The Sun. — London, England, 1802-03-05 00:00:00

IMPERIdL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF PEERS, THURSDAY, MARCH 4.. The various Bills before the House were forwarded in their respective stages. Mr. CrtEw?. and Mr. LAscELLEs brought np a private Bill each from the Commons, which were read a first time. • An Officer from the Board of Admiralty presented several Accounts relative to the Condition of the British Settlements and Forts on the Coast of Africa, which were ordered to lie on the 'Table. Some private business was disposed of. Their Lordships then proceeded to the Order of the Day, which was for the second reading of the Bill to dissolve the Marriage of CHARLES BKYDGES WOODCOCK, Esq. with ANNE his now Wife, on which Lord AUCKL AND rose, and after a few observa tions upon the general subject, declared, that as the Law now stood, it was with extreme jealousy he considered the great majority of Bills of Divorce— In the case before their. Lordships, the Petitioner stated, that at the age of 19 he was married to his Wife, then no more than 17 years old : that they lived together three or four years, when, on account of some differences having arisen, they en tered into a Deed of Separation, &e. On a case of this peculiar nature, his Lordship observed ) he was free to say, -that he was prepared to propose its re jedion ; but considering all the circumstances of the case, candour, he thought, called on him to ad vert to one or two cases, in some degree similar, which came under the consideration of their Lord ships, in the year 1798 ; those were the Divorce Bills of Esten and Twisleton. In both these cases, Deeds of Separation were executed between the parties: in the former, the Deed, which produced a Non-suit in the Court below, was of that nature as obliged their Lordships indignantly to reject it.— The latter, upon a due consideration of all the merits of the case, they thought proper to agree ttl. At that period, he had to observe, the House was not in the habits of so closely attending to the ex treme frequency of divorce cases, and he thought himself warranted in observing, that Bills were then passed, which now would not. The leading question, at present, was, whether the party, under ail the circumstances of his case, wag entitled to the desired relief; but, in considering this, they should not lose sight of those rules which they hacqwisely ' placed as safeguards to the purity of their Proceed ings. No relaxation should be suffered, but all the necessary forms, on the part of the Petitioner, ought to be complied with. Of these considerations, the Pe titioner should be aware, but he set forth those fads which lie was conscious had precluded him from com plying with the rules which guided their Lord ships' Proceedings, and, therefore, spooking con scientiously; he thought the Bill ought to be refused. The admission of such a Bill would go to sanLion a line of condua, and give effect to pradical ar rangements, the result of which would be, to trans fer any lady from the character of a wife in one family, into the same character in another, and the parties well may say, that the House of Lords had saved them the trouble of establishing all the ne cessary fads by positive and incontrovertible proof. Nay more, in such a system of collusion, as such an admission would sandion, there need "no special ad of adultery take place : the. lover might be con veniently placed in the .lady's chamber, and the chambermaid called to see the transaction, which she might afterwards state at their Lordships' bar, as constructive proof that the aka. of adultery had been committed. However, leaving this hypothetical state ment, he trusted their Lordships would evince them selves in these great important points, the guardians of public morals, and ad with an eye to the conser vation of those barriers to domestic virtue and private integrity, which they had so wisely esta blished. What he should have moved in the first instance was, for the discharge of the Order for the hearing of Counsel, and the rejection of the Bill ; but in compliance' with the established-practice of the House, and to afford the party every possible opportunity of defending his Bill, he was willing that Counsel he first heard in its support. The LORD CHANCELLOR quitted the Wool sack, and previously to his entering into the Pe tition in question before the House, made some ju dicious remarks upon the general subject of Divorce Bills, and also touched upon the subject of Hoare's case, recently decided upon by their Lordships, with respeft to those points in which he conceived a simi larity existed between the two cases. In the outset of his observations, he touched upon the validity of what was stiled a legal Separation, and which, he seemed to say, he could not admit until the ultimate decision of that House, the highest known authority, controverted his opinion—With respect to the effect, however, of such a proceeding in the Courts below, it was held by that very able and upright Judge, Lord KENTost, on repeated occasions, that it de relided from the right of the party to complain, as a