The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-31 00:00:00

EVENING 'EDITION.

pass that measure and it would have the effect of
(
bringing back the affections of the people. He felt
assured that no man could prevent him from succeding
to the extent that the people would know that there
were some—at all events, there was one—in that
House, who duly prized that most invaluable
right which was inherent in them.—(Hears hear.)
The people did not meet now except in circumstances
ad agitation—they did not meet except with feelings so
inflamed that they were likely to be led to mischievous
acts. The best disposed of the people were not as-
sembled. Now if meetings could be established on the
footing which he proposed, these disorderly proceedings
would soon be terminated. The tine was now come
when the upper orders could not stand aloof, and if
they meant to live in safety, they must mix with the
people and show themselves as their fellow-men and
brethren. If these meetings should be held and the
ministers of religion would attend in order to sooth their
passions, they would render petitioning one of the
most glorious instruments in the hands of pro-
vidence to raise the country to a pitch of pros-
perity which it never yet had attained. The
second object which he had in view, would be one
of a not less important nature, and not less difficult.
It was a circumstance which certainly had struck him as
remarkable, that on the very night when he was called on
by the Speaker to give notice of his motion, Moaday, 15th
1 July, the flames were rising in the Bull Ring at Bir-
mingham, proving that the passions of the people if
not controlled would produce fearful results. A feel-
ing was prevalent among the people that they were
not called upon to obey laws in the making of which
they had no share.—(Hear.) No sentiment could
be more dangerous, or more deeply to be reprobated.
But this showed what was rankling in the minds of the
lower classes, who, having just knowledge enough to
see the narrow sphere in wich they were placed, and
having thus their discontent stimulated, were natu-
rally irritated, and their dissatisfaction had now arisen
to an alarming height. There were some in that House,
who would vote for Universal Suffrage, and many who
voted for Household Suffrage—which in reality meant
Universal Suffrage. Now, he objected to this,
because he believed it altogether unconstitutional. One
of the great principles of the Constitution, but unhap-
pily not in modern times sufficiently regarded, was, that
there existed a broad line of difference between direct
and indirect taxation ; that there was a vast difference
between telling a man that he must, if he drink beer ox
tea pay a little more for it than if it were not taxed, and
the sending a tax-gatherer to collect, in money, a certain
portion of the annual profits of his lands or houses, and that
1 it was to the latter only the principle of representation
co-extensive with taxation applied. To establish Uni-
versal Suffrage would be in fact to leave property with-
out protection. Indeed, the Hon. Member for Old-
ham, had now on the notice paper a motion
as coupled with Universal Suffrage, which would
have the effect of a property tax. Under
these circumstances, looking on the one hand to
the ruinous consequences that must result from the in-
troduction of measures such as that to which he had
alluded, and on the other to the practicability of safely
giving a certain degree of influence to the masses of the
people who were at present not qualified by the posses-
sion of property for the exercise of the franchise, he
wished to consider whether it was not possible. safely to
devise a plan for this purpose. He knew he should
be met by the argument of the difficulty of showing
at what point he would stop. His proposal was, that a
meeting of the unrepresented inhabitants of every pa-
rish in England should be held in a quiet and orderly
manner, which meeting should elect foremen, whose
power would endure for a year, and the person so elected
annually should have the right of voting at every elec-
tion for Members of Parliament which should take
during the year in the county. He believed by this
plan he should be adding 15,000 persons to the con-
stituency, and this he considered no trifling boon to the
unrepresented portion of the community, and as it was
natural to suppose that the men so elected would be
among the most intelligent, energetic, and active of their
class, he considered he should b giving them great in-
fluence by giving them this right of voting in the election
of Members of Parliament ; and if eventually the sys-
tem should be established in Ireland and Scotland, the
addition to the constituency would be double the
amount of what he had stated, and as these men would
most likely, having the same interests, be inclined to
act together, no Member of Parliament but would be
inclined to treat their representations with respect, and
thus they would form a medium of communication and
influence with Members of Parliament. He bad no
doubt that many would think that Universal Suffrage,
as compared with the plan he proposed to adopt,
would be considered a prudent and cautious measure.
He thought that there was much in the working of the
Poor-laws that might be alleviated. They should
depart from the system of treating the labouring classes
as mere machines ; if they assembled them together for
the purpose of discussing their rights, they would do
more for them than all the relief that was given through
the medium of workhouses. There was another
subject to which he would just advert, which
was with respect to the uncultivated lands in the
Colonies ; if those were given to the poor great good
might be effected, He might be told that what he pro-
posed would change the face of society in this country,
but to those who said so he would say that the great
landlords of England were not any one of them en-
titled to hold their land except in connection with
certain duties which they owed to their fellow-men. It
was not for him to trace through history what those
duties were, but he felt bound to say, that the system
that had been going on for the last two centuries
had led to absenteeism, which had had the worst
effects. He had now nearly concluded what he had to
say ; he had carefully abstained from making use of
language that was calculated to do mischief.—( Hear,
hear.) England was the greatest nation in the world ;
but were the lower classes in it in as good a condition
as other countries ? Certainly not ; the lower classes
in India we* far better off. He believed there was in
this country a great uode.veloped power of improving
its condition. It had been said that poverty was easier
remedied in the United States, because those States
were surrounded by a boundless wilderness, where the
poor might always find land. But there was as much
waste land in this country as in the United States.
Besides, we had Colonies possessing admirable climates
and fertile soil. All these were points which the
people might well consider. With views such as those
he had thus stated, he had submitted his present propo-
sition. He was sensible that having began late in life
his Parliamentary duties he was very incompetent, in
many respects, for their discharge. He certainly did
not recommend his suggestion as likely to prove the
fortunate panacea for all our social ills. He had
brought it forward, believing it would be beneficial in
its results but with so little of obstinate or predeter-
mined prepossession on its behalf, that it now occurred
to him at the elose of his speech, that be had not
asked any one to second his motion.—(A laugh.) But
he could not conceive that a proposition so intimately
connected with the interests of the people would not
want a seconder.

