The Express.
London, England, 1853-02-16 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 16, 1853.

should apt being in a bill every year. He thought it saw&
better to do that than to enact a great amount of machinery
at mu . which might not work, and which crested a great
expense, and consequently a cry against the measure itself.
Very recently, in the other house of paeliament, Lord St.
Leoaardespoke against a registration of deeds. And what
he wanted was not a registration of deeds, but a registra-
tion of titles, which was a thing totally different. They
might afterwards, if thought desirable, have a registration
of deeds. Lord St. Leonard' said that this question of re-
gistration introduced a most important social question—that
it involved every question on which depended the internal
prosperity and social order of the country; and that
the object of these measures was to prevent family settle.
meats, and preclude those dignities and distinctions which
were enjoyed by the nicmhers of their lordships' hou.c.
Now although it was for the public good that the members
of the House of Lords should be possessed of large estates,
it did not follow that because they had entailed estates, that
ordinary men should follow their example and entail their
estates likewise. His lordship said that no man could prove
that • geoeral registration of deeds would shorten by a
single line the conveyance of land. No; but an entry of
titles on a register would shorten it because it made the title
plain and undisputable, and a man could convey his land to
a purchaser by a simple alteration in the register. Ile
thought he had said enough to convey a Reineal idea of the
bill, which he now moved for leave to bring in.
HEADLAM, in seconding the motion, said that the
hen. gentleman deserved the thanks of the house and the
public for his unwearied perseverance in endeavouring to faci-
litate the sale and transfer of land and providing a registration
of titles. The hon. gentleman now brought forward the sub-
ject uuder different circumstances from those under which
he brought it forward before,and he trusted that the govern-
ment would take from this bill of the hon. gentleman
what was good if they brought in a bill of their own on
the subject. He bad the strongest possible opinion of the
benefits which the country would derive from a well-con-
ceived scheme for facilitating the transfer of land, fur it was
impossible to exaggerate the evils which occurred from the
difficulty of transferring it. At present great labour and
expense were incurred in ascertaining the title to land, and
after all, there was uncertainty cf title. The courts of
law afforded many instances of cases in which it appeared
that parties had purchased estates with heavy iucum-
brancer, which were not known to exist. If the Chancellor
of the Exchequer proposed in his financial statement to put
a tax on the transfer of stock, making it as difficult and ex.
pensive as the transfer of real estate, every holder of stock
would feel that his property was materially depreciated, and
yet the practical effect of the law affecting real estates was
the same as such a tax on the transfer of stock would be.
He wished to impress on the house, in consequence of
what had been said elsewhere, that neither this bill nor •
bill for the registration of deeds, would in the slightest de-
gree affect the control which every owner of real estate bad
over his property. There might be objections to the bill,
but no objection of this description could arise. Neither
did the argument as to the exposure of family affairs apply,
for at the present moment, when stock was invested in the
hands of trustees, and made the subject of settlements, the
.deeds were concealed and the settlements were not pub-
lished to the world. Yet stock was a subject of easy vague
fer and in the same way real estate might be transferred
without the exposure of family affairs, and at the same
time fetch its full value. He would not pretend to go into
the details of the measure, but he heard enough of it to
give it a hearty and warm support. He had no doubt that
the object of his hon. friend could be carried out, if not by
one bill, by a succession of bills. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUdll3 said that as the bill was only permissive, it
would not be of that use which otherwise it might be. The
present system entailed a great loss on landed proprietors.
btolieved that there was a difference of two years and a
half perchese in the sale of an estate in Scotland and an
estate of equal value in England. With this fact before
it, it was extraordinary that a nation which boasted of its
good sense had so long tolerated so vicious • system. He
was present when an estate is Belgium was conveyed in
five minutes. Any plan that would introduce similar
facilities in the sale and transfer of land is England would
confer the greatest benefit on the public, and on the owners
of real property.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
THE CLEIfOY RESERVES IN CANADA.
Mr. F. PEEL said he rose to ask for leave to introduce
a bill which should empower the legislature of Canada to
oxen's, a control over the provisions which then regulated
the arrangement of the clergy reserves in that colony ; and
he trusted that the house would bear is mind how impor-
tant that question was, and how great an interest the peo-
ple of that province felt in it, if, in doing his best to pat
the house in possession of the precise nature of the bill, he
trespassed for some little time upon its attention. (Hear,
bear.) The clergy reserves constituted a fund of no incon-
siderable magnitude. They took their origin from a period
as far back as the year 1791. At that time the province of
Canada was divided in two parts; and in the place of the
single council of government which had legislated for the
whole province, there were substituted two representative'
legislatures, one for each province ; and in the act knows
as the Constitutional Act, which made that alteration in the
constitution of Canada, it was provided that wh the
crown disposed of its waste lands one-seventh of the value
should be reserved for the benefit of the protestant clergy.
Now, under that provision land continued to be reserved
for a period of fifty years, and in 1340 an act was pared
which was a bar to any further reservations of land. But
in the course of those fifty years a very great quantity of
land was reserved, a great portion of which had no doubt
been sold; and at the present time the clergy reserves con-
sisted partly of land, and partly of investments in the funds
of this country and of Canada, which had arisen from the
disposition of land originally reserved for this pupas.
Now the manner in which this fund was appropriated was
this. Ite revenue was applied to the payment of the stipends
of ministers of different denominations. It was not the fact
that those denominations participated in the fund in pro-

