Star. — London, England, 1821-02-16 00:00:00

r - rant' mermen, giving the Wee Interpretation to the Act as the Noble Lord, negleCted praying for her successor, thinking that the operation of the law was rioted to her. For that omission th e y we r e in 'te. &se l l in the Supreme Cottrt, and he could refer to A 'the decisions to shew that the Act w as not limited to the re i gn ing Sovereign. He had found two instances l •ie the State. Trials, of Clergymen being indicted for the omission in question, and had discovered various e th ers in the Records of the Court of Chancery. He f o und that in January, 1716, Robert Anstruther was 'Meted for the offence, and John Hay in the same r . They were ordered before the Conn of Justi- T e to ry t hou h the charge was not followed up against e rn . But e now came acethe case of a Clergyman, owned Gu rie, who, in July; 1 7 15, was indicted for / s ea:4 emitting to pray for the King and the Prince bi Wales, and fined £2O. In Howard's State Trials, s re Ll7, p. 782, there was the case of Geo. Robinson, . T eu was indicted under the Statute, and also fined. therlefence set up was, that the party could not be w itted because the names of George I. or of the prince of Wales were not specified in the Act ; and t h e panel (so a prisoner was termed in the Scotch L e o s ubmitted that he had prayed for all the Royal Lev) The next was the case of Daniel Taylor, w ho, in'l7l6, was convicted and punished for the like offence, together with some other Clergrmen.-- This case would be found in the 18th Vol. of the late Trials, page 1383. One half of the penalty s ri sgiven to the informer, and the other half to the poor of the parish. .The Noble Lord, after citing Arne other cases of the same nature, observed, that eons the time of the passing of the Act, the King and the Royal Family were prayed for in Scotland as in this country. Whether those decisions were right of wrong, they were in strict conformity with the law of Scotland. It was fair to conclude, from the character of the Scotch Bench at the roe, that if there had been any doubt upon the legality of the proceeding, the prisoners would have had the ad vantage of it. He had already stated that Queen Anne, and afterwards George 1. were prayed for by name. From that period, with only two exceptions, whenever an alteration was made in the Liturgy in ibis courrtry, an order for the same purpose was sent down to S-'tland. This had been the uniform prac tice from the year 1717 down to the present day. In Ilmtland, nothing disrespectful to the Queen was in vaded by the omission of her name in the prayers of 'is Church—(Near, hear).—The Learned Lord here feed the Order in Council, which was dated Nov. 1818, and directed that " his Majesty King George, Wall the Royal Family," should be prayed for.— aimaintained that the Government were justified bylaw in issuing the Order. It directed that the King should be prayed for, but did not say in what terms, nor did it tie the Clergy down in any respect alto form. He would appeal to any of those Hon. Gmtlemen opposite who had ever been in Church in Scotland to say if they had ever beard the words— eMost Sacred Majesty" uttered. He was sure they lent did. In praying for the King,. the Clergy of icedand were not prohibited from praying for any atisi branch of the Royal Family they might think roper. The King was to be prayed for nontinatim, tad he was free to confess, that according to the principles of the Church of Scotland, he saw nothing lkgal to praying for the Queen nominatise likewise. Jot he deprecated the introduction of sentiments into that Church, which ought never to be introduced in times like the present—(Hear, hear).—He regretted that the Chaplain of the KirkcudbrightYeomanry had not returned an answer to the letter which re quired him to say, whether he meant tO pray for the Queen. He came, and did pray for the Queen by tame, and the Commanding Officer put him in ar rest, confining him to the County until a communi cation was made by the Commanding Officer to Go remment ; and then an intimation was made that the west was at an end, and left it entirely to the indi- Sideals to settle the matter themselves. This pro. seeding could not be blamed on the part of an Offi er, oho wished nothing introduced which could sow my dissentions among his corps. Ile had himself been Rade arbiter by the parties ; his award had not yet ken made public ; and he hoped the House would re no necessity for the production of these Papers. Sr JAMES MACKINTOSH, after commending the candid view, which the Learned'Lord had taken of this question, proceeded to say that he felt himself impelled to offer a few remarks on this question, by time-of duty to his country. His Noble Friend, rho