The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-04-24 00:00:00

iIdPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the !louse of Lords, April la,- the at assent was
eyes by commission to various bills.
• Lord Redesdale, in asking the Government whether
there was .y intention on their part to propose any altera-
tion of the Coronation Oath. or any legislation to relata ~
thereto, said he had been prompted to do this in .milse-
•Hence of the measure for the disestablishment of the Kish
which he believed to lie associated with the Coro-
nation Oath. It was, he contended, incumbent upon the
poye, patent to show that the conditions of that measure
were not affected by the terms of the oath. The noble lord
traced the history of the oath from its origin, and declared
(hot the bill before the House of Collitiodoi would Out, het
majesty in 5 rennin it was moat undesiraiile she should be
piaCta in mg: rd to the ol,ervance of her Coronation Oath,
Earl Granville having tainted Lord itedestia e with en-
scouring to raise for the (hilt' time a discussion an, the auli-
ject of the Irish Church, said it was the opinion if
the Govereinient that her Majesty t.-Ank the oa•h in an
executive and flit in a legislative capacity. It was not
to he contended that eeclesistical laws should be-
come stereotyped, so that they should he irrevocable,
by Parliament in all futurity. With regard to tale Colo
atitutional question, it was a most monstrous doctrine to
maintain that wider any circumstances, when the Sovereign
baq .aterad into a Divine compact at the will if her people,
il those subjects should wish to depart from the compact by
proper declaration., end by the votes of both Houses id Par-
liament. that her Majesty should be placed in • position not
Li Di, ir wishes without a violation of her oath.
After a brief explanation by Lord Red, little as to the latter
p.rt of this question, the snideci dropped.
The Duke of Argyll, in presenting a hill with respect to
the govennuent of East linita, argued, in reply to Borne ole
nervations mule on a former mciasion by Lord Salisbury on
the evils of a Veto which the latter had stated that •
te.,sorlty of the Council of Indlik possessed inn the Secretary
of 55310.5 financial measures that the supposed Veto did not
In fact, exist. Since the establishment of the Board of
Control the East India Company hail enjoyed no troll Veto'
igoi the Act of la5S, which transferred the renmining powers
of the Compa-1 to the l'mien, could not have b•en intended
le limit the levee. already belonging to the Crown.
Lord Salisbury exprcssed his satisfaction with the Duke's
explanation as to the Veto supposed to be enjoyed by the
Members of the council.
Lord Halifax remarked on the peculiar necessity of •
timed to a Secret•ry for India coming, as he generally
must, fresh front a Parliamentary life to so novel a sphere.
Lend Lyveden thought the bill far too circumscribed in its
trope Ile linggeeted various modifications which he would
ham been glad to see introdweal on the sul•ject of the con-
stitution of the CounciL Be considered it was at present too

numerous.
The Duke of Argyll, so far as the Government possessed
tbreugh the telegreph any inf,rination, could reassure Lord
14,,d0i. Lord Mays had entirely adhered to the principle
of noinintervention.
Lord Lawrence. who rose amid cheers from both sties of
She lion e, s,zuined his approval of the Bill $o far from
dhnloishing the number of the council, it might, he thought
be wisely even increased. He recommended the increase of
facilities l.y the grant of pensions for the retirement of worn-
out menibers 01 tine Council.
The Governor-General of India Bill, and the Naval Stores
Bill were real a third thue, and the Colonial Prisoners' Re-
moval Bill and the Merchant Shipping ,Colonial) bill psased
through Committee, and their -rdships adjourned.
In the House of Commons, Mr. Sheridan endeavoured to
Impose nn the Metropolitan Railway Coropan) the obligation
to provide smoking carriages, which he carried by a majority
of ei,ht last week in the case of the District Metropolitan
Railway. On this occasion, however, he was beaten by a
majority of 21-ISS to DM.
'De House theu went at once into Committee on the Irish

