The Sun. — London, England, 1801-06-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL ENT HOUSE OF PEERS,, NIONDAY, JUNE 15., COUNSEL were heard in.continuation, respthirg the Appeal, PLASKETT AND THE YORK BUILDINGS COMPANY DAVID STEWART, 'Esq. ; the further hearing of which was deferred till to-morrow. The Bills before the House were forwarded in their respative stages. A number of Private Bills were brought up , from the Commons, and severally read a first time. Lord HOLLAND presented a Petition, we believe, 'from some individuals, respefting the Indemnity Bill ; which was ordered to lie on the Table. The Earl of RosLIN presented some Papers, which; as we could coiled, constituted a Report from their Lordships' Secret Committee, and was, on thd Noble Earl's Motion, after a few words from the Earl of Su rvoi.x, ordered to be printed. CLERICAL ELIGIBILITY BILL. The Order of the Day for, the second reading of this Bill being read, - • Lo-. 1 THURLOW.thse and addressed the HouSe at some length upon the subject, but generally, in such a 'feeble tone of voicei.. that: his -auditors were precluded from bearing the :greater part Of his obser vat ions. The .Noble and Learned Lord 'en . tered into a line of 'argnment,"and dedltdiOn froth. various legal Authorities, which .he cited, in :the course of hiS-*eCh, decidedly . agitinSt the Biil, • and, apparently, as well. with respeil' to its prin_ ciple, as to in: leading provisions. " Mfg acknow— ledged4he importance of the subject, `and, in some degree, the necessity of taking some steps upon it, but seemed to imptess the idea, that it should not be dope by means of a Bill. Holding it as a prin 'hat either House'of Parliament, respectively, should have the sole disposition as to the compe tency or incompetency of their own' members; he • thought that such a consideration should ,have enced the Commons in the present instance. lie was * - astOnished at the introdatiOn of the Bill, arid depre_ . cated the consideration, that, in consequence of such a step, their Lordships should be called upots to decide, ' who had, or, who had not a right to sit in the other House of Parliament. He contended there was no necessity for -a legislative provision on the subjed ; the other House, was competent, within itself,, to do - every thing the necessity of the case required; , and he regretted that- the Right Hon. Gentle Man now at the head of. His Majesty's councils should squander away his time and his abilities .upon so silly and so frivolous an occasion. " He would ask, in what part of the History, or in .what'principle of the Cobstitution of this Country, 'was it to be found, ,that Holy Orders prevented an individual from - exercising the Eledive Franchise ? He adverted to the disabilities which the .Clerical Charader involved, as meriting, some points of -view, the; indulgent_ consideration of the Legisla ture. He ohserved, that he knew many Clergymen who lied relinquished even preferment upon consci entious groLinah ; and seemed- to allude to the op pressive tendency of those regulations which pre vented Clergymen from entering - too any other . sphere of life. , In considering the proposition of 'excluding Clergymen from the Legislature, he ad. vetted to the participation which the Heads of the Church enjoyed therein, viz. the Bishops 'sitting in the Upper House of Parliament. The tenure by which they' held their seats was &rived flom the Constitutional or legal contemplation of their Stet; as laronies, to which an objection was never yet •• Made, nor to' their sitting formerly --in the Upper -House- of Convocation, in which- Assemblies the suhordinate Anders of the Clergy sat in virtue of an equally legal right with that of the Bishops., He then adverted to that part. of the history of thesubjed, Whieltrespeded the autient right of theargy to tai{ themselves ; the period of, and grounds on which they relinquished that -right, what in his mind ought to be the consequence of such surrender, and also With resped the, qualifications fOrmerly required from the Clergy to sit and votein the -House of Convo cation,; in discussing those several heads he' dis. plafeal much, ability. and a great.degree of know.; ledge of the,sUbjed, and cited.varions . legal autho. titres in support of his opinion, particularly that of Lord COKE. p He observed upon the reciprocal . rights of. taxation and representation, as Applying to the' disqualificatioo,, laboured _under by the Clergy ; against whose light to eledion, we understood - his