Star. — London, England, 1824-05-05 00:00:00

the Church of England had enjoyed; seas the celebra tion of marriage by her Ministers in Churches and in Chapels of Ease. If, however, this edifice were per mitted to be undermined—if stone after stone were to bi taken up—and if, beyond all value, the corner-stone ♦were also to be destroyed, what must be expected at last? He would appeal to their Lordships once more, as to persons who had been educated under the shelter of the Established Church—who were not, who could not be indifferent to that Church—not unguardedly to relinquish that systemwhich their ancestors had defended -so long, and which, happily, was interwoven with the very beit interests of the State. He begged their Lord ships for these reasons not to suffer the present 13111 to go into a Committee; and he should accordingly mi.ve that, instead of now, the Bill be committed for this day three months. The Bishop of EXETER spoke rather in favour of the Bill, but admitted that it ought so far to be aisimi lated to that passed last Session as to provide for the prevention of clandestine marriages. He also thought that Unitarian marriage registers had better be kept by themselves. He wished to see the Bill amended, but not abandoned ; and therefore he was for proceeding to a Committee at once. The Bishop of ST. DAVID'S objected to the pretence by which the Unitarians were anxious to press the Bill, for he certainly did not conceive that even in this en lightened age the majority of the people were disposed to reject the doctrine of the Trinity. If the objection went to affect the solemnization of Matrimony in the Church, it must also tend to weaken the authority of the Scriptures. The words complained of contained no declaration on the part of the Unitarians at all offensive to conscientious minds; and if their Lordships were con ceding now, they might presently be asked to concede to the conscientious scruples of those who denied the truth of Christianity altogether. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said it was per fectly true that the Unitarians denied the doctrine of the Divine Trinity ; for they questioned both the Divi nity of JESUS Curtiss and the personality of the Holy Ghost ; and it was because they denied these religious points that they now asked relief from their Lordships. Did the House wish, under such circumstances, to obtain a simulating or seeming acquiescence in the doctrines of the Established Church from persons who so far dis sented from them ? It would, he believed, be as much a relief to the Ministers of the Establishment not to be under the obligation of marrying such persons, as lot the Unitarians not to be so united in marriage. Explanations took place between the Bishop of ST. DAVID'S and the Archbishop of CANTERBURY. The Marquis of LANSDOWN now observed, that he should be sorry, after what he had heard respecting the present Bill in and out of the House, and after what lie had read in print, to allow the question for going into a Committee to be finally put without just adverting to the statements he referred te. It had been asserted, for instance, that the Marriage Law should be suffered to rest upon the foundation it assumed at the time of Wil liam HI. hut, if that were allowed, there would have ; occurred no necessity for the present Bill. The real fact happened to be, that the law in agitation had under gone some retrogradation since the time of that Mo narch by the introduction, in 1756, of the Act called Lord Hardwicke's, the object of which was, certainly not to ' , moire a simulant consent in marriage, but merely to pl event the celebration of clandestine mar riages. 11, therefore, in order to prevent such mar it r as necessary to inv,olve the Dissenters in the provisions of that particular Act, they were upon that account now entitled to the relief sought by the present Bill ; for no alteration was asked, as the Right Reve rend Prelate who opened the debate thought, in the Liturgy of the Church of England. But the Unitarian Dissenters did ask not to be subjected to an expense from which no advantage could accrue to them, and also to be exempted from the necessity of admitting doc trines which they were prepared both to deny and reject ; and unless they held blasphemous and seditious opinions, and offended against the law s, they were entitled to in dulgence. lie was told, 1p )v ever, that the present Bill was a stroke aimed at the Establishment of the Church of England, not indeed by the patrons of the Bill sitting in that House, but by the contrivers of the measure out of it; and therefore he called on the Noble and Learned Lord upon the Woolsack to point out whether the Bili aimed at the doctrines or at the revenues of the Church. The system had long been general in Ireland. It met with the itpprobation of the Privy Council at one time, and with the concurrence of Lord Thurlow, and there fore their Lordships