Mr. HODGES seconded the motion, which having
been put,
Mr. HUME said no motion should be made for
securing to the working classes of this country a due in-
fluence in the election of Members of Parliament, with-
out having his support. The present proposition ap-
po.:ared to have that end is view, therefore he should
support it. He might state that in Scotland, in all the
boroughs, it had been the regulation to have annual
meetings of all the inhabitants, to consult upon the com-
mon good—the original design having evidently been
that contemplated by the Hon. Member, to give every
individual some interest in the management of affairs
within his particular locality. Though the Hon. Mem-
ber had stated some things in which he (Mr. Hume)
did not concur, still to a proposition calculated to give
the people greater influence in the election of Members
of Parliament, he was anxious to afford his support.
The Hon. Member had not, however, stated in what
way he meant that his object should be carried into
effect, though, doubtless, he would be prepared to do
so, having paid considerable attention to the condition
of the working classes in this and other countries. The
result of the Hon. Gentleman's experience was, he
(Mr. Hume) feared, too much against our working
fellow-countrymen, for both in America and India—
degraded India—the lower classes were better off than
in England. Yet this country possessed every requisite
for rendering life agreeable and happy. To aid, if
possible, in discovering the causes of this difference, he
(Mr. Hume) should undoubtedly support the motion
for leave to bring in the Bill ; and he believed that any
man who brought in a mobsure tending to make the
population of this country more satisfied with their
situation than they now were, would confer a benefit on
his country,

The SPEAKER—WiII the Hon. Member divide ?
Sir C. GREY—Why, Sir, there does not seem to be
any opposition.—(Laughter.) I certainly wish the
question to be put.
The question was accordingly put, and about two or
three voices were heard both for the " Ayes " and the
" Noes."

Tke SPEAKER declared that the " Noes" had it.
Sir C. GREY said he would not put the House to
the trouble of dividing —(Hear, hear.)
TRIAL OF ELECTIONS BILL.
A message from the Lords announced that their
Lordships had agreed to the Trial of Controverted
Elections Bill without any amendments.

CHURCH-RATES.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he was about to bring
before the House a case of great injustice and oppression.
It was the case of a person who had been long confined for
the non-payment of Church-rates, in Chelmsford Gaol. The
real ground of: that imprisonment was evidently that he
was a Dissenter from the Established Church, and an
active partisan of tire Liberal cause in the county of
Essex. Thou he was a poor man, he (Mr. Duncombe)
hoped tlittt the House would not entertain the idea that
therefore religious scruples and conscientious faith could
not influence him, as they might the greatest and most
distinguished. And provided he should make out a
case of hardship and ill treatment on account of reli-
piagia,OD44l,oll3, he trusted that the House would take