Lordship to say,• that he knew of, no principle ~of Common Law that applied ;and he slightly referred to the well known .case-of Mr. Rust-iwbwrit, as illustratieg his argument, He par. Ocularly disapproved of the declaratory part-of the Bill, observing with respect to it,, that they. shon,ld not punish the other House of Parliaineot for their inadvertency in sending up such a Bill, by agreeing .to it, but .merely. to admonish them, that they should be the: sole Judges of the Eligibility- of persons to sit in their House 'of Parliament. He Observed, upon the Preamble of the Bill, which, as it stood, he confessed himself rather at a lois to comprehend - what it meant, as well as the real object of .the Biel itself, which he de_ scribed to be in part declaratory, and partly enad ingi it declared 'one way, he said, and ,enacted another. fhb view of the subjects he could not 'discern one spark of common sense in the measure,' and he thought their Lordships should pause before they did that which went lib disfranchise a partieu. lar body of men, He wouldeven, had he an oppor- . ' tnnity, put it to the other House, with .t reference to that spirit of liberty, which -sometimes Wu_ elective it to extend the eleive franchise. Nbble and Learned Lord, then procetied to comment upon the principle of the Bill, ,a Bich he seemed to say apperated rather oppressively, with resped to the inferior orders - of the Clergy - , whose interests, as identifxd with religiott, 'should be 'particularly con., skived, at :a period, -in Which he said, we Vl;re cogned in War, for religion, and ,is) abundance -of Other good things. A•propositiort of this kind ' he observed, (rather jocularly,) might originate in either House, and so as to inlet cinch other reci proeally ; in such an instance, the seas even of the Reverend Bench. Inlet; be affeCted.- concluded \ exer.,.ssing his 'decided disapprobation of the Bill. The LORD CRANCELLOR quitted the wool. sack, to answer the Noble and Learned Lord. He ,obiervett, that what' he was .about to subniit.to their- LOrdships; he should deliver •With at; much earnestness and sincerity as if in his judicial cape. city„and just what he should deliver from the woolsaCk, were their Lordships sitting .air a' house pf judicature. He agreed With the Learned Lord, Chat-the Bill was declaratory as to the law. Ano ther. proposition in which ,he agreed with him was, the absolute necessity of some regulation upon the subjed. • He should, were he a Member of the Hoose'of Commons, certainly, in the first . instance, have proposed a Resolution, ,and not an Ad ; bUt the former, when acceded to, he should have held it his duty to propose following up such Resolution with . a Bill. He also agreed with his NOble and Learned Friend, that the Bill gave an opportunity, nay, imposed a necessity upon their Lordships, of deciding so far as to the PrivilegesOf the other. House of Parliainent.. With respcd to' ' the Objedions to the declaratory Clause, he argued for the necessity of its insertion, on the part of the C.iaMmons, and instanced, as a case bearing out that part of his argument, that of the Middlesex Ekc. tion, where Resolution was opposed to Eledion, and euice veme, Election to Resolution, in a way which at least did no credit to the policy of that part of the conduit ,Of that Hdttsee What he conceived to be • the object was, to say that' by the Law of England, as it nosh stands, a person taking. Holy Orders Was, because he had taken them, incapable of being elected into the Commons House of Parliament. With, respeCt to. the idea of its extending to depri. vation of franchise; such an idea was evidently un founded, as it was impossible to take away from an individual that which:he had nor. And he 'Mast strenously insisted, it would neither serve the in. ' terests of Religion or of the State, to change the present system in that respeds His Noble and Learn_ cd Friend, commented upon the language of the Ad before their Lordships ; with resped to that, he could perhaps as, well as any other person, remove those doubts froth the Noble Lord's mind. He had for a series of years, while he served in the offices of Solicitor and Attorney General, .occasion frequently to draw up Aets - of Parlia ment, and loskeds he 'observed, it was ayery cult thing to draw up an ACt so as. to render the language of it free from objeftion ; but he had one rule r and sq far as, it applied, it was an .unerring rule, and which he had learned from his Noble and very Learned friend, which was, to adopt those phrases which the Legislature had uniformly. used before him, and this was the mode in the present instance; he held the declaratory part of the Bill to be as necessary as any other part, of it ; such a line of proceeding was adopted by the framers of the Bill Or Rights, which,' if ever there was a purely declaratory Law, it was that Bill.