had opened this question, had performed his esk in so able and ample a manner, that he felt it kmecessary to travel extensively into the subject. Me waralsoreiieved from the necessity of going into detail, by the. speech, so full of ability and promise, *kith was made by the Noble Lord who seconded the motion, and whose illustrious name was con. meted with . every struggle that had been made du ring centuries back, for the rights and liberties of England—(Neer). It was delightful to see two men, those ancestors had once headed opposite parties, ow concurring- in a constitutional jealousy of any efringernent upon the independence of the Church tilleotland--(iertr, hear). In following the Noble who seconded the motion, he could only hope %Kra up a pet of the outline which he had sketched. he Learned Lord remembered that one of the first cts of the Presbytery of Scotland, was one connected with the King. They had no intention to reflect on excellence of the Church Establishments in any tier country: but they conceived it to be their duty 'hat form of establishment, to which the' lined. In forminS a new establishe . not think that the inclination s of dui altogether a matter of indifference They did not defy the People, when t make a law for them. They duty as men, to obtain the sanction assembly—(Neer). The Convention issued the Articles of their Creed, one hich was, that "The Church bad no With that confession of faith in its , entioa Parliament took the Church with the State. The Church was le Act of Union with England, and the Sovereign of England took an it in all its rights and privileges. state of the fundamental law on duel ince then an Act was made, which dee • that funJar:rental law. He did not mean generally that no Statutes ought to be al :r-to depart from a fundamental law, that ace to assert: but hs contended, that Acts ni I* ' of Parliament which did *0 depart from the funda mental law ought to be construed with the utmostjea lousy. The Statute of Anne which the Learned Loid r .cited was an Act of that description ; it was therefore drrctiuimi Learned and ought to be construed most ri gidly. The Learned Lord would excuse him (Sir James), who had been brought up a Member of the Episco rpallan Church, and - had ever since remained so, it he would take the liberty to remark that that statute was brought in by the last Ministers of Anne, with an excellent professed object, bat a bad intention.— The intention of it was to give strength to a faction which then meditated the destruction of the Church of Scotland, by imposing on the Presbytery the same rules as had been imposed on the Episcopalian Church. —But there were a few men of the old Cameronian. fervour, who still were unwilling to pray for an un covenanted King, and they objected to it. The clause was in consequence rendered temporary, not in its frovision, but because the subject matter of it ceased 'Sadist, for it applied only to " the Queen and the Princess Sophia while living." It was true a certain number of convictions had taken place under the Act during the four years which jotervened between the two rebellions, a period.far• from favourable to calmness and impartiality of.clecision, because the Courts necessarily shared'in the angry feelings which at that time raged to an excessive degree. Those decisions were, on that account, of less value, having been made, as it were, on the' ashes of one rebellion, and while another rebellion 'was kindling. The con victions, therefore, of the non= e ing Clergymen did not go for much with him. Magistrates were more likely at that time to be influenced by party teal than by a calm reverence for the principles of law. With the Learned Lord, he gave the tribute of applause to the Government of that day, who re sisted the party of a man who founded his claim to the Throne on what was now called legitimacy, but was then called " Divine right," but which, under either name, was a gross usurpation on the most sacred rights of mankind—(Hear, hear).—But the precedents were still drawn from times, and con nected with acts, which he knew no man living would now attempt to justify. They all amounted to this, that by a laxity of construction of the 10th of Anne, the Clergymen were called on to pray for the reigning King by name. But that was not, after all; the question before the House. The true question here was waived, and kept out of sight by the Noble Lord with great dexterity. The question here was, not whether the Ministers of the Crown were to be blamed flsr issuing an Order to the Church of Scotland to pray for the King by name. What he blamed them for was, that that Order implied an omission of the name of her Majesty—(Hear, hear). They issued an Order of the same description to both