would be surprised to find that the only one objection was to its not going far enough. It passed the Irish Commons without opposition; but in the Lords it was objected to upon the grounds of clan destine marriages and want of facility in cases of di vorce. He should have expected no opposition to the present Bill, except from those who held that Unitarians were unfitted for living in civil society; for if society must continue to exist, then, he would contend, all Uni tarians ought to be admitted to contract marriage in the way their consciences might direct the solemniza tion of it; far in proportion as importance was attached to marriage at all, in that same proportion he wished for no conviction hut that springing from the heart. Did it become the Established Church of England to countenance a subterfuge at her altars—a subtet fuge unworthy of a Christian community, unworthy of a Pi o testant Legislature, and most unworthy of the toles ant Church of England, which wished for tio subjection that was not vital to her support, no inhibition not neces sary to her existence? It was upon these grounds, therefore; the present Bill came recommended to their Lordship; but he wa , , ready to amend it in part, and would be happy to give lull cousideration to the sug gestions of their Lordships. As to the objection taken by one Right Reverend Prelate with regard to the regis tration of marriages of. Dissenters by Alinisters of the Establishment, it might or might not be considered as offensive in certain quarters; but he was persuaded that there would be no objection on the part of Unita rians to register their own marriages when empowered to marry in their own places of worship. The LORD Cll ANCELLOR said,. the Noble Lord who had just sat down had on a foimer occa,ion been pleased to find fault with hi •ii for expressing some doubts respecting the legality of tolerating the doctrines of the Unitarians. Their Lordships knew very well that per9ous holding those doctrines were excluded the bene fit of the Toleration Act, passed in the 9th of William the Third; and he knew that it had been as►crted in the writings of some great and eminent ecclesiastics, that the repeal of that Act removed all the restrictions, not only of that Act, but those which existed previously to the pas►ing of it, and even those which were imposed by the Cosamon Law upon the bold4rs of such doctrines. ootyithstanding the opinion which bid been so ex- pressed, he knew that at the time of repealing that Act no such view of the operation of that repeal was con templated by the person who brought forward the Bill by which it was repealed in the other House; but that the intention of that person was to leave the holders of such doctrines on the same footing on which they stood under the Common Law previous to the passing of the Act of the 9th of Williafn lit. Those doctrines were described in that Act as opposed to Christianity, and were therefore criminal at Common Law ; and what ever might be the state of the law repealing the punish ments affixed by that Act to the entertaining of such doctrines, it did not go to legalise those doctrines. The Noble Marquis, in the arguments which he had drawn from the state of the law in Ireland upon this subject, had laid down principles which, if admitted, would go to esta blish the necessity of passing this Bill not only in favour of the Unitarians, but of every other class of Dissenters. It was said that they ought to be put upon the same footing as Jews and Quakers. Bat what had been done for Jews and Quakers? They were excepted from the operations of the Act of 17.56, which provided that the marriages of Jews and Quakers should be as valid after the passing of that Act as they were before. But what it was that made these marriages valid before the passing of that Act, although he had been occupied for eighteen days in hearing arguments and authorities on both sides in a case involving a question of legiti macy arising out of the effect of a marria , , , ,e of that desc►iption of law, he did not know how to decide, and he believed their Lordships would rather undergo the tortures of the Inquisition, than be condemned to hear the arguments which he had been obliged to listen to on the subject. If he had understood the docti ines of the Church of England at all, which perhaps lie did not—and really, after what he had heard on this occa sion, he was some•xhat afraid that he might he mi.,- taken on that head—it was impossible that a greater repugnance could exist between those doctrines and any other doctrines whatever than that which did exist between the doctrines of the Church of England and those of the Unitarians ; and he for one felt, and must ever continue to feel, the most decided objeztion to the Church of England being made the handmaid on a Church so decidedly opposed to it in doctrine as the Unitarians, which, he must say, appeared to him to be the whole scope of this Bill. Rather let them be en tirely separated—let them take the same benefit of ex emption from the provisions of the Act of 1756, as the Jews and Qurakers, and leave it to themselves to tend with and clear up the difficulties of their own situation. But he could not, to the policy of preventing clandestine marriages, sacrifice the great and paramount policy of upholding the dignity and authority of the Church of England • and he would not be accessary to the degradation, in which that Church would be in. volved by the adoption of the principle of this Bill.