—ln that Aft, their virtuous 'Ancestors, after having asserted the indisputably legal rights of the Subjeft, went on to declare and enad that they were The material part for the consideration of ; the House: 'in the present InStance was, whether persons in Holy Orders were capable or not of , being eleded to the 1-louse of 'Commons ? And in this view, he was led to consider the Indeli. 'bility of the Clerical charader. With respeCt to this very important consideration, every principle in the Christian Church, Reformed, or as it stood be fore that period—every Decree and Canon—every Writer, Historian, &c. all agreed in establishing the proposition, that a person in Holy Orders is ludeli. ble ; that the Canon Law, which inculcated ex. pressly this.dodrine, was part.of the Common Law of &gland, was a principle received and adopted by , Lords Hate, HoeT, i'L oWtott, and even by an Authority . which he respected as much as any of those, that of Lord Tnithow himself. By the 'Canon of, 1,603, his Lordship observed, it was expressly decreed, that no man, being 'admitted in Holy OrderS, could, voluntarily relinquish the same upon pain of excommunication; but the ope. ration of this the Noble and Learned Lord explain. rd, did not,go to affect the charader of a Priest, or a DeacOn. In support of those positions, and fur.: abet to establish. the absolute Indelibility of the Clerical Charmer, his Lordship read a variety of 4itotations from different Ecclesiastical Authorities; particularly from' Decrees of the Council of Trent ;, and above to prove that this Indelibility could not be 'abrogated by the volition of the individual himself. In the Christian Chureh, before the Epoch of the Reformation, Holy Orders, as well as Matti mony,.' was held a, &eminent.. Thoogh in the Re; formed Church they were hot. consideted as 'such ;. yet, from time sanctity of the respedive Instittitionst is 'Well as the didateS of the Law of the , Land; the / CleTical Character was indelible, the Marriage state indissoluble.—ln further illustration of this import.: ant position, Ms LOrdship proceeded to state the 'various clerical attributes which attached to the in dividualt even after he had ostensibly relinquished . hii aticred fundion, particularly the enjoyment of Benefices. In these respeitsithe Cahon is folloWed tip by the Lai , / Of the Land; neither suSpension nor. deposition could destroy the Clerical Character ; in some points of ,vieW, the. degradation (so we derstood the Noble Lord) had that effeel. The pros, cess"of degradatiOn, , he explained, and Its partteu; hie application in order. to legalize the execution of a man ; but even with respcd to this, an ittstinee . obtained,- as given by the Canonist LANP it LOTUS, of a man,• who on his being pardoned, resumed Clerical Charoder. With rasped : to •wh3t ought. to be the Law, as his Noble Friend, had 'observed, he was sorry to say, that. he differed from him most fundamenttily. It was with grief he had to ob serve,.that it was not,one of the best symptoms of the times,:that some were anxious to bring forward -, a proposition, nip were ht liberty to renounce the Clerical Charaaer. That the contrary doe trine may press hard Upon some iialividtialahe well knew that should be a Consideration for tho se b e _ fare they entered into the Holy. State. B ut t h e great qUesfion v'lts, whether the 'interest 'of the Public, upon the wkole, likely to he prevented; by a constraint upon men who had come. crated themselves to the Sevice of :God, to oblige ahem to - continue in • that state, or by leaving them at full liherty, Whenever their own . errone o u s , or perhar, , bad notions shoity prompt them, to for., sake it. Such-OjOtions would just as ftircibly to the Law of Marriage ; the differenceOf temper's in the individuals linked together, anA their respec tive inclinations, virtuous or vicious as they may he, might contribute to render that a state of: unhappi ness ; still it was the. Law-of the Land, and just as much soovith respell to the Clerical chttraaer. With regartrto the second branch of aro b oment the eligibilit - y of Clergymen to sit in the Commons House of Parliament, his Lordshp