Churches, that of Scotland and that of En ;land. In 4n g land it was understood universally as an order not to pray for the Queen. Now, even according to the reasoning of the Learned Lord himself, the Mb of Anne did not afford the Ministers an authority to that extent. The King of England was admitted not to be the Head of the Church of Scotland, and the 10th of Anne gave no power to authorize the omis sion of names. .Thelearned Lord admitted that one part of the Order, as applied to Scotland, was absurd and useless. It recited the 92d of George 111. ac cording to which it would become necessary for Scot land to follow the formula of the Church of Eng land. By reciting that Act, the Order commanded them to observe the same formula, against which, in former times, Scotland had so lung and so success fully contended. The Learned Lord talked of usage, and referred to the Order in Council of 1714. It was true, the Synod ;lid then recommend to the Church an acquiescence in all reasonable directions from the King; but still those directions were now admitted to have rto binding power; so that, in spite of the Order in Council, every Clergyman of the Church of Scot land could pray for the Queen by name, if he chose. What, then, he asked, was the real state of the case? Why, it - was this, that the Ministers advised the King to issue an Order which might be disobeyed with im amnity, and thus exposed his dignity and his autho rity to insult, because the order was of no force as it respected the Established Church of Scotland— Wear, hear).—As to the question of usage, it weighed nothing with him, if the usage itself was bad. The same plea might have been advanced for the " gene ral warrants,' before the question concerning them was finally decided. That usage, he admitted, might be pleaded in justification of Ministers, if the question here was, whether the Ministers were to be impeached. If they were to be impeached, the usage perhaps might "go to prevent it. But, in the admissions which were made, he was ready to allow that enough was done to atone for the insult which was offered to the inde. pendence of the Church of Scotland ; though he' could not but observe that the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, acting perhaps on the ire .cedents ok a certain other illustrious Assembly— (ltear, hear)—adopted a mode of evading.the Order, without passing a declaratory Resolution against it. When such a Resolution was proposed, did they ne gative it P—No. They passed the Ordersover without censure, on the ground that they were assured Minis ters proposed to convey in it no hostile intention against the Church of Scotland. Now, it could not be questioned that the whole object of that Order was to obtain the omission of her Majesty's name in the Prayers of the Church. The Learned Lord, while be, admitted that every Clergyman of Scotland bad it right to pray for the Queen if he chose, 'yet- added, that he would think better of the Clergyman who would omit her name : that, he said, was the most impartial mode of proceeding. The Learned Lord knew that there were two great parties in the country —one who believed in the guilt, another who was convinced of the innocence of the Queen. And yet, the Learned Lord 'said, that the only'way for a Cler gyman to chew that he was of no party, was to omit her name in his prayers—in other words, to become one of the party of the Courtl—(Hear, hear). That was the Learned Lord's recipe fir impartiality— (Heer, hear). He was afraid that there were somt- Clergymen in Scotland, who would find the Learned Lord s favour of as much importance as his construc tion of an Act of Parliament, and that they would , feel an inclination to prefer his law to that which they might receive from other masters—(Hear, bear). — In choosing, however, the Learned Lprd as umpire, the Clergyman had acted as he himself would have done under the circunistances: If he had-occasion in any private concern to ask any map to bean umpire, be knew no per** whom be mold prefer to the • rid Lord. It was said that tills was a private injury. The private injury, however, was not the question here. The question was as to the national consequences of the Orde. in Council, oppression was not suffered by one of his Majesty's subjects, and if they were not to inquire into the loss ofliberty in flicted upon him ? It also embraced the consideration of the probable tendency of such an act to-cause ge neral injury to the People, and in that view he looked upon the motion of his Noble Friend as justly entitled to the attention of the House. Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that the speech of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman had pro duced so little impression on the House, that he did not think it necessary to follow him in the course of observation which he had taken. Ile would recal the attention of the House to the question before them. He did not see how the emotion was calcu lated to tranquillize the country, though he was ready to admit that it avoided all circumlocution, and put the question fairly to issue. He could not help observing, that the speech of the Honourable and LearnEd Gentleman appeared to him to be com posed only of detached parts of another speech, which was framed for another state of cirmunstanceL He did not mean to say that the Hon. and Learned Gen leman could not make a speech on the spot, but he believed - that the Honourable and Learned-Gentle man did come down to the House prepared to com lain of the independeiThe of the Church of Scotland b‘g violated, by an Order, commanding them to pray for the King and Royal Family. He would put it to the candour of the Honourable and Leainetki Gentleman, if he really had any coaception of' the answer which was . given by his Right Honourable Friend near -him, to the motion of the Noble Lord, and if he had nbt formed-the outline of another and quite a differ ent speech-in his own mind ?—(Hear, hear, aad laughter.) The Noble Lord had broughf forward two charges with respect ro two private in. dividuals. He would put it to the House, whether it was the duty of Government to take upon itself to 'administer .justice between man ,and man ?— (Bear, hear)—and whether the time of this House was to be taken up with cases of individuals, who had their remedies in the common Courts of 'Law.? It was not the object of. the Noble Lord to obtain that justice, for here it could not properly be admi. nistered. But the object was to poison .the public mind with these cases, while the Courts of Law were amply open to them—(Hear).—The Noble Lord pro duced those cases, and called for information in order not to redress them, but to see if the Government was in any -way implicated with them. As to the cases themselves, both had been settled, one by the Superior Presbytery, and the other by the act of the party. As to the motion itself, the Noble Lord must have felt it'fall from his hands, after the able state ment of his Right Hon. Friend. The Noble Lord would allow him to say, that the real object of the motion was for any other practical purpose than that of restoring 'tranquillity to the country; and he re gretted to see the great talents of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman misapplied on such an occasion. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said there were precedents only for four years, and that there were none afterwards. What did this prove, but that there were no similar offences since that time. The Hon. and Learned Member threw some reproaches on those decisions because they were made in a time of civil war. If tharrule were applied to the decision upon general warrants, he did not see how the Hon.' and Learned Gentleman could approve of it, for he believed it would be difficult to state warmer times than those in which that question was agitated, and put to rest, he hoped, for ever—(Hear, hear). — The Noble Lord, after praising the speech of his Right Hon. Friend for its clearness and solidity, pro ceeded to' state that he differed with him as to the necessity of sending separate instruments to the dif ferent bodies of the Church in Scotland, and con tended it was sufficient to send the Order to the Church collectively. He then referred to the 32d of George 111. which, he contended, merely applied to the regulation of the Church, and did not bear at all on the question of the Liturgy. 'A Queen was then existing, than whom no Queen was more entitled to the prayers of the People—(Hear hear), . And the Act of Parliament was intended exclusively fOr the regulation' of the Episcopal Church of Scotland. It enacted, " That every such Minister should, as often as he officiated in Chapel, pray for the King by name, his heirs and successors, in the same, manner as he was directed formerly to be prayed for, and by law ful authority." It was true that that lawful autho rity was controuled by the Act of Uniformity, so chat the only chance which the Gentlemen on.the other side had for getting in. the name of the Queen, was by what he considered an illegal interpretation of that Act. If the Honourable and . Learned Gentle man Was not pleased with that law as it stood, he might, if he chose, come forward with a proposition to amend it. He concluded with expressing his be lief that neither the Noble Lord nor the Honourable and Learned' Gentleman had seen the cases which had been cited ; otherwise this motion would not have been brought forward. Mr. J. P. GRANT contended that