— Having said this much in explanation of the grounds on which he never could consent to this Bill going into the Committee, he felt that he had discharged his duty, and he should conclude by expressing his sincere be lief that a worse Bill had never been introduced into that house. Lord HOLLAND said be had been reading a witty and humorous Work, written by Mr. Cooper, in which he found the following story:—" Sam bum., a cele brated lawyer of his day, was observed walking on the beach at Ramsgate in deep meditation. His friend asked what absorbed his attention? lam thinking,'' said Core, ' how it is possible a small sprat can come from this great ocean!'" The Noble Lot d was surprised on this occasion, how a miserable spat, which he con sidered the Bill, could make so much splashing in that grave assembly. lle was astonished to hear a Noble and Learned Lord cry 66 Wolf" on the appearance of, so small an animal. Any stranger would suppose the State was endangered by the Bill under consideration, when the fact was, the only object was to put Unita rians, with tespect to their marriages, on the same foot ing as they stood in Ireland. The Noble Baron sup ported the measure, and contended that it ought to be considered in a Committee. After some observations fi am the Bishop of CIiESTF.It and Lord LIVERPOOL, a division took place, when there appeared, For the Amendment - 55 I Against it - Proxies -50 I Proxies - 41 - '2j 105 I Majority against the Bill - 39 The MI is tbetefore HOUSE OF COMMONS. Colonel TALBOT presented a Petition from certain Tradesmen and Fishermen of Skerries, in the County of Dublin, against the repeal of the Fish Bounties. Mr. AIUN DAY presented a Petition from the Licensed Victu allers of Derby, against the Beer Duties Bill. Mr. D. GILBERT presented a Petition front Penzance, in fa vour of the County Courts Bill. Mr. DENMAN presented a Petition front the Barristers of the Palace Court, against the County Courts fill, and praying that some compensation may be made to them in case it be passed into a law. Sir R. 1-IL RON presented a l'etition from certain Journeymen at Newark, against the Combination Laws.—lieferred to the Com mittee upon Artisans. Petitions were presented in favour of the Hides and Skins 13111, from the Butchers of Wolverhampton, Cupar in Fife, Peterbo rough, Carlisle, Br.c. and against it, irom the Tanners of Liverpool, Norwich, and some other places. Mr. K. DOUGLAS prestlited a Petition from the Commission en of Supply and the Land-owners of the County of Dumfries, relative to the state of the spirit Duties in Scotland. Dlr. id YNG presented a Petition from certain Landholders of Middlesex, againstthc turthercontinuance of the Sal' Duties. Mr. LEYCliz..aEll complained of the unequal operation of these Duties, which pressed with great severity upon the agricultural la. bourers.—The Petition was laid on the table. '.‘11 . . C. ELLISON presented a Petition from the ship-owners of South Shields, praying that sea-borne coals should not be subjected to a greater duty than was levied on coals conveyed by any other species of carriage. —Laid on the table. Mr. LOCKHART presented a Petition front the tanners and cnrriers in the neighbourhood of Oxford, against the Hides and Skins Bill.—Referred to the Committee on the said um. Mr. LITTLFION moved for a return of the Duties received, and the drawbacks vaid, on glass imported into, and exported front Great Britain, from the year 1818 to the year 1824, distinguishing the amount in each year.—Ordered. Mr. J. BROWNE presented a Petition front the Land-owners and Linen-manufacturers of the county of Mayo, against the repeal of the bounties on coarse linens.