entered into a very able and elaborate investigatinn, and --toOk-a 'view of the. various authorities upon the subjed ; their qualifications and right to sit formerly in the respeaive Houses of Convocation, also came under his consideration ;• hut with resped to the au thority of Speaker ONsLow, as adduced by his Learned Friend, he contended it went in favour of his Petition. He thought a positive Law on the subjeft preferable to a Vote of either, House - of Par liament. With respect to what had obtained relative to the Eleetion of RUSHWORTH, it was no disparage ment to any man, or body ofmen, to ad differently upon better information, and farther consideration of the subject. Resspetting theinueh-talked of case of THOMAS HANKSEY, it wasi he obserV,ed, 'by no means clear that, he was a _Member, at least his name' did not appear among the official returns.-!- He was, however, about the period in question, sifting occasionally in the House as , the Proxy of the Earl of NOTTINGHAM, according to the custom of those timzs ; and with regard to RUSHWORTH, it was certainly clear, he did not take his Seat : as a Clergyman. 'Pursuing - farthet the, con - clusion of the ineligibility of Cletsgymen, he quoted' the 'Ob. serrations' of BLACKSTONE'4pOn the celebrated case of the Middiesex Eledion, as diredly applying to the point, I , articidarly his idea of a Clergyman, whn might be. the S' , 2,7be•veril of the day, startingagainst Colonel L'UTTR E LI., and taking his seat ; would not the House instantly decide agninSt the former Yet it was contended by the authority that '.1 , .11.KE:3, u,ider the circumstances of his case, was then as in ' eligible as a Clergyman would and the Writer of jvniut's Letters, commenting .upon the: argu. mutt Of_I3LACKTONF, denied the similitude be'. tween \\. ts and, a Clergyman; observing, however, that the ineligibility of the latter vvas established, and known for A . period of more than two hundred -years... Drawing towards a conclusion, his Lordship oberved, that the pro- Vidence of God had placed inch in diarent states and situations of life. .He was t'avourable to politi cal vitality, as far as the same was consistent with the interests of Order anti•the well being of.SOciety, and, he trusted, that that Howe would,, either in its legislative or judicial capacity, be governed by that general 'principle, and particularly with iespetl to the Bill..then beforethern, for which, he solemnly declared, he should not be the advocate, but that it asserted the Law of the Land, and went to dis franchise no man.- - The Earl of MOIRA, after complimenting the Noble and Learned Lord for his elaborate speech, said, that in his mind, st mere doubt being enter taineti as to the existing Law of the Land, on this subject, was. no sufficient • reason for . a legislative enadment.which would go to deprive a large and respedable body in the community of their rights, If doubts were sufficient in such a cast, he would only it was a good thing if no One raised doubts respiaing the rights which their Lerdships held to their estates. The Clergy had their rights, and these could only be impeached by a distina Statute. Admitting the Indelibility of the Clerical Charac ter, still the Noble and Learned L or d oug h t tO have made good' his argument, by proving from this the incapacity of Clergymen to exercise the fundion3 of Members ',of the House of Corimons. The same argument:Would hold equally good against the rights of' the Bishops to seats in that - House. He could easily account for the reasons which operated in the breasts of some Sovereigns, .when they rejeled the Petitions of .the Clergy to the right of sitting in the House. of Commons, nor was he at any loss to find opt the inducement with the Clergy, who were desiroui to get into the House; the fotmer, exert ing hiS , authority and influence over them in . the • way of taxation, and the Clergy wishing to mix with the,Commons, io. order to avoid the severe exadions of the -Sovereign • upon them as a distinct body,. His Lo t aiship declared, that he was con scientiously attached to the .church establiihed, and that, he considered it to be one of the firmest props of the Constitution ; on this ground he 'was led to . oppose ,this Bill, as tendi ng to wea k en t hi s prop. On what ground did their Lordships wish to see Bishops in their House, that did not exist, to a cer tain degree, in favour of the Clergy's being eligible to sit in the House of Co mmon s ? 