The Press. — London, England, 1858-07-03 00:00:00

Vrattaings Varlianunt. HOUSE OF LORDS-MONDAY. SANIATRy CONVERSATION. LI. d RAVENSWORTH complained of the defective ventilation in the committee rooms of the house. The Earl of MALMESBURY stated that the Govern ment hstl ordered some temporary measures to alle viate the inconvenience produced by the bad air from the river; but any permanent operations that would disturb the deposits on the shore could not be under. taken till the cooler weather of the autumn. Lord BROUOHAN thought there was great danger of the appearance of cholera in the first fortnight of August. The Government ought to assume very complete powers in this matter. After some remarks from the Earl of HARDWICKE ansi the Duke of NEWCASTLE on the efficiency of these palliative expedients, The Eart of MALMESBURY explained that more extensive measures were contemplated by the Govern ment, but they could not be adopted without careful consideration. Earl STANHOPE moved, as a resolution, that an address be presented to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty will be pleased to take into consider ation the proclamation of the first year of her reign, by which the services of the Church for the sth of November, the 30th of January, the 29th of May, and the 20th of June are appointed to be read yearly on those days, and are annexed to the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England ; and, should her Majesty see fit, to substitute for that pro. clamation one declaring that only the service tor the 20th of June, the anniversary of her Majesty's accession, shall henceforth be so real and published. These services, the noble earl stated, were not founded on the votes of Convocation, or on Acts of Parliament, but on the royal proclamation alone. He asked their removal, because they deserved no part of the admiration the beautiful and majestic Liturgy of the Church commanded, but were rather a blot and stain upon it. The lapse of a century and a half since the most recent of the events celebrated had taken place rendered it no longer proper or desirable to continue these services, but there were &so special objections to the language of the services themselves, which in some passages resembled that of a party pamphlet. Having noticed some of these passages, especially in the service for the 30th of January, and the feeling of the times when they were written, he said he proposed to proceed by way of an a 'dress to the Crown, rather than an act repealing the old statute, because the moment the Crown ceased to provide the services the statute would become obsolete. But after the address had been issued the Sovereign might be advised to propose to Partiamant the repeal of the ancient acts. Even now, though the services were ordered to he used by the proclamation, clergymen were not compelled to read them, as they formed no part of the Prayer book, "as by law established;" in very few churches were they retained, and recently some cathedrals had released themselves from the duty of reading them. The tendency cf the services was to make the Church political, and he believed the very best results might be expected from their discontinuance. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY had felt bound by duty to oppose the plan of a revision of the Liturgy, on account of the controversies to which the revision would give rise ; but the present proposal was not liable to that objec tion. Practically, the State services were already obsolete, and their removal from the Prayer book would be generally sanctioned by public opinion. The feelings excited by the events celebrated had died out, and the services had fallen into des uetude ; it was better they should he regularly abolished than irregularly disregarded. He sup ported the motion. The Bishop of LONDON contended that the bishops had full power to effect what was one chief object of Lord Ebery's motion of the 6th of May,—namely, to shorten the regular services of the church by dividing them ; no Act of Parliament was required to confer powers already existing. The present motion differed materially from the proposal to introduce changes into the Liturgy itself. Ho approved the abolition of the State services. It was asserted they were very seldom read ; but they were read just at the times and in th e pl aces where it was least desir able they should be heard—in all the College chapels, In the great seminaries of education. lie asked 11 these services ought not to cease? He objected to the position in which they placed both the Sovereign and the clergy, and to much of the language to be found in them ; they had become empty forms, and no one would regret their abolition. The Duke of MARLBOROUGH thought the services might be modified, withont removing them from the Prayer -book altogether; in an improved form they might be retained as memorials of past events of the national history. THE PRESS, JULY 3, 1858. The Bishop of BANGOR did not defend all the ex• plessions these services contained ; but they might be accepted by any pions man without scruples. The Bishop of OXFORD could not accept them as proper exponents of natiotial humiliation or gratitude. They contrasted unfavourably with the prayers of the Liturgy ; they were far too political, polemical, and epigrammatical. He strongly objected to any alteration of the Book of Common Prayer; but these services ought not to be annexed to it. The Bishop of CASHEL supported the motion. The Earl of MALMESBURY thought the better course would be at once to move the repeal of the statutes on which the proclamation was founded ; the other house would then express Its opinion on the subject, which would strengthen the Crown in dealing with it. The Bishop of Sr. AsArt{ could not support the motion, and deeply regretted that it bad been made. The motion, amended by the omission of the reference to the service of the :20th of June, wa3 agreed to. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS-MONDAY. At the morning sitting the house was , - I;cupied in committee with the details of the Universities (Scotland) Bill. FUNDED DEBT BILL. In the evening, on the order tor going into com mittee on this bill, Mr. WILSON moved a resolution, — That the extraordinary expenditure incurred during a war beyond what is obtained from taxation should be raised in the form of terminable loans, the redemption of which should be provided for within a specified period after tie return of peace; or, if raised by loans in the shape of permanent snnnitiea, that a provision should be made for the liquidation of the same by moderate annual instalments, after the war expenditure shall have ceased, from surplus revenue. He did not desire, he said, to disturb the budget or to embarrass the finances of the present year ; he only wished to caution the bless against committing itself rashly to the absolute repudiation of obliga tions contracted at the commeacement of the late war. In viewing our finansial pr Jspects, he dwelt upon what he termed the shri&ng aspect of out national debt, and insisted thy, by gong on as at present, it would be impossible not to ly to repeal taxes but to fulfil our obligations, .be succession du .y having disappointed expectations, while the income tax, our sheet anchor, was to be abandoned, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer's promised snrplus was melting away and becoming a deficiency. He urged that the bill should be altered so as to postpone, instead of repealing, the Sinking Fund clauses, and that there should be an inquiry next session into the state of our finances. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that the resolution involved propositions of a very ques tionable character, and that, it there was to be sn inquiry into our finances next session, it might have been as well had Mr. Wilson postponed his motion until then. It was unwise, in his opinion, for the house to bind itself by such a resolution. The great objection he had to an artificial sinking fund, created by imposing taxes, was that it was a mere theoretical arrangement that would not work. The real practical question was, would the house support the law of 1829, which had fulfilled its purpose ? We could not have the sinking fund of 1820 and the artificial sinking fund adopted during the war. The former could not be given tap but upon a demonstration that it had failed in its object, whereas he maintained that it had succeeded. Mr. W. WILLIAMS denounced the bill as a breach of faith with the public creditor, and a repudiation of an important financial engagement. Mr. GLADSTONE denied that the bill was an act of repudiation or a violation of any engagement with the public creditor. He was grateful, he said, to Mr. Wilson for having called attention to the sub jects noticed in his speech, in which there was much that was sound. But it was impossible for him to vote for the resolution, because he was sceptical as to Mr. Wilson's views regarding a sinking fund, and because it was prospective and theoretical. Mr. Wilson bad passed over a capital point, the state of our expenditure. A true sinking fund was to be found in public economy. He thought the Act of 1820 sufficient, and that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer was right in doing away with the sinking fund of 1855. Sir G. LEWIS said be was not prepared to support the resolution on the ground of any contract with the public creditor. He admitted that the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had put the question upon a fair issue, but be disputed the correctness of his theory respecting what he termed a natural sinking fund, resting only upon a surplus, and what he called an artificial sinking fund. He (Sir George) could not but think that a compulsory sinking fund, which was in constant application by the house for the extinction of debt, was a sound and wise iuciple. 639 Mr. CARDWELL thought it would not be wise to adopt the resolution, which would be only a new prospective engagement for the reduction of our debt. Nothing was easier than to make such an engage ment ; the difficulty was to keep it. Lord J. Russ Err. said Mr. Wilson had raised two questions : one was of an abstract nature, relating to the mode of reducing the debt ; the other referred to the financial arrangement for the present year. With regard to the first he differed from Mr. Wilson ; he believed that the Act of 1829 was founded upon a sound principle, and he did not regret that we were going hack to it. AS to the financial proceedings for the present year, it was indispensable that there should be a clear surplus revenue, and lie did not see that the Chancellor of the Exchequer bad pro- vided for such surplus. Mr. W. EwART could not vote for the resolution. The motion was then negatived, and the bill went through the committee. CAPTAIN VIVIAN'S RESOMTION. On the order for going into committee of supply, Captain VIVIAN called attention to the resolution relating to milital y organization adopted by the house on the Ist of June, and to the unsatisfactory and unprecedented position in which it was placed by the reply of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a question as to whether it was intended to take any no:ice of that resolution—namely, that. considering the importance of the subject, the small number of members present at the decision, and that the ma• jority was a bare one, it was not the intention of the Government to take any stens in the matter. He explained and enforced the object of his resolution. which, he said, was not to do away with the office of Commander-in• Chief as regarded the discipline of the army, and transfer its functions to a civilian, but to consolidate the authority of the War Department under one responsible head. The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER observed that the Government had only taken the parliamentary course usually taken under such circumstances, and which they were bound to take. The motion was carried unexpectedly, and, he believed very much to the surprise of the whole house, by a bare ma jority. It had never been acknowledged that when the house bad arrived at a resolution, the decision was irrevocable and binding. Resolutions of equal importance to the present had been carried in that house (and he specified instances) in 'which the Minister had not thought it necessary to act upon them, and it bad been the duty of the Government in this case to consider and be guided by precedents. He defended our system of military administration, as more consistent with our • • form of government than the centralized systems of military Staten. Lord J. RUSSELL denied that the precedents cited by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were applicable to the present case, with one exception, which ought not, he said, to sanction a practice of placing reso lutions on the journals to be neglected, despised, and set at nought. If the Government did not intend to act upon the resolution, they should move the house to rescind it. General PEEL said he was responsible for the acts of the Commander-in• Chief, and so far from thtro being any difficulty in carrying on the duties of their offices, they had only one duty and responsibility, to promote the good of the army. STATE OF THE THAMES. Mr. ROTIPELL called attention to the noxious st of the Thames, and moved that the house conside r it the duty of the Executive Government to take immediate measures for abating this dangerous nuisance. He contended this was not a local, but an imperial question. All agreed that the work for getting rid of the sewage should be a grand work, and he contended that it would not be practicable, and, if practicable, it would be un just to charge the expense upon the metropolitan districts. The motion was seconded by Sir J. PAXTON, who suggested that the nuisance might be alleviated, or abated temporarily, by putting into the sewers lime and water mixed ; though he admitted that this deodorizing process would kill the fish. Lord J. MANNERS stated the steps which had been taken by the Government, who had authorized the Metropolitan Board of Works to apply a preparation of lime in the manner suggested by Sir J. Paxton, as a palliative. Some further conversation followed touching chiefly the question whether the charge should be local or national, in the course of which the Crux- CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER announced that the lime remedy would cost 1,5001. a week. The motion was withdrawn. WEEDON. Colonel BOLDER() moved thitt an address be pre sented to her Majesty, praying that she will be pleased to appoint a royal cononi , sion to inquire into the systein upon which the books and stock have been respectively kept at Weedon, as well as the general mode in which the busin•.ss of the estali h:,,hreent at Weedon has been conducted, the result -