—Laid on the table. Mr. HUSKISSON presented :a Petition from the Common Brewers of Liverpool against the new Beer Duties Bill, and a Pe tition from the Tanners against the Hides and Skins Bill, and front the Butchers in favour of it; also a Petition front the Stocking makers of Glasgow against the Combination Laws. Sir T. LETHBR I DGE presented a Petition from Castlecary against the Assessed Taxes. Mr. MA BERL Y presented a Petition from the Tanners of Can terbury, another from the Tanners of Abingdon, and another from the Tanners of Brighton, against the Hides and Skins Bill; also a Pe tition from the Inhabitants of Dartford, against the Assessed Taxes. Lord BELGRA VE &notated a Petition from the Tanners of Chester, against the Hides and Skins BilL Mr. A BEIiCROMBY presented a Petition, signed by 4.500 Mechanics of Edinburgh, against the Combination Laws. The Honourable Gentleman also presented a Petition from Yougball, in Ireland, against allowing Corn to be taken out of Bond for the purpose of making Flour; and prayitg that the Average Prices of Corn might be more correctly taken. Mr. MONCK presented a Petition from the Par'sh ol" St. George, in Middlesex, against the Duty on Salt. Lord A LTIIORP presented a Petition from Manchester, in fa vour of the County Courts' Bill. A message was brought from the Lords, signifying that their Lordships had agreed to several Bills. WAREHOUSED WHEAT RILL. M r.CURTEIS presented a Petition from the occupiers of land in Sussex, against the Warehoused Wheat Sir I'. LETHBRIDGE was understood to say he should pause before he gave his support to the measure. Mr. HUME thought the principles of the Bill were not properly understood by those who opposed it. Sir J. WROTTESLEY considered, if the Bill should pass into a law, it would have the effect of bringing into the market inferior flour, and sending the good away. Ile hoped a considerable degree of caution and circumspection would be exercised in legislating on this subject, as there was the greatest danger to be apprehended in tampering with it. Mr. CHIN'S was favourable to the Bill. _ _ HUSKISSON would not go into a detail of the , Bill thus prematurely ; however, he could not forbear expressing his sorrow that the subject should be dis cussed on the presentation of a Petition. Mr. D. BROWNE said lie should oppose the Bill. Mr. T. WILSON thought the measure would be pre judicial to the landed interest, and would not be bene ficial to the country at large. The corn holders of Liverpool would reap more advantage from it than any others, as they had more corn and flour warehoused.— The Petition was then read and laid on the table. ORANGE AND RIBBON SOCIETIES. Mr. JOHN SMITII presented a Petition from Far mers in the county of ‘Vestmeath,in Ireland, complaining of the existence of Political Societies, called Orange men and Ribbonmen, by which the peace of the country was disturbed, and the Petitioners rendered insecure in the exercise of their industry. The Hon. Gentleman said, AA hetever an Oianpe Lodge was formed, it was followed by the formation of a Ribbon Lodge, and al most all the dist tit trances of Leland had proceeded from the rancorous licsli'ity of those factions. Ile hoped Gave , nment would take effectual measures to suppress both ; for his own part, he felt more satisfaction in pre senting the Petition of those poor and peaceable Yeti uoners, than he would in presenting a petition from the most opulent class in the community. • S'r JOI IN NEW PORT said, there could be no tran quillity for Ireland tul both factions were put down, and it was fully in the power of the Government to put an end to all such associations; but at present the public' func;ioraries in Leland announced themselves, in the public papers, as Patrons and Grand-masters of some of those societies. NVhile that was the case, it was idle to suppose that there could be peace for Ireland, or that capital would Le transferred to that country—( Hear). The Petition was lead at length, and ordered to be laid on the table, and be printed. IRISH DIOCESAN SCHOOLS. Sir JOHN NEwpoRT presented a Petition from the Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese of Ross, stating that their Diocesan School had been taken from them by the Board of Education, and praying redress. The Honourable Barouct said, in many instances the Board of Education had united two or three diocesan schools together, to the great prejudice of education. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER said, after the condemnation of the Board of Education in Ireland, lie thought it neces , ary to say a fore Cis in explanati.n. The re duction of thii ty-four Diocesan Schools, in Leland, to twelve, had Leen recommended by a former Board of Education, and the present li.)ard had only acted on that recommendation, and appointed places for keeping the schools which appeared to them most eligible ; but the whole subject w mild be taken into consideration by the Commission about to go to Leland. Mr. GOULBURN said, the union of the Diocesan Schools was the subject of much consideration, and it was found that, while the school was in Ross, the beim s were so few, that tl.e master had actually relin quished the salary and removed to Cork to keep a school, where theme was a demand for education. Su. JOHN NEWPORT said, the school had declined in consequence of an imptoper appointment, hut the Petition stated that the school would be of great utility, which sheweJ there would be scholars. Ile wished to know who were the Commissioners that were to go to Ireland to inquire into this important subject? Mr. GOULBURN said, the Commission that would be appointed would be of such a character as to give satisfaction to the Right Hon. Baronet. Mr. PEEL said, he was confident the Commission would merit the approbation of every impartial man.