'Were not their Lordships desicous of availing themselves' of, and reaping the benefit resulting from the morality, the learning, and the influence of the Reverend PrelatesT BUt if the reason, .as assigned in the Ad of 1 - 64. t, was. sufficient for excluding 'the Clergy from the _Gammons viz , that it was i m p roper t h ey s h ou ld h ave interferenceany. in temporal matters, the same reason held equally good for excluding Bishops from the HOuse of Lords ; but in this case, where, he would ask, would be the security for the Church of tlfe Establishment ? The Ad, if adopted, ought, in his opinion, to be taken up merely prospectively ; ard he thought every good purpose would be answered, if it was provided, that_no person holding a bene fice should be admitted to_ a 'seat in 'the flouse of Conimons ; and also, that no Clertryman returned to that House should be capable accepting any 'benefice; but as the An .was now brought forward, he considered it as a disfranchisement of the worst' kind, by an ex pit -.MTh law, depriving a resped able body of some o f t hei r dearest privileges. Tho Noble and Learned Lord, had asked,. whether any instance could be produced of a. clergyman, dressed,in his gown and cassoc, claiming his seat ? ,i3ut, allowing that there was no such instance, no thing mote could be inferred, than that'the Clergy . bad, erroneously perhaps, conceived themselvei ineligible ; but such mistake ought by no means to be made a handle fur disannulling , their privi leges. The Learned Lord had 'referred to a Pamphlet of judge BLACKSTONE, but he could Only say, that he gave a, different exposition in his, Commentaries. Upon the whole, viewing the Bill as rerrospeCtive,.. -His Lord s hip sa id, i t appeared to him to be most. opyreisiveond unjust. The Bubcp- of ROCHESTER declared that he onterratned no doubt concerning the indelibility of the Clerical Character, but he had 'sonic respating their ineligibility to sit in the House of Conuncre, as well as to the expediency of stirring a questioc of this nature at the present time. From the vies lle had been led to take of the subje&, the Revercni Prelate avowed his conviCtiop, that it Would by la means be expedient to admit the Clergy to sir in th other House. He declared that it was with nOlcs surprize than sorrow, that he had heard what hat fallen that' night from a Noble . acid Learned Loa (Tit uR LO w), and that he had grounded his arquinen upon the idea'. of the delibility of the Clerical` Charge ter. The Learned Prelate Observed, thiiii t had become costomary to raise ObjeCtions to certain principles, In Charging them with being of Popish origin ; ha such persons did hot distinguish those, from win' existed id the Christian Church ere Pripery began The Protestant Church- did not assert that Ordino, don was a Sacrament ; but it was suflijent for Ilia 'to say, that Holy Orders:Were, of Divine Instil°• tion, and that on this account the Clerical Chat*. ter was indelible. But he would not argue this point theologically ; it was sufficient for hitritt say, that the law of the land cOnsidered the Clerica Charatter to be indelible ; and even although J Clergyman might have negleCted the duties of MI profession for thirty years, and have afterwat4 committed certain crimes, lie would be uoleg a ' meltable to the Ecclesiastical Courts, and liable tt be punished as. a person. in Holy Ordeo.--The Learned Prelate then quoted and explained rise _ meaning of .the Canon, which prohibits Cfergymeu from voluntarily relinquishing their Cali;og, mitien'' ploying themselvei as Laymen His Lortiship ac knoWledged that neither - of these would necelill v ons„ He declared he could by no follow, . it' they were to have Seats in the lin tbe°f Comin me.ins scribe to that 'despicable puritaniql maxim, shat a Clergyman 'might never . to .exercise him in 4 thing but in the immedi ate . duzie, 'of his cAlliag• Most of our eminent Divines had conneaed °, Il ia 'sub!' branches of Science with Theology, :trid had sl.g''''' lised their names as Chronologists, IVlJilieniat;ciansf Geptßetrieians i . Historians,Philosophers, &C. such) fits Lordship said, . were USHER,. PEARSON, il ' lL i R 0 v: ).;:faintedWA LI. Is, 'Be.C. i these great I),ivirea Wer e " i ' t ,' :•c ;:fainted with the praeticali business of the wer9' nor, diddle think that the business :t' the Illa',b° 0t Commons was totally wit onnet ; ted . with the a,js r c of Divinity, for it was intermixed with t' great principles of Political Justice and Al o '''," lity, anti the Laws of Nature and Nations. although ' lie did not think