voluntary abandonment of the rights and duties of matrimony ; they would, therefore, have to con sider how a persoo, so circumstaneed, could come to ask the favour, the bounty of the interposi tion ofothat Home. In resped to the present case, was it entirely - of the novel nature that Hoare's was, •he would not hesitate to put a question for its rejection. After shortly referring to the cases of Esten and Twisleton, he stated his opinion that their Lordships should strictly abide by their forms, and in that view he agreed with the Noble Lord as to the hearing of Counsel though at the same time he had his doubts, as well as the Noble Lord, whether it may be the most wholesome mode. The policy of the question, and the great interests of public morality should not be left out of their consideration. Proceeding to ob serve upon the nature and eifeet of Deeds of Separa tion, the Noble and Learned Lord stated a case which had come under his cognizance in his judi cial capacity ; and it was with regret he re_ felled that this fashionable practice had become frequent amc..g 'the lower orders of Society.— The case lie alluded to, was that of a Li very Servant and his wife—the question was wile e'7'a,ather such deed made the woman responsible SZ‘i •o e • - -- - ] 7- 'teee;, In tile Deed of Separation in this in - . e were clauses entitling the Lady to a roportiou, hy way of maintenance, cut e'' , / wages, which was to rise in • k•4;A',7 proportion to the contingent increase of his income, and even so far as to specify that if he was promoted to the situation of Steward, she should live as well as his own mistress. Such was the length to which this destrutive pradice had arrived ; it was, there fore, the more incumbent on the House to consider the situation in which it stood. As the guardians of the morals of that great family, the Public, which more than any other, the Pradices then under consideration, tended to dissolve—however, under the circumstances of the established praftice of the House, he thought it would..be rather trenching too much, if the hearing of Counsel was precluded. Mr. ADAM, its Counsel for the Petitioner, was then called in. He stated a general outline of the case, which in efred was, that the Petitioner, Charles Brydges Woodcock, Esq. of Berner's-street, was, in September, 1790, being then nineteen years of age, married to Miss Anne Crosbie, then aged seven teen; the daughter of the Hon. Maurice Crosbie, of Limerick, in Ireland : that they lived together as man and wife till June, 179+, during which inter val they had three children, when some unhappy differences arising, a Deed of Separation was duly executed between them. That long after this sepa ration, and particularly from July 1798 till Ju1y1799, he 'resided in England ;k and during which period, the Lady constantly resided in Ireland, where, about the last-mentioned interval, she entered into an un lawful intercourse with the Hon. Christopher Hcly Hutchinson, with whom she aft,twardi cohabited in England : That the Petitioner obtained a sen tence of Divorce, a mensa et thoro, against the Lady in the Ecclesiastical Courts, but that, by reason of the above-mentioned Deed of Separation, the Peti tioner was advised he could not sustain, or com mence any Aftion for Damages against the said C. H. Hutchinson, &c. The Learned Counsel displayed his usual ability in support of the Bill, on legal grounds as well as these of precedent, and pathetically addressed him self to the feelings of their Lordships with respeCt to the unfortunate situation to which the Petitioner must be reduced, as well as the unhappy issue of the Parties, should the Bill be rejected. That the case was materially different from that of Esten, whose Bill was properly rejeCted ; and that the Deed of Separation was a bona _fide transaetion on the part of the Petitioner, Sce.'-' In the course of the argument, some explana tory conversation took place between the Learned Counsel, the LORD CHANCELLOR, and Lord AL VANLEY, chiefly with resped to the existing Law. The Duke of NORFOLK expressed his opinion, that the Counsel should not argue the case upon the ground of its abstraft legality, but solely upon its individual merits. The Deed.of Separation was then given in evi dence, and handed up for the perusal of their-Lord ships. Lord ALJ'ANLEY made some observations upcin the particular nature of Deeds of Separation, and also upon the general question of their validity ; of this, his Lordship seemed, notwithstanding the: high authorities by whom doubts were entertained,. to express his opinion in the affirmative. There were some cases, he observed, in which it may be proper for the parties to separate, and some in stances may exist, where the wife had a right to plead the deed, without proving the grounds which led to it, as such may obviously be improper for publication ; however, under all the circumstances of the present case, he thought it may not be im proper to postpone its farther consideration, and, in that view, he moved that the same be deferred till Monday. After the Deed had been under the inspeaion of their Lordships some time, The Duke