— The Petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. presented a Petition from the Brewers of hen tar, in Scotland, praying a reduction of the Duties on Beer and Malt. The Honourable Gentleman said, that, in consequence of the reduction of the duty on spirits in Scotland, a great diminution had taken place in the sale of beer. There was also a difference of 25 per cent. betsseen the quality of malt in Scotland and England, to the disadvantage of the Scotch. He was quite satisfied the simple and effectual mode of proceed ing would be, to lay all the duty on the malt, in propor tion to its relative value, and allow the brewers to make from it such beer as be suited their customers. SCOTCH DISTILLERIES. Lord A. lIA MILTON presented a Petition from the Land-ow ners of the County of Lanark, praying that the Distillers of Scotland might be placed on the same footing with the Distillers of Ireland, and be allowed to send their Spirits into England. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it was true he had given reason to suppose that he would, in the course of the present Session, bring forward a de finitive measure on the subject, for certainly nothing could be more absurd than the present state of the law, by which Scotch spirits were prohibited from coming into England, and it was his most anxious desire to cor rect die evil; but he greatly regretted that it was not in his power to propose an effectual remedy this Ses sion. He only asked not to be driven to a hasty mea sure, and lie felt it was his duty not to lose any time unnecessarily in proposing a measure that would be sa tisfactory and effectual. Mr. C. HUTCHINSON said, the Act of Union with Ireland had been violated, by causing Irish spirits to be rectified in England before it was drank, from an opi nion, he supposed, that it was a dangerous spirit, but the truth was, it was a most excellent spirit, and had been drank in Ireland for centuries, and he hoped would for centuries to come—( A laugh). He added, that the prohibition was productive of much smuggling. Mr. MABERLY said, why did not the Honoui able Member propose the only practicable and efficient re medy, an equalization of the duties ?—(Hear) out that were done, all would be in vain. Mr. HUME remarked, that he .wished the cqualiza ticn of duties as much as any man—(T ear, hear).— Pt titian ordered to be printed. CHANCERY COMMISSION. Mr. J. WILLIAMS asked whether the evidence which might be taken by the Chancery Commissio n would be reported? Mr. PEEL replied in a low tone of voice, but he was understood to state, that the reporting of evidence formed no part of the instructions to the Commissioners. EMPLOYMENT OP THE IRISH POOR. Mr. W. L. MABERLY, in moving for the Howe to resolve into a Committee to consider of an Address to the Crown upon the employment of the poor in Ireland, bespoke the favour and indulgence of the tiou.ie. H e disowned any political motive—he had nothing to alle ge against the Ministers of the Government. Th e "7 4 which Ireland suffered were particular. With the sank laws, customs, and manners with the Engli-h, there were moral causes which made them differ ait(Te:hei. The most prominent cause of these calamities w as t„ lit found in the redundancy of the population—not that .; was too great for the capabilities of the soil, but it ss.,, far too gteat for the means of employment. It was n. t for him to say what was the primary cause of this re dundancy. Some ascribed it to the potatoe, though ns t very accurately. He believed that the population wary!. be redundant if the food were wheat, or anything higher ; though he could readily admit that a population whici : with potatoes was seven millions, would not have e s . ceeded with wheat above three or four millions. But from the disproportion of population and employment, the population became degraded and ba.e—a fit Instr.'. ment for factious and designing men ; so that what ever existed there as a local grievance speedily b e . came a subject for general revolt ; and the country always laboured between starving and insurrection...