that 'Seats in I,''` House of • 'Commons - were foreign, to, or ''' , Compatible with the clutraibr of Clergytile"' any more than the office of justice of the l'ea' still he felt strong . objeetions to, their entertAilitl such views, and'that chiefly arising from the meal by which 'they would be obliged to seek adatiti 4 " c into the Lower House, such as op.. .i. 4,; !,o:lies l c, ' entertainment, 'displaying. flags, and trocklis,:,o . every scaarian voter. Nor: was he less favour3ll, to the Noble Earl's suggestion of confining the the eligibility to such Clergymen as held benefices _ice saw no equity in such a distinction, whils4 b f ii " lit unbeneficed, it would hold out objets of am 1 , . a L, rdst9P ,Fcc. For the reasons lie had stated, his view cf the subjetl, declared he would vote for the Bill. • it'D stated his The Earl .of WESTMORL ,4 '• d Lary h they uaa were two distinCt bodies ; and as ''',.`; i o ur history; been considered in the early periods 0 • „,, i ei. for, when the former at in Parliament, It tit , pressly and solely as the representatives r -1 co Clergy.' His Lordship then proceeded it) ,,, i 03,0 the subject on the grounds of ittimenlori,:., tend of inexpediency ) and 'of the effeEta it woJi a to , 'helmet to produce on the minds of the Clergy , icreas i n g as well as in the House of Commons, by' i ,' c L lis. "that the Clergy, an , , i the influence of the Crown ; and front In e : te d a t tine topics, on which his Lordship exl,' atl o f A be some length, he expressed his approbation present -hel Bill.. ' . • 0 . s liD - lord HOLLAND objeaed to the Billo ? • ~ ~ . tutt el , in his opinion an innovation on the COW ' f t heir a deprivation .of one large body of ini es ' ~f t he political rights, and also . of the commue , tY ' .1 0 benefit which might he derived from their learnl•ibe if holding seats . in the..' House of.Cotn" )° , ns. t h e ei.. .Iteverend Prelate had agreed with him ca ttle elusion of the - Clergy was not to be j.ustifteulait; ground of the Indelibility of their Clersicaiqsortl o f and he was surprized to finci.his only obic`'. llto Or - on account of . the manner of their gettlni; ' Lok House. There were certain Bishops, 1 ; 1 ' s c i t e ship said, who were not averse to that ea re. Paterfering in political matters, who had ev i o l eic ..influence over them with respeet to the commended it to there in their charges, and Lis el t ,hich they (the • Clergy') v. otes q . oo ii Members to serve in Parliament. 'I had l}r' y i ili t, aor an argument against Clergymen sittino- o.l"ictoie ment, that a permission of this sort wovukt' that A should give for the f ie ' ',pule the influence of the Crown. He &chum ,Cl, a v argument founded' upon this basis wAs - gn it .. 4 a. lit' from the quarter -Whence it had been advq c i B ,,ty,cit Lordship . said, ' that . . from the,investiga t !c%o'o o ' ' had been made, it appeared that since 1 114 ,- „ 3 ,00 5, tion. of the Clergy had ceased to tax t''''' 1 7 . f liP there had been instanc6 of their sitting. ii' sir' f 1 " • . mew, • ;mil that in the controverted . case 0 . t ,ithel' woknOhe Committee had decided in fa ono 0 , 1 ,,,x • Eligibility •,- but now, when a Ciergrio n t' ' .ie i' t I.'' -Political sentiments were obnoX iotts if' l . , i f IP Power, had gained , admittance, the Minot; rgi day brought in this Bill Of Exclusion. 'Ws •'''. .„ r as , to considered the present to be aharill ineasut,, I.o iitt, the Clergy, and particularly .to thof; '' at ' ' * h4fl late`'' _ -frolti'conscientious motives, relinquish to t oo , their sacred functions, and. who, ..'it 11 ''''' , ' 1 1 .'0 1 ° rn their. : oi p might be eminently qualified Ire , t'i trot to serve_the public interest. His LordshiPA j 'i c ' gr a, thisl might have been the case as to Del . T. L_ ,. . vic t . get or others of great tornuiercial or Poli 601 1 01 :: , , „ r ot; and that it would be a hard case to then?, .:"..,,' i t to itol dicial to the Public, if the elector wetelf° - .. ~--lre from chusing such men. . Ilitined. • , 'The Bishop' of ROCIIESTER - oil' ~, , ,I , Luto believed -the circumstance to which the 1`.. , ',, 1 - , ir , t p had alluded- was that of a Bishop Of Si. Davi 1 _,.. wp ai case of two .Parliarnentary Candiclares,one,i°,!i. Th:it was known to 4ntortain Democratic ptnlell s ' ic e pi. Prelate .bad not, indeed, introduced tlul7arw'o,,,t 'Letters to to" 1,00 but he merely wrote private .. . 4 t , Circ 1 ~...' or particular Clergymen in his D a Charge, nor, did he even wri i t o e ccse, gi,i,4