portion to their relative numbers, or to the strength of each
denomination ; for it would be found that, notwithstanding
the change which took place in the year 1840, the esta-
blished churches of England and of Scotland de-
rived by far the greatest advantage from the ex-
istence of the fund. He would read an extract
fkom a despatch of Lord Elgin, accompanying what
was known as the Blue Book for the year 1851, which
showed how the clergy reserves were appropriated in that
year. In 18.51, it appeared, the clergy of the church of
England, in the two provinces, received about 12,00 W.,
while the population professing their religion amounted
altogether to about a quarter of a million. The church of
Scotland received at the same time 6,5001., having a popu-
lation of 61,000. The United Synod of the Presbyterian
Church of Upper Canada received 4641 ; the Roman catho-
lic church, 1,3691.; the Wesleyan Methodists, 6391. Now,
open what authority was this distribution made ? It was
Mile on the authority of an act of parliament passed in the
year 1840; and as that act, and the circumstances which
preceded and led to the passing of it, were considered to
have a very important bearing on the conclusion which
ought to be arrived at in the present day, ho would
give a short summary of the proceedings. (Hear, hear.)
The great bulk of the clergy reserves were in the province
of Upper Canada. In consequence of a term used in the
Constitutional Act of 1791—the term " rotestaat clergy"—
the church of England advanced, and succeeded in este
blushing down to the year 1810, an exclusive claim to the
advantages of that fund. Now, the majority of the popu-
lation of Upper Canada professed a religion which wu not
that of the church of England ; and it was not surprising,
lihseefore that the monopoly of that church gave rise to
seasiderible jealousy and agitation in the legisl f the
province. The house would find that from about the year
1823, when the reserves first began to be of value, and were
ant sold, down to the year 1840, there were continual pro-
longing' in the legislature of Upper Canada. They would
Mad 'notions, addresses, resolutions, bills, passing through
the House of Assembly ; at one time urging the admission
of other denominations to • participation in the ad-

vantages of this religious endOwnstnit, at another time
proposing that the reserves should be applied to secular
purposes. The legislative council of the province never
concurred in the views of the House of Assembly. The
two branches of the legislature were continually at vari-
ance, they could not be brought to acquiesce even in any
compromise on the question; and in the year 1835, the
legislative council, despairing of coming to any terms with
the House of Assembly, proposed that the whole question
should be referred to this country, and that the imperial
parliament should put an end to the difference. Now it
was important to notice the words In which Lord Glenelg,
who at that tines wax the colonial minister, answered this
application. This was an extract from his dexpatch, in
the Parliamentary Papers of the year 1840, No. 200 The
chief practical question is, whether her Majesty should
be advised to recommend to parliament the assump-
tion to itself of the office of deciding on the future
appropriation of these lands. There are two distinct
reasons both of which appear to me conclusively to forbid
that course of proceeding ; first of all, that parliamentary
legislation, on any subject of exclusively internal concern,
in any British colony possessing a representative assembly,
is, as a general rule, unconstitutional." (Hear, hear.) He
gave another reason, which was, that the constitutional act
of 1791 had previously left this subject to be dealt with by
the local legislature of the province. That was the im-
pression which prevailed at that time, and down to the
year 1810; and he would show immediately that it arose
from an erroneous construction of the act of 1791. Well,
the legislature of Canada being thus prompted by the colo-
nial minister, again entered upon the discussion of the
question. lie found that between 1835 and 1839 bills
again passed through the House of Assembly, to
which the legislative council refused its assent ;
and that in the year 1839, both houses con-
curred in a measure vesting these lands, free from any
conditions, he thought, in the crown, and at all events re-
ferring the question to the Imperial Parliament. At that
time the noble lord the leader of the house was the colo-
nial minister, and this ens the language in which he replied
to the proposal: " I cannot admit," he said, " that there
exists in this country greater facilities than in Upper Ca-
nr.da for the adjustment of this controversy; on the con-
trary,tbe provincial legislature will bring to the decision of it
an extent of accurate information upon the wants and gene.
cal opinions of society iu that country in which parliament is
unavoidably deficient." Thus, a second time the colonial
minister refused to advise parliament to deal with this
question and referred it back to the colonial legislature.
, He found that upon receiving this second invitation the
' twolhouses did succeed is agreeing to a measure, owing is
I a great degree to the tact and parliamentary management Of
Lord Sedenham ; and the bill, which passed the Rouse of
Assembly by a narrow majority, gave the House of Atteem-
bly much more favourable terms than could have been ex-
pected from the previous action of that house in referent*
ito the subject. That bill came to th 6 country, and in ac-
cordunce with the constitution it had to he on the table of
both housis 30 days before receiving the royal sanction. It
was objeeted by the Bishop of Exeter that the legislature
of Upper Canada had exceeded its powers in dealing with
this question, the Constitutional Act of 1791 giving them