of NORF3LK observed, upon 'the grounds on which it proceeded, he stated generally that it was in consequence of differences having arisen between the parties—this seemed to alter the. Noble Duke's sentiments of the case, and he ob served, he then saw nothing which should induce him not to vote for the rejection of the Bill. The DUKE of CLARENCE said, he had reason to believe, that there were evidence ready to be examined in behalf of the Bill. Lord AUCKLAND stated his coincidence in the result of what fell from the Noble Duke, and added, that he did not objea to the proceedings at the Bar ; yet his mind was made up, that nothing which could be offered there, could shake his sen_ timents of the Bill. Lord ALVANLEY spoke in explanation, after which The Lard CHANCELLOR quitted the Woolsack and spoke at some length, and with great ability and effea in reply to some 'legal points which fell from Locd ALV ANL EY, principally with regard to the validity and effeet of Deeds of Separation ; in concluding, he paid a handsome and appropriate corn. pliment to the Noble and Learned Lord who presides. in the Court of King's Bench, who always con scientiously and diligently canvassed the grounds of his judgment before he advanced his opinion, and he reminded their Lordships that Matrimony was a solemn and important institution, which held together the great family of the Public. The Counsel was then called upon to state the nature of the Evidence which the Petitioner had to offer with respeft to the Deed of Separation ; when he described the general effect of it, to be to esta blish the points, that.the parties were very different in their habits and inclinations, the Lady keeping a description of company which led her into extra vagance, and a rate of expenditure which the Peti tioner was unable to support, &c. Some conversation ensued between their Lord ships upon this communication, which seemed to alter Lord ALvANI,Ly's ideas of the case, and 'he expressed a wish to withdraw his motion, and ac cede to the proposition of the . Noble Duke for the rejeaion of the Bill. After some farther conversation of an explanatory nature between the LORD CHANCELLOR, Lords AUCKLAND, ALVANLEY, the Dukes of CLARE,NCE and NORFOLK, the Motion for postponing the far ther consideration of the case till Monday, was re gularly withdrawn, and the question, on a Motion by Lord !Ioci:LAND, " That this Bill.be rejected," put, and ordered accordingly. At half-past six the House adjourned till to morrow. • HOUSE OF colrmoNs, THURSDAY, !MARCH 4. MR. MIND brought up the Report of the Com. mince appointed to examine the Petition for a Bill for building a Bridge between Carnanonshire and Anglesea, which was read and agreed to, and a Bill ordered. 1.4 r. BOND also brought up the Report of the Committee upon _the Petition for building a Bridge over the River Conway, which was likewise read and agreed to, and a Bill ordered. Mr. \V. DUNDAS brought up the. Dundee Two penri Scots Bill, which was read a first tune, and ordered to.be read a second time. Several Accounts, ordered by the House relative to the Duties on Paper were presented from the Commissioners of Excise, which were ordered to be referred to the Committee appointed to consider the Petition of the Booksellers and Printers. NON-RESIDENCE OF THE CLERGY. Mr. DIO(ENSON said he had the honour to bring forward a.Bill in the last Session of Parlia ment, which was passed into a Law for the purpose of suspending all Proceedings against Clergymen for Non-residence under the At} of Henry VIII. until the zsth of March next. He-did then hope that by the time to which that Bill was limited, some pernanent measure would have been resorted to relative to this sublea, which would have super redcd the necessity of any similar temporary expe dients. That, however, was not the case ; but it was highly satisfaCtory to himself, and he was sure it must be to the House, and to the Public, lo know that the subjea had been taken up by a Gen tleman of high chara6ter and great ability, from whose exertions every thing was to be expeaetl. He hoped the measure in contemplation would be soon brought forward, as it must of course be a subjea of considerable discussion.' It was for the present, however, expedient and necessary to con tinue the, At of last Session. for a further pe riod, and according to the notice he had given, he should now move for that purpose. He pre sumed the House would not now call upon him to state the time for which he proposed to continue the Ad-, that would be matttr of future discUssion. He then moved that the Aft of the 4ist Geo. M. chap, 102, should be read—which being read pro forma, he moved for leave to bring in a Bill to con tinue the said Ad for a - time to be limited,— Leave given. GRENADA MERCHANTS. Mr. LusxIINGToN moved, that the Report of the Committee on the Petition of the Grenada Mer .chants should be referred to a Committee of the whole House on Monday.