The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-06-25 00:00:00

EARL SPENCER ON THE PROGRESS

OF PRINTING.

The 54th anniversary festival of the Printers' Pen•
sion, Almshouse, cad Orphan Asylum Corpotation
was held on Monday night, under the presidency of
Earl Spencer, K.G., at Freemasons' Tavern, London.
The company numbered about 130 gentlemen.

The chairman, in proposing -prosperity to the
corporation, said that, although not an author or
public orator, he had, he hoped, some little claim
upon the sympathy of those present, for the reason
that two of his ancestors had formed large col-
lections of books and founded lil-raries, where the
choicest specimens of the art of the printer might
be seen. Having thus been bred up and nurtured
in an atmosphere of Looks, he might be supposed
to have some sympathy with a profession so well and
nobly represented in that room. Prawing a comparison
between the old books and old printing and the
productions of the printer in the present day, he hinted
a doubt whether, in certain respects, modern art
could turn out anything more beautiful than some of
the great works of the old printers, such as the
" Mazarin Bible," the Aldus editions of the Classics,
or the works from the presses of Caxton. The old
adage that "history repeats itself " was true of the
art of printing, and the inventors of movable type
would have been greatly surprised could they have
foreseen what was practically a return to something
like the method of printing the old block-books, such
as the " Biblia Pauperum." Yet, in principle, the
Walter printing-press was an adaptation of the old
block-book press.
After referring to the assistance which science lent
to the printer, as in the employment of the telephone
to report in Printing-house-square the speeches made
in Parliament, Earl Spencer said we had probably not
arrived yet at the end of imorovements and inven-
tions in the art of printing, and possibly might live to
see a book or article printed simultaneously in two or
three distant towns.

With regard to the society, he said it was one
which deserved the support of all people in this
country. It was, in a sense, a self-supporting in-
stitution, and he urged all whom his words might
reach tc help those who were trying to elp them-
selves. The institution supports above 100 pensioners,
provides accommodation for 24 inmates in the alms-
houses at Wood•green, and is maintaining 11 orphan
children. During the past year, £1,700 has been paid
in pensions ; £163 in allowances to inmates ; £328 for
maintenance and education of orphans, and £4lO in
pensions under " Biggs' Charity for Printers," making,
with outlay on the building, a total expenditure on
the charitable objects of the corporation of £2,655.
During the evening Mr. J. S. Hodson, the secre
tary, announced subscriptions and donations amount-
ing to nearly £6OO.

, CURIOUS BURIAL REGISTRATION
• CASE.
On Monday, in the High Court of Justice (Queen's
Bench Division), before Lord Coleridge, Mr. Baron
Pollock, and Mr. Justice Manisty, the case of "The
Queen v. Hall (clerk), Rector of Shirland, Derbyshire,"
was heard.

The case raised the question whether the clergy of -
the Church of England are bound to register the
burials of persons buried in churchyards under the
provisions of the Burials Act of 1880 (43 and 44 Vict.,
chap. 4). The register of burials is kept under the 52
Geo. 111., chap. 146, and was to be a register of
"burials solemnized according to the rites of the
Church of England," but then the 10th section
of the Burials Act of 1880 provides that when any
burial has taken place under the Act, the person
responsible for the -burial "shall on the day
thereof, or the next day, transmit a certificate of
the burial (in the form annexed) to the incumbent of
the parish or the clergymen in chargo of the ceme-
tery, who shall thereupon enter .it in the register of
burials, and such entry shall form a part thereof." In
the present case it appeared that there had been a
notice to the incumbent from the husband of the death
of his wife and of his desire that her interment should
take place in the parish churchyard without the rites
of the Church of England, and it accordingly so took
place, and, as the husband alleged, due notice was
given to the incumbent of it; but it had not been
entered on the register, and on a refusal so to enter it
an application had been made for a mandamus to the
incumbent to make the registry, and the mandamus
having issued, the incumbent had made a return to the
writ, denying that he had such notice as alleged, and
also submitting as matter of law that he was not
bound to enter the burial; to which latter part the
prosecutor demurred.

Mr. Bompas, Q.C. (with Mr. N. Morley) argued for
the prosecutor in support of the demurrer. He hardly
knew, he said, on what ground the opposition to the
registry really rested. The Burials Act positively
required the registration of all burials under the Act.
Mr. 13ighain (with Mr. A. Charles, Q.C.) argued for
the incumbent, in support of the objection to the
registry of the burial. The prosecutor, he urged, had
no interest, as the registry of the death would equally
answer all the purposes of evidence; but
Lord Coleridge said it might be that the party had
an interest in a registry of the burial, and if he was

legally entitled to it, then the Court could not enter
ir.to the nature or degree of his interest.

Mr. Bigham then urged that the Act of Geo. 111.,
under which the registry of burials was kept, was to
be a registry of persons buried `!acaording to the rites
of the Church of England ;" but
Lord Coleridge pointed out the express provision in
the Burials Act.

Mr. Bigham urged that the registry referred to and
required some "ceremony of burial, and here, or
in many burial 4 under the Act, there might be no
"ceremony."

Lord Coleridge observed that this did not neces
sarily mean a religious rite or ceremony. Surely the
burial itself might fairly be called a ceremony. The
Scotch people had no religious rite or ceremony at a
burial.

On the whole, after fully hearing the learned counsel,
Lord Coleridge said there was really nothing in the
legal grounds of objection taken, and so the demurrer
must be overruled.