the sth Geo. I. had repealed the Act of Anne. It *as enacted in 1719, a very short time after the date of the last ca;e which had been cited by the Learned Lord. So far as the penalties were inflicted, the 32d of George repealed botfi the Statutes of Anne and of George I. so that, in fact, that was the trite reason why no pro secutions had taken place since. He then maintained that the step taken by Ministers, Avith respect to Scot land, was precipitate and ill-advised. It introduced divisions among tbe People, and he could not con ceive anything more mischievous. Such an order might have been necessary for England—for Scot land it was useless, and its only object was to stigma. size the character of the Queen. . It was a decided demonstration of' an impotent desire to inflict punish ment, and was altogether unjust and illegal. Mr. MAXWELL said, that if the Noble Lord (A• Hamilton) had brought forward his motion for party purposes, as insinuated by the Noble Lurd (Castle reagh). he,, for one, would not support it. But he was satisfied the motion had no such object. 'le thought the Order was issued; no doubt, for pre ' judging the Queen—(Cheers). --They (in Scotland) had little to boast of in their' Country—less in their Constitution—and, least .of all, in. their Laws— (Hear, hear).—But still they would strtiggle for what their ancestors had, valued so dearly—the lode pendent., of thAr Church l- - (Nevi, hear).—The Order .ht Council tentlect to bring die Royal Ail; .thority into contempt—(Hear, hee3 - • , Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON r os e to reply. If, said the Noble Lord, it should go forth this night s and go to Scotland, that the motion was negatived, on the giound that there existed a right to issue Or ders in Council on the score of Religion, then the House would have cause to lament their vote. It had been imputed by the Noble. Lord (Castlereagh), not more to him (Lord A. Hamilton) than to his Hou. Friends near hini, that they were poisoning the pub lic mind by such motions and discussions. Now, he would say, that if there was one man in that Hous4 who was poisoning the public mind—who was de grading Royalty—who divided one part of the Royal Family against the other—who poisoned the laws themselves—(Loud cheering)—it was the Noble Lord himself, who had, in that House, introduced the de claration, that the Queen, though technically acquit:- ted, was morally convicted !—(Goers.)—He (Lord A. Hamilton) would rather poison the public mind than be guilty of the subversion of public justice. He saw no possibility of the public mind being tranquil lized, so long as the effect of that declaration was un removed—(Checrs).—AVould any man stand up and contend ror the right of issuing an Order'to be scouted and condemned? . A negative on this question would occasion-more mischiefto the best feelifts of the coon , toy than the, House were aware of—(Near, hear). --Lord CASTLE.REAGH explained. He must have been either tinllesud or wholly misunderstood by she Noble Lotd-ieho Inid just spoken. He stated that the .nature of souse-of . the - topidi which had been intro oincid in that debate, were calculated to poison the .public mind ;. without, host•ever, making that charge upon the Noble Lord, iu partic.ular. He had never said that there could be any such thing as a technical conviction. He did say that the nature of the pro ceedings against her Majesty, would not warrant the declaration that she bad been legally acquitted. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH explained.-.-If he were to attempt to act upon the suggestion of the Noble Lord, he would attempt an impossibility. The sth of George the First, rendered it imperative on the Scottish Clergy to pray for the King ; and a disobe dience of that Statute would be immediately followed by a prosecution. _ _ . . Strangers were then ordered to withdraw ; . and oa a division there appeared. For the Motion, 35—Against it, 110—Majority, 75. MISCELLANIES. Mr. C. GRANT obtained leave to Wing in a Bill to regulate the Civil Side of the Court of Kinz's Bench and Common Pleas, and the Common Side of the Court of Exchequer, in Ireland. Sir J. NE %VPO ItT approved of the Bill, as the Taiiug t Ificer had connived at the taking df fees. He hoped the pi would be followed in the Court of Chancery, agreeably to the recommendation of the Commissioners. 