country for the attainment of that object than to the other means which had been suggested. He must express it to be his belief that it would be well if our Ecclesiastical Courts were placed on a footing of greater harmony with the spirit of the other Courts of the kingdom. It had in former times been urged that it was desirable that proceedings in the Civil Courts should be cumbrous and expensive, inasmuch as a check would by that means be placed upon litigation; but upon that point public opinion had since undergone a complete change, and it was now universally held that if the majesty of justice was to be maintained that object could most effectually be gained by having causes tried before a tribunal which was at once cheap and good. He might further observe that it was not the framework of our Ecclesiastical Courts that stood in need of any considerable alteration. What was required was that a more simple mode of procedure should be established in them, and he, for one, could never understand why rules should not be laid down for the transaction of the business in those Courts such as the Judges of the Superior Courts were enabled to lay down for inferior tribunals in civil matters. If such a course were adopted, and rules for the regulation of proceedings were framed by the highest judicial and ecclesiastical authorities, as had to some extent been done already in Ireland, great waste of time would, he thought, be avoided, and much good accomplished, without effecting a revolution or even any great change in the constitution of the Ecclesiastical Courts. He hoped he might be allowed to add a few words on the other subject brought before the House. He differed in many important particulars from his right rev. Friend behind him (the Bishop of Salisbury). While, however, he entertained that difference of opinion, he must admit that his right rev. Friend had taken great pains in the formation of his peculiar views, and it was not likely that he would be induced to change those views even by the forcible eloquence of the noble Lord opposite. He understood, indeed, the right rev. Prelate to say that, having formed them maturely, he intended to persevere in holding them; but there was little doubt that he would also persevere in that course which he had hitherto pursued, of dealing with perfect fairness and impartiality with all the
  142
  clergy of his diocese. He had, indeed, good reason to know that persons who differed from his right rev. Friend materially had found in him a kind adviser; while the respect in which he was personally held in his diocese, owing to the deep religious tone of his life, was, he believed, as great as was ever paid to any Prelate in the present or former times.
  Petitions ordered to lie on the table.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Five o'clock.