The Press.
London, England, 1854-07-08 00:00:00

THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

Mr. WALPOLE on Tuesday inquired into the Go-
vernment intentions respecting the various bills in-
troduced, or promised, which affected the jurisdiction
of the ecclesiastical courts. He wished especially to
learn whether the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill
would be proceeded with this session.
Lord J. Russ ELI, announced the result of his con-
sultation with the Lord Chancellor on this subject:—
" The Lord Chancellor had introduced into the House of
Lords a bill on the subject of divorce ; but as regarded
church discipline no bill had been introduced, and that was
a matter which must receive the consideration of the Go-
vernment. There was much difference of opinion with
regard to the nature of the court to which matters of this
kind should be referred : whether it should be a branch of
the Court of Chancery, or a separate court, though not
together resembling the ecclesiastical courts. Considering

JULY 8, 1854.

that this was a question of much importance, and consider-
ing the lute period of the session, the Government had
determined not to proceed with the Testamentary Jurisdic-
tion Bill this session. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the
Divorce Bill he rather believed that the Lord Chancellor
proposed to make some alteration in it. The first part of
it was founded on the report of the commissioners on the
law of divorce ; it was not connected with the other parts
of the report which referred to the ecclesiastical courts.
It was a separate question, and the Lord Chancellor was
of opinion that it m►ght be taken separately ; the Govern.
went reserved their opinion on the other parts of the sub.
ject."
THE BOARD OF HEALTH.
- - -

The vote of 11,8651. proposed on Thursday for the
expenses of the Board of Health was objected to by
Sir G. PECHELL. Since 1846, he said, this board
had disgusted all the towns with which it had had
any dealing. Its proceedings had frequently been
unconstitutional; and, in fact, wherever it had inter-
fered it had caused destruction and dissatisfaction.
The bulk of its work seemed to consist of the
official registry of the number of letters it bad
despatched and received. He proposed to reduce
the vote to 6,8551.

Lord PALMERSTON, without defending the board or
its proceedings, argued for the necessity of providing
some machinery by which measures could be devised
and enforced for the promotion of health and clean•
liness

" Nothing was more easy than to get up and say that
a thing was useless and a nuisance, and ought to be put
an end to. Such language sounded well when there was
no danger; but a time of calamity might come, and then
the people would ask what the Government were about in
abolishing a board whose duty it was to secure the country
against the recurrence of such a calamity. After the very
sad experience of the past, after the population had been
swept away by visitations of cholera, and after the awful
warning of last summer, pointing out how defective were
our sanitary arrangements, he could not comprehend how
it should be seriously proposed to abolish a department
of this description. If Brighton was anxious not to be in-
chided, it should be excluded. But in every town there
we two parties, corresponding to Whig and Tory—the
clean party and the dirty party. (A laugh.) The nine-
!inns of these factions were well known. One man said,
'I my dirt, and I object to pay for being made clean
.—(laughterj—the clean man shall not touch me.'
(Laughter.) If hon. members were to read the accounts
which it fell to his lot to peruse, of the condition of some
of the towns in this country, even at the present moment,
they would be surprised, not that these periodical visita-
tions recurred, but that the population was not extin-
guished. The condition of Newcastle in the north, and
of Dartmouth in the south, had been such as to make
people shudder that such a state of things could exist iu a
civilised country. He thought this a most unfortunate
period for proposing the breaking up of the board. He
admitted that the constitution of the board required altera-
tion. (Hear.) It was not represented in the house, and
no public officer was responsible for its proceedings. The
President of the Board of Works hai no controlling
power, and therefore had no responsibility. He thought it
desirable that in reconstructing the board there should be
a limit with respect to time; and he should propose a bill
to continue the board, consisting of two paid and unpaid
members, for a period of two years from the end of next
month, and render the board subject to the instructions
and orders of the Secretary of State, who would be re-
sponsible to Parliament. He thought that it was impossible,
with a due regard to the public health, to discontinue these
arrangements at the present moment ; but he did not
mean to say that there would be any necessity for the fur-
ther continuance of such a board. It was very possible
that when more towns had organised themselves, and made
provision for their own security, a central direction might
be no longer necessary."

Upon the suggestion of Lord SEYMOUR, and after
much further debate, the vote was postponed until
the promised bill would be laid before the house.