11e could convey no idea of the abuses that had taken place in these Court,. Mr. BENNEIT said, that the whole of the credit of these Reforms was due to his Right Hon. Friend (Sir J. Newport), as the measure bad been carried against the• wishes of Ministers. Mr. R. MARTIN said, that in England the Officers were par ticularly chaste in the taxing of costs; and some understaudint should take place as to making the taxing equal in both countries. On the motion of Mr. C. GRANT, it was ordered, that the House should, to-morrow, go into a Committee for the purpose of granting certain compensations to the Officers of the Courts of Justice in Ireland. Sir J. NEWPORT moved for an Account of the Names of the Commissioners, with the Dates of the Commissions, ap pointed to inquire into the Courts of Justice in England. Lord FOLKSTONE moved for an Account of all Addi tions tb Places 'whose Emoluments did not exceed £l5O yearly , since the year 1793. mid the cause of the additions. After a . few words from Mr. W. 5311111 and Pair. Goutxcast, the Noble Ldrd converted his motion into a notice for to-tior row (this day). On the motion of the LORD ADVOCATE, the House went into a Committee to cerisider of the remuneration to be made to the Clerks of the Admiralty Court in Scotland. Mr. CREEVEY said, the House ought to know, for what services the compensations ware to be granted; and, for him self, he would grant no money. He hoped the People of Eng land would look to the conduct of the House, where nothing was done with facility but the granting of money. He would grant compensation to no Clerk, and to no man in Scotland. The LORD ADVOCATE said, that the measure arose from the recommendation of the Commissioners, as a substi tute for the system of fees which were due upon voluminous proceedings. Mr. W. SMITH was of opinion that an explanation should have preceded the motion. Mr. BRIGHT said, that at the creation of a new (nicer, a provision should be made against the principle of future COlll, , pensation. .Mr. CREEVEY wished the Learned Lord to convert his motion into a notice, as bad been done in the case of his Noble *Friend (Lord Felkitone). • Mr. ROBINSON stated, that that step had been taken is consequetice of the recommendation of the Commissioners. Mr. DENAIAN observed, that many Members, himself for one, were unacquainted' with the Report. Mr. W. DUNDAS said, that the Commissioners appointed to Inquire into the Courts of Justice, bad recommended the abo lition of certain offices in..the Court of- Admiralty, and to give' the holders of them a compensation. If no compensation were made, many individuals would be consigned to poverty. Lord FOLKSTONE said, it did not appear from the Report that a compensation had been recommended. Sir J. NEWPORT had never meant that Bills should be brought in without examination, though he had advised that the recommendation of the Commissioners should be attend:n.4 to, The LORD ADVOCATE said, that the sanie course had been followed here as in similar cases; but if a preferable mode could be suggested, he was ready to adopt It. Mr...CREEVEY moved, that the Chairman should report progress, and ask leave to sit again. On which the House divided—For the Motion, 22; Against it, e4..;—:Report to-morrag.. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and, af Q • VAST WASSCK, the House adjourned. •THE MINORITY ON LORD Ai HAMILTONS MOTION RILATIVZ TO TIM 112CLUINON OF TIFII QUFLTININANT re')M Tlll ettATERS OF TRC CIIIINCII OF SGOTLAN" ° Althorp, Viscount Harbord, Hon. Ed. Scarlett, J. Allen, J. 11. Hill, Issrd A. Sykes, Dan. Sennett, Hon. H. G. Kennedy, T. F. Talbot, It. W. Creevey, W. Maxwell, John Tennyson, C. Crompton, J. Mackintosh, Sir J. Webbe, dward DeCrespigny,SliV. Newport, Sir J. Western, C. C. Davies, 'L H. Nugent, Lord Wood, Aldernstai Denmast, Thomas Ord, W. Wyvill, M. Duncannon,ViscountParnell, Sir H. Wetherell, C. Mire, Edward .Rica, T. G. .Folkeston, Viscount Robarts, A. TELLIFIRS. Ferguson, Sir It. C. Ricardo David Grant, J. P. Gleaorchy, , Lord . Sefton, Bari of Hamilton, Lord A. ' • Amongst the few Numbers advertised by Bun for the present Lottery, was 2,124 Which on Wed. nesday was drawn a Pi ize c f Tivo Thousand Pounds, Consols, and shared by him into Sixteen Sixteentls. It was a favourite number from the first moment it was advertised, and was very soon all disposed of• Bisu has been very fortunate in the selection of nuns,. bers for the Public in hii Advertisements, as he very. recently 'offered a I.:26,000, and various other Caps-, tals, in the same . manner. BIS!r has on Sale a few of the thadrown Shares he yesterday bought front those persona who did not choose to continut their chance for the Six £21,000 now in the Wheel. og g — adopt that fog Re were incli 1 t, they did nc : he le were alto 630 ran hear). TI fr 7 were About ris ught it 'their a pOpolar • ass t ied and they isvi fors 14 int of whi tiog on earth." lux e . the Convei s a to alliance te al binhed by w i c k ce that time the to maintain isedi Gat via, the st a d I 'fete . Since tl c the r.eo hon k that Ad co•••• . r,d genera sr wed *vol.° de Foot '` cl()4 to