CiM-ch-
Clauses from $ to 9 inclusive, which relate to the constitu-
tion alit power of the Commission, were postponed. On
Clause 10, which protonits future appointnimits to any eccle-
siastical benefice or office, Dr. Ball took exception tons phra-
seology as being so wide that no Archbishop or Bishop could
hereafter be nominated tnt, e diaestablished Church. Sir R.
Palmer agreed in this view of the probable operation of the
clause, and suggested words which Mr. Gladstone, though
averse from recognising by law the epiecopacy of the future
Church, promised to consider. The point was adjourned
until the Report, and the clause was agreed to.
On Cati.e 12—the disendlowing clause—which vests all the
property of the Church in Commissioners, there aims a pro-
tracted niscussion. Mr. Hardy who in Mr. Disraeli ab-
sence from illness took c,liarge of his randmerits) moved to
-"

postpone the date of this vanster from January, 1871, to
January, 1872, the add Itiobal year, In his opinion, being ens°.
inn Is necessary for malting all the inchspensaole prelinimary
arrangements. The amendment was supported by Dr. Ball.
Mr. Gladstone resisted the amendment, allegh,g that the
date hod been flied as the 'nest otnyenlent for the Stste.
. . . .

and for to Church NA well

and that. In the opinion of
. •

persons well sequantee with the Irish Church, 'rho had been
consulted, It was desirable, with a view to stimulating private
effort, to make the interval between the passing of the bill
and the peri d of dlsendowment as short as possible. Ou a
division. the amendment was rejected by 107-301 to 104.
Various verbal amendments were made in the clause, and,
among others, words were inserted to make it clear that the
official, and not the private property id ecclesiastical persons.
will pan to the Comtnissi“ners. Mr. Gladstone gave his
content to an amendment suggested by Mr. Ilentinck to pre-
vent the vesting of Church furniture, plate, pictures. to.
The question that the clause be added to the bill led to a
very lively scene, and, after a lengthened discussion, the
clatwe was earnest on a dtvielon, by lit-214t0 103.

On Clause 11, which provides for the dissolution of ecciesi-
• - • -- - •- • -

sanest corporations and cessation of rights to sit in the
House of Lords, Mr. Charley moved au amenement to pre-
serve their rights of peerage to the existing Bish:ps,.put,on
. . . . .

the advice of Mr. Hardy he did not preen ft. On Mr. Har lys
motion an addition was made to the clause presersing to the
existing Prelates and Deana the title and precedence they

now enjoy. -
On Clause 14, the compensation clause,
Mr. Hardy moved the omission of that part which deducts
the compensation to the curates from the income payable
to the incumbent. He contended that the curates ought to
be dealt with as a separate class entirely, and that they
ought to be conipensoted for the loss of their prospects of
pr motion ; and in this he was supported by mr it ,undell
Palmer. Dr Ball, Mr Lefroy, and milers. On the one side,
Br C Forteseue, the Attorney-General for Ireland, and the
Sacitor-General defended the arrangement prinosed in the
clinoe, &noting that, as the incumbent paid the curate's
salary now, so he ought hereafter to pay his compenaition,
and that the curate was substantially benefitted by having an
Income for his incumbent's life converted into an 111COMO for
his own. After a lengthened conversation the amendment
was tegatived bps majority of 98-30 to 432; and the
further progress of the Como ittee was adjourned
The Oyster and Mussel Fisheries Supplemental Bill was
read a second time. and referred to a Select Committee.
&me other business was disposed of, sad the House
adjourned.
In the House ci Lords, April 20, the Marquis of Clan
ricarde, in moving the second reading of the Land Tenure
(Ireland; Iii•l. traced the progress of this question during
the last fifteen years. The last Act changing the
laws of land, he contended, was not so satisfactory as
o uld he desired. The noble marquis then came to
the year 1866, when was introduced • bill which had
the approval of some of the principal judges and lawyers hi
Ireland. The select committee of this ',Huse which had
since intoned int, the law of contract in Ireland had con-
ducted their inquiry with great itnpartiality, and their con-
clusions were sohhtliitially embroiled in the bill now before
the kb use. Ti.e object of the bill was to ti ,ke a certain
kind of ledies 111,MA after the year 1871, in crier to
encourage small agreements. Anticipating the objections
that w ould he raised to the 10.1, that the present was not the
time for legislation, and wonki not meet the popular wishes,
the noble )i amain maintained it would prove of great ad-
vantage to the Irish people.
Earl Grinville admitted the courteous manner in which
this bill hod been introduced wi.h regard to the Goveninient
Ma, ing the views of the Government on the subject, he ad-
mitted that the big contained siam y useful prionenns ; but
named at • reconstruction of the law of tenure of land, arid
Ii was trot 1111ffiViClIt to settle the question of Imid,M Ireland.