—Ordered. EAST INDIA COMPANY's SERVANTS. Mr. WILLIAM DUNDAS moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Bill for enabling the East India Company to transfer their Servants at Fort Marlborough, in Bencoolen, from thence to Madras. On-the question for reading the Bill a second time, Mr. WM. DUNDAS said, that in consequence of what had fallen from an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Jo tr STONE) on a preceding - evening, he wished to state to the House in a few Words the nature and ()Ned of the Bill, and he was convinced, that when the House was fully informed upon the subjed, they would at once see the.propriety of the Bill. He would first, however,observe, that.he had no private affedion for the Bill, but that it had come to him in consequence of the unanimous resolution of the Court of Direc tors of the East India Company. The expence of the Establishment in Bencoolen had been from too,oool. to 120,0001., without any adequate re turn for this expenditure ; the. object, therefore, now was, to reduce this Establishment to a Fadory, Whereby a saving would be made of 80,0001. The Court of Diredors certainly might themselves have done this without corning to Parliament, but in that case the Servants at this Establishment must have been. left without any provision. It surely would nor be contended, that these 'men, who had passed,their days in the service of the Company, were at last to he discharged without any provision what ever. The question•was, therefore, to what place they were to he transferred ? The Hon. Gentleman had suggested that they might be transferred to Prince of Wales's Island, or to Ceylon, but to. both of these places there were the greatest objedions: The Hon. Member had, however, contended, that to transfer them to Madras, would be a - breach of national faith, because it would unjustly deteriorate the situation of those of the Company's Servants, who were already stationed at Madras. It should be reconciled, that since the year 1798, the East, India Company had made large acquisitions of ter ritory in Mysore, from which their Servants at Madras had derived the greatest advantages, which they had no right previously to expel, and he could not see what objection there could now be to the transfer of a few additional Servants to that Presidency. The Revenues of the Presidency of Madras had very materially increased since the year 1793, at which period the number of Servants there was 173, the number at present Was 207 ; but if they were increased in proportion to the increase of the Revenues, the number ought to be 287; where then could be the objedion to. transfer a tew additional Serva'nts thither ? The Servants who were to he transferred, were to lose five years rank on being sent to Madras, and he could not conceive how their transfer could injure the rights, or the just expedations of the Company's Servants at Ma dras. He wished to press upon the House, that the object of this Bill was to save 80,0001. to the East Ind-iinCompany, which was now expended on a su purfluous Establishment. Mr. 70 HAISTONE said, if the House was really reduczd to the alternative of either passing this Bill, or that of the Company losing 80,0001. lie would not hesitate a moment in giving it his-support. The Mouse would recollett that they had formerly a very flourishing statement of the alLirs of the East India Company given them, which turned out to he fallacious, as they could not go on without solid and substantial reforms. He admitted in this case, that the expences of 13encooleri were 120,0001. hut of this 60,0001. was appropriated to military cA rences 1. zo,oooi. to certain charges relative to the fortifications, and the only usmining 4- ( r th t was applied to the Civil Establishment. fated sum of 40,0001. only 15,0c01. was ari'm 4a , to the payment of salaries:. in the proposed t blilltnent of a Factory, there was to he a geodes 0 wils a salary of 30001. and five A s Si s tants at a ex pence of zoool, amounting together to co 001.; i the saving therefore, would. not be 80,001., h ut , °f c i f to,oool. He coulal not agree, that fur the sane saving only 10,0001., the House ought. to pas s e': Bill which went to violate the public faith ple d g to the Company's Servants at Madras. By the j n d rent . Bill several regulations had been establisher:to - the Company's Servants ; amongst the rest, " la i ,t they should rise by seniority, and should 00 1 5'1 allowed to enter the service at an early peri od % life, in order that they might devote their wh° ` time to the Company's service, and that those er a perienccd in the affairs of the Company tnigl;t appointed to high situations. The Public faith %I therefore pledged to the Company's Servants, it each Establishment, for the fulfilment of their f' k l o expeatitions, and he could not consent, for the s i , 3 o of saving so small a sum, to violate that faith. Chi: Hon. Gentleman had said, that the nurrib2r of Company's Servants at Ma.iras was smaller tt ia n it ought to be in proportion to the rev en ell O of that Presidency ; but it it was in cont ernflitT e to do so, a junction should take place betwee ill '4 Presidencies of Bombay and Madras, and there cT ij i , be no doubt that the number of servants would be amply sufficient,- as there would be at least ' a- 4 hundred. Ile saw