-. The only remedy left, then, was to repress the popula tion by increasing the eapital, and supplying the means of employment. To the misgovernment of Ireland, ustlybe uland to the want of employm u ent d fo n t lig it h s t population, j the evils under which it lithoze attri buted. The Honourable Member then proceeded to quote, in support of this as,errion, the evidence gives before a Committee of that House, by the Honourable Nlember for Mayo (Mr. Brown), and by Mr. Owen; the latter of whom stated, not only that there was no disturbance where the people were employed, but also, that in those places where disturbances prevailed, 'they bad ceased upon employment being furnished. The Honourable Member alluded also to the evidence of Mr. Griffiths, in a Repot t made to the Irish Govern ment, w ho stated the " improvement which bath been effected in the circumstances of certain labourers, wh had been furnished with sufficient tools, Cie value of they had repaid by instalments, from being able to earn only from 4d. to 6.1. a day, they now earned from 10d. to Is. Was it not then, lie asked, the duty r.f GovernMent to interfere, and by the means of cer tain encouragement, to induce manufacture's to embai their capitals in Ireland, who, without some such is ducement, would never do so ? It might be objected to him that this measure was opposite to all the rules of political economy ; but it was highly illo gical to draw such an inference from a science, sl e rules of which were subject to constant exceptions.—. It would rather become the House to look at the existing state of Ireland, and to draw their deductions how facts, the truth of which could not be gainsaid. The two branches of commerce in which the people of Le land might be most profitably employed were— first, the fisheries ; and secondly, the cultivation of fl ix. The southern and western coasts of Ireland pos,essed almost inexhaustible hanks of fish ; but although, from those coats being open to the Mcditeranean, great advantage; were presented to them in sending their produce ts Catholic countries, where the consumption of fish was very large, they were unable to avail themselves of those advantages, from their want of capital, and their ignorance of the principles of commerce. He (Mr. Maberly) had taken pains to procure returns 'dative to the growth of flax from Holland, Flanders, and Russia ; and he had uniformly found, upon comparing them with those furnished by the South of Ireland, ilia: the balance was considerably in favour of the latter. The flax could be grown much cheaper there than else where—the duty was so small, that it was almost a non-existing quantity ; and the Manufacturers were able to consume all the material they produced. He might be asked, after this statement, how it was that Ireland did not avail herself of these advantages ? His reply was, that she could nut do so, as well for want of the necessary skill as for want of capital. It was to supply these wants that he was about to propose the advance on the part of the Government of so much capital as would excite the dormant faculties of those who were most interested in the welfare of Ireland, and would en ' courage others to venture their property,and to apply that skill so necessary to the success of the manufacturers. Embarrassed as the landed Gentlemen of Ireland were known to be, it was very probable that some of them would endeavour to make use of this advance for the purpose of redeeming their mortgages, and prefer pay ing a small interest to the Government, than the large interest with which their incumbrances were already charged. It was therefore his intention, as well to pre vent this evil, as to avoid that other of the political in fluence which might be exercised by means of such ad vances, to propose that inspectors should be appointed, and that penalties should be provided for all misappli cations of the fund. He alluded to the benefit which had already been derived from the charitable loans which the Government had made in Ireland, and which had proved powerful incentives to good conduct. It was impossible to mention a more striking instance of the good which might be hoped to result from the ex tension of manufacture in Ireland than this that wherever the linen manufactures had been established, quiet and moral habits seemed also to have taken root, and all the advantages by which industry , was usually accompanied had been experienced by the people of the neighbourhood. He concluded by moving— " That the House do now resolve itself into a Committee to con sider of the propriety of presenting an bumble addreu to his Ma jesty, praying that he will be pleased to grant the advance of a sum not exceeding one million, to be distributed by way of loin, for d.. I employment of the poor and the encouragement of manufactures in the provinces of Munster and Connaught, and that Commissioners be appointed to carry those objects into effect." On the question being put, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER bore testimony to the manner in which the Hon. Member had brought this motion before the House, as well as to the lublic spirit which had actuated him. No one who knew anything of the situation of Ireland could refuse to admit, that although its climate was most happy, its soil exceedingly tertile, and its people vigor ous and spirited, yet, that with all these outward lualities, !rich should contribute to its prosperity , .here were certain internal circumstances in its consti, n- .ion that defeated the promise which was held cut.--