He deplored t:di fact that the Legislature had uot long since
solved the problem of land tenure in Ireland.
Lord Grey stigmatized the conduct of the Government in
shrinking from moving the rejection of a measure like
this, yet declining to support it, as quite unprecedeeted.
lie could infer from the tactics of the Government in
regard to it only that it believed such improvement.
were of trivial importance. The Government intimated
they might take the matter up another sear. But they
must remember that they thereby made themselves

responsiiiie for another winter outrages in Tipperary.
_ After some remarks from Lord K imberley,Lord StdiSbUrY,

fetence

. .
Lord Athlumney, Lord Westhury, and
The bird Chancellor said he neheved a comparison of the
!KM policies of the late and present Governments would not
be disailvslitageous to the latter. In reply to Lord Salisbury,
he pointed out how impracticable it was for any single
member ot a Cabinet to expound the views of the whole on a
large niessure Ike this bill. A private member of the House
like Lord Salisbury might safely wed° his opinion ; but a
Government could not express its till it was prepared to act
upon It. When the present Gdvernment did state its inten-
tions, be believed they would be found to be based on views
of the rights of property which even the Opposition would
accept.
Cl- After a short reply by Lord anricarde, the bill was read

a second time.
The Colonial Prisons Removal and Merchants Shipping
[Colonial), 19,9, Bills were read a third time, and their Lord-
&hips adjourned.
lathe House of Commons, Mr. Gladstone, replying to Mr.
T. Collate, stated that the Bishops and Clergy of the Irish
Church ordained before its disestablishment would un-
docile edly be eligible for employment and promotion in the
Eriglish Church. As to those who received its orders after
disestablishmeut. he was not aware of any disability to pre-
vent them being received into the Church here, though it
might be necessary to consider the subject as a whole.
The long-vexed controversy of the site of the Law Courts
was revived for the first time this session by
Mr. W. H. Gregory, who moved a resolution calling for
the reconsideretion of the present arrangement to build on
the Carey.rtreet site, and argued eareestly for the Thames
Embankment, which he maintained hail never yet been c.m-
sidered. Altogether he calculated the Carey-street site, in•
cludieg approaches, would cast £3,150,000, while the
river site could not cost more than £1,600,000, and would re-
quire no new approaches Ihe Embankment, he argued,
would be the most convenient for the lawyers—both bar-
risters and solicitors—and the general public; It would
secure the Important rfrsiderece of light, quiet, and ample
accommodation ; and among other inducements he men-
Gourd that a company was ready to buy the land recently
eleared in the Strand, for the purpose of building zhembers
arid office,.
Sir Roundell Palmer moved as an amendment a counter
resolution, calling for the immeoiate prosecution of the
Carey-etieetdesign and the purchase of whatever additional
lend might be necessary in immediate proximity to that site.
In his turn he Insisted on the superior advantage. of Carey-
street, as being midway between the Temple and Lincoln's--
inn, and by far the most convenient for the solicitors, the
great majority of whom lived north of the Strand. It gave,
Inn, the greatest facilities for enlargement, and its levels were
Incomparably the most favourable for architectural effect.
A diseesaion followed, in which several hon. members took
part, after which,