no ,reason why'the Servants w ' were the objcclt of the Bill, might not be to n° ferred to the Prince of Waits's Is ~d , or .to Cc ; lon instead of Madras. For all these reason s " e was hostile to the Bill, though he should not 01 1 1 )°s • its going into a Committee, where he sliould „ pose certain Clauses to meet his ideas upon the Sulk jed. 11,• however, the Hon. Gentleman c o° , clearly shew that 80,0001. would be saved by 1 )35 17 - : ing the present Bill, he would not any longer ) "jea to it. Mr. WALLACE said, as the Hon. Gentletnan did not oppose the Bill's going to a Couhnittee, should trouble the House with only a fess lif or A on the subjea. The objea of the Bill was to Ev " to the East India Company a considerable c%Pel l , a ce ' t 'The Hon. Gentleman had, however,' denied- t.'"' e s the sum stated• by the Honourable Geoticllci who brought forward the Bill, cou ld be. sa l d by its operation. The Honourable Geotie tua- i t (Mr. Jost sts-ro NE) hadconfined his argument o n this head, to the Civil. Expenditure of Bencoolena_detT. ing that any saving would accrue under this -bi g i i a " the Military Expences; but,.surely, it mast be ev r ''' dent that the Military Expences must be i n P ropo-;' tion to the Establishment kept up, and if, as it w i intended, Fort Marlborough was to be recktic e `-' a FaEtory, there would necessarily be a con sidera b o saving in the Military Expenditure. He wo uld agree with the Hon. Gentleman so far, that td, saving would not be so great as had been s tate°, but, at the same time, it was considerably 4' 1. 1 . than it had been stated by the Hon: Gent le:o ot He would take it, during a period of Peace, 28,0001 0 and in War at 96,0001. The a verag e of which, taking .one year of War, and another„c Peace, would be 62, 003 1. He could not Con cel i ce b how this Bill could affect the rights or e t arf u sae pe(tations of the Company's Servants at - i - t eas Bras. The Honourable Gentleman had s t ,..; e as that, by the Mt of Parliament on that the Company's Servants must rise by seta° t- a s , C but, it should be recolletled, that seniority g o d no absolute claim ; the Company were at f ig liberty to make a choice wherever they found tlic so or experience to justify that choice. These le, whom it was proposed to transfer, were to be ,4 prived of five years rank, they were very fc.°lr, j nramber, and how the addition of so small a numb e d 4, onder such circumstances, to the numerous bsitlY'sl t the Company's Servants at Madras, w ould set wa g affeft the rights or interests of that body, h e ;0 0 at a loss to imagine. It had been said, they 112 'W be sent to the Prince of "Wales's i s l a nd, but lie L) ta , not understand how they could be'established ttictaa unless as Servants of the Crown, amenable 0 0 ,0 Company, which would be absurd. But 4, o h , urged, they might be sent to Ceylon; in this-10of however, no Servant of the Company eotild':siglil. 'without seriously injuring those prospens he had .a right to entertain. It was not beciaat the Establishment of Bencoolen was subverted, opt therefore the just claims of the Servants were, a i to be attended to, and he considered the objo-7eti this bill to be perfedly_ consistent with Igor ° and justice. NO Mr.. METCALF said, that he had oc i 0 ,t.9 the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. joliNsToNE) actuated by a desire to preserve the Rights ot Establishment of MadraS, but he trusted t he ll ° a l would readily believe that the Executive Bo d y t o the East India Company were equally atte n i `ato. those. Rights ; that nothing might be svziot i ' ) ' fa ee the justice due to those Rights, the Court 0fv 4 1 ,05' tors had sent notice to the Establishment 0 1 lII' fe " that they intended to apply to Parliament ! ° o lse move those Servants who were the objcai ( , ) ,, e jeJ. present Bill. It was impossible that the Ad to by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. _Too NsToNE) — l O 7 apply to the present case, as it could 11Qt ha" ir,if t templation such a .cireurnstance. It was true, El'f,cf, India Company had received a great accessioo c)ciaal ritory, and the Court of Directors mialo, if they VS pleased, have . made Mysore a !sew Presids:ncY:llo). they rather chose to give up the patronage 0,00 such an ad would have conferred upon them, lid apply to Parliament in the maener had now done. The Hon. Gentlelnen 1 1 :" 1 ./ that these men might he sent to CeviOn = Hon. Gentleman could prevail on the Ci'Ow l • ti n io l up Ceylon to - the East India C om p a ny, i t I Iret i indeed be dune, but it surely woo 1,1 il" r " „tO . , corous, in the present instance, to propose t° them to an Island beloaghig to the Cro\v''' Prince•of Wales's Ishoid, w hi a ; l l, a nii,aeo inen t e l d k • was a Residency 'under the .Presid6ney of These Ser vants were, as it had been 6 .31 1 4 sg"' irimsrei red with the loss of five y e ars t'' n 'aft s : those members of the Establishment e, of . ea le, who looked at these men with the m os t ly it" eye, must be aware that they were not etscv considerable time, to obtain any lucr at n As to the Senior and Junior ;vie:chants °