The shancellor of the Exchequer went elaborately into the
finances of the question, and startled the !louse by stating
that the estimate now made by the Commissioners for site
and building, etc., was £3 200,000, and that, with approaches
and other accompaniments, we should not get out of the
Weimer for lees than £4,oe o,oi 0; whereas the original esti-
mate wait only £1,500.00. This increase Mr. Lowe attributed
to the frenzy for concentration which had led the Commis-
Borers to enlarge their original plan, and to prop :we what
he railed a "Tower of Babel" and a " Vanity Fair."
Believing that the:e was a greet disadveroage in
over.ceswertrai ion, Mr. Lowe advaed the 11011.0 to retra e
its steps anti to return to the orginal modest scheme.
Acting on hie own reepordeldlity, he maid he hail already
Stopped all the expenditure on tile preseut scheme within
his reach, and hail refused his sanction to the outlay of
£600,000 for additional land until the plessure of the House
could be taken. before giving his opinion as to the curse
the House ought to pursue, he di -pelled a general delusion
that tile cost waste he paid hy the suitors, by showing that
the Comte as a whole required £52,000 from the Con-
solidated Fund beyond the item they received infees. The
security which the Coniniiesfoners sffered for the .e 1.305,000
which they proporeit to borrow front the Treasury,
was the imposition of a storeage fee on every probate, and
this Mr. Lowe contended was merely another form of Im-
perial taxation, be advised the house to dissolve this Com-
mission, with which it was impossible for him to co-operate,
and to place the power and reaponeil.ility in the hands of the
Geverimient, and he stated that the mode in which the
Government would propose to exercise this power would he
by building on a site of six acres between Howard-street,
runnhig from surrey-street across Norfolk-street to Arundel-
street, and the Embankment. This, he anticipated
might be bought for £eoo,ooo and a building which
would contain all the courts and their offices might
be erected for a million pounds Veer; and he sug
gested that the facade designed by Inico Jones for Charles
l.'s palace aught be placed lo front of it Asked by
Sir John l'akington what he proposed to do with the Carey'
street site already cleared, Mr. Lowe was strongly of opinion
that by a little confideece and patience the Government
might diape.e of It with, a sacrifice. At any lute,
it weulil be wise to know when to ulnae a loss, but
above veryteiug he urged the House to ',hake lie f
free at the earliert moment from the extravag arcs
to width the Comnii•sioner.' latest plan would lead it.
thi the motion f Mr, lively, sevoraied by Ile Crawford,
the debate was adjourned.
Mr I in a speech consisting chiefly of extracts from
the Judged' Report (for which lie was celled tn order, as it
had nit leen laid before the House' and from the evidenee
tins knit 05 Um petition, moved en address for the dliPittint,

meet ot a loyal 11.11111L10011 to inquire into the eat/term. of
corrupt practices at the Dublin e'ection.
The motion led to an animated debate, but the p dot of dif.
terence between the two sides was a very small one, and on
a division the motion was carried by • majority ot 71-102 to
120.

On the motion of Mr. lrawcett • Select Committee wu
appointed to inquire whether, in the animal Inclosure Bills,
the Bth and 9th Vict,ma, cap. its, have been carried, and
whether the Act requires alteration in respect to the pro-
visions for places of public recreation, and for allotments for
the labouring poor.
The other business was disposed of, and the House ad-
journed.

In the House of Commons. April 21, Mr. T. Chamber, moved
the second reading of the Bill for Legalising Marriage w lth a
Deceaaed Wife's Sister. Ile stated that thirty three divisions
hi the House had already tiondemned the law, and five
times the House hat sanctioned a bill for the removal of
the present restriction, and on four occasions the Houm
had sent to the House of Lords a measure to do away w ith
the reatricttou. No Divine laws prohinited a man marrying the
sis•er of Ins deceased wile, but there was a prohibition
against a man taking the sister of his wife during the life-
time of his wife to vex her. In all ages among the Jews such
a marriage was honourable, and was now permitted by the
Jews. With the exception of some of the Baptists and
We-hyena, marriage wPh a deceased wife's sister took place
at the present time and was acknowledged. Taking the
English laws, too, in the days of Henry VIII. it was there
stated that marriages are to be considered legal if not
prohibited by God's law. In Ireland and scotlaud
1585 a similar law was agreed to, and prevails to the present
time. Gail's laws were an authoritative appeal, and no
I leas of men could make a marriage unholy and illegal, if
it were according to God'a Word, holy and legal. The
learned gentleman quoted a portion of the words used in the
marriage ceremony, and eolllCllliCti that he was back° I by the
laws and toy the doctrines and principles of the Dumb Word.
The law was broken without reproach hi every corner of the
land. and in every other conntry with the exception of
Great Britain such marriage was acknowledged with very
slight conditions The 101 l had the sanction Of all chusses of
the community in Christendom. and he asked what other
a diction they wanted. Tne marriage with a deceased se ilea
sister was noire commOn mailing the poor coisses, and it
won d always be so, and to then. it we. a great brewing in
a time of great elomeatic sorrow. The hon. and learned
gentleman concluded by moving the second reading of the
bill.

Captain F. Egerton seconded the motion, and sail that
although many of the clergymen of the Church of England
were against an alteration in the laws, yet they were not the
only people to be studied.
Mr. Sclater-Booth moved, m an amendment, that the bill
he read a second time mmn this day six months. Ile ob-
jected to the question heir g dealt with during the present
session, and stated that a similar bill had been rejected by
decided majorities in the two last Houses. lie urged that to
pars this bill would be a step backward and not forward, and
would help to carry us back to a state of barbarity, and not
to civilisation.

Mr. M. W. P. O'Reilly, after stating Ms objections to the
bill, concluded by seconding the amendment.
Viscount Bury sail if t le law were forbidden or allowed by
God's Word, so ought the comsnand to lie mule legal in the
country, lie should give the bill his Marty support.
Mr. Beresford Hope expressed his disapproval, and Sir
George Grey his approval of the MIL
Mr. Bright considered that the law as It at present stood ,
was very unjust. Ile contended that not a member of the
House would point a linger of scorn at children the fruit of
a marriage with a deceased wife's sister, and call them by
that odious name—bastards. He had beard this bill
described as a bill for the abolition of sitters-in-law.
(Loud cheers and laughter He hoped that sisters-
w would not be abolished, and one reason was
th,t he had been the recipient of great Minimss from
sisterain-law. In every other Christian count, y marriage
with a deceased wife's sister was permitted, and from none
did there come any complaint of social inconvenience. The
right hon. gentleman concluded Iris earnest and eloquent
speech amid loud cheering, by appealing to the House to pass
this bill by a decided majority.
sit J. Is. Coleridge could not understand the grounds ou
which this measure was forced .11 the ilouse semiou alter
session. Ile contended that the majority of the people of
this country were quite content with tile present state of the
law. For 1,500 years, he said, marriage with a deceased
wife's sister was unrecognised among all countries.
Whatever was done in Catholic countries could never be
am.ilied to this country, where liberty was based on totally
different principles. lie denounced the bill as being unprin-
cipled, and urged that it would not protect tue minority,
but would oppress the majority.
Mr T. Chambers rose to ieply amid loud cries of" Divide,"
Which were almost incessant during his speech
The motion that the bill be read a second time was then
put, and there appeared—For the second reading, 253;
against it, 154; majority tr, 09.
The second reading of the Game LIMB Amendment (Scot-
land, Bill and the Game Laws ,Scotland, Bill, was postponed,
on the respective motions of Sr. 34PLagau and Lord ';oho,
Until Wednesday, 23rd of June.
On the motion of Mr. 31•Laren the second reading of the
Annuity Tax ,Elinburgh) Bill was postponed till the 30th
• June.

The second reading of the Game Laws ;Scotland) (So. 2,
•/.18 postponed, on the motion of Mr. Loch.
The House went into Committee of Supply, and afterwards
adjourned.