measures for preventing the recurrence of such cases.
at least after next Session. This case had first been
brought fdrward on a petition which had been pre-
sented by the Hon. Member for Leeds (Mr. Ba;nes),
whd was not now in his Place, from John Thorogood, who
cortiplained that he bad been confined in Chelmsford
Gaol for the non-payment of ss. 6d. Church-rates. A.
subsequent petition-had been presented by himse' f (Mr.
Duncombe), complaining that the former petition bad
not been attended to. and that lad, the petitioner, had
been treated, if possible, with increased rigour. He
(Mr. buncombe) had asked the Under Secretary of
State for the Home Department if the Government
were aware of the manner in which this individual had
been treated, complaining, as he (lid, that he had been
treated as a felon ; that he had been confined for six
months, eighteen hours of the twenty-four, in solitary
imprisonment ; that he bad been allowed to see his
friends only as felons were, and that he had been re-
fused permission to see his wife on Sundays. Now the
Visiting Magistrates of the county of Essex had laid a
statement before the House in their vindication, wherein
they admitted the cause of this individual's deten-
tion to have been the non-payment only of five shil-
lings for Church-rates. They said, however, that
he had not been treated as a felon ; they stated that he
had not been confined in the felon's prison. He (Mr.
Duncombe) had inquired and found that although this
individual was not at present confined in the same prison
as the male felons, he was confined in the same prison
with the female felons, and in the prison in which the
male felons had till recently been placed. As to John
Thorogood's being treated as a felon, that could, of
course, apply only to certain particulars. But this he
stated, that he was in fact worse situated than a felon
in this respect, that a felon's confinement was limited,
and definite ; whereas his, (Thorogood's) imprisonment
was unlimite and indefinite. It would only be termi-
nated by death, unless the House interposed to put an
end to it. The Visiting Magistrates further stated,
that this person had much better lodging than felons,
that there were nine good rooms on the debtors' side of
the prison, of which he might have his choice. Yes, but
on what terms ? Not without paying more to the Go-
vernor than his circumstances would permit. They
further stated that he could work at his trade as a
shoemaker. True, but only under certain regulations,
and having the sale of his goods effected by the Governor,
at very disadvantageous terms compared with what he
might obtain himself. In answer to the charge that
he was only permitted to see his friends in th same
hours as felons, the Visiting Magistrates lightly replied,
that, " to debtors, felons, and John Thorogood, surely
the twenty-four hours were alike." It did not require the
sagacity of the Essex Magistrates to inform the House
that to all persons the twenty-four hours were alike ;
that was not the complaint of John Thorogood. His
complaint was, that, by harsh regulations, the twenty-
four hours were as irksome as twenty-four days. The
regulations of the Warwick gaol, which had been re-
cently referred to, were merciful, in comparison with
those of the Chelmsford. At Warwick prisoners might
see their friends any time between eight and half-past
nine in summer, and eight and nine in winter. Then,
as to Thorogood's not being allowed to see his wife on
Sundays, the Magistrates themselves admitted that out
of about thirty Sundays during which he had been
confined, he had been allowed the company of his wife
only four Sundays. Now he (Mr. Duncombe) did
submit to the House whether such inflictions as
these were consonant with the spirit of Christianity?
—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Why not have adopted
against Thorogood some more effective and more sum-
mary proceeding ? Why imprison him for life ? If it
should be suggested that the man only wished to ac-
quire notoriety as a kind of parochial martyr, he (Mr.
Duncombe) would say nothing was further from the
fact. He held in his hand a letter from this individual
to a friend, written before it was known that the case
would be brought under the notice of that House ;
written, evidently, in real sincerity of feeling, and show-
ing that he was a man of strong religious principles.
While the law as to Church-rates was neglected to be
enforced in large and populous towns in deference to
public opinion, there was something savouring of cow-
ardice in thus singling out individuals in humble life, for
oppression and punishment. The House might not at
once be prepared to release this individual, but they
could at once express their opinion respecting the pro-
ceedings—proceedings which reflected no credit on the
Essex Magistrates, nor on the Government who allowed
the question of Church-rates to remain so long in
a most unsatisfactory position. Three years ago, the
subject having been brought fdrward by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was subsequently
referred to a Committee, who had eat a short
time in 1837, and the whole of 1838. The instruction
to that Committee having been, to ascertain what would
be the possible and probable amount of any increased
value that might be obtained by an improved manage-
ment of Church Lands. The appointment of the Com-
mittee was considered by many at the time as only a
decent way of shelving the question. And when they
reported, they left unsettled the very point they were
directed to decide, for they stated that they could not
positively calculate the amount of improved value. So
that after all the question remained just where it was.
God only knew where it would stand next Session.
At all events, he hoped the House would now pledge
itself to consider the subject practically, at the earliest
possible period, and express an opinion upon the pre-
sent transaction, which might shame these Essex autho-
rities and the persecution they allowed—a persecution
alike cruel to the individual concerned, and discredit-
able to the Established Church.—( Hear, bear.) He
begged to move, " That whereas it appears by certain
papers laid before this House, that John Thorogood,
a Protestant Dissenter, has been confined in her Ma-
jesty's county gaol of Essex, since the 16th of January
last, for neglecting to appear in the Consistorial Court
of the Bishop of London, for the non-payment of ss. 6d.
being the amount of Church-rate assessed upon him for
the parish of Chelmsford ; and whereas, during this
period, the said John Thorogood has been treated with
uncalled-for severity, it is the opinion of this House,
that the imprisonment of the said Jobn Thorogood is
not only cruel and unjust, but reflects great discredit
upon those at whose instigation these proceedings were
instituted, and under whose sanction they are so perti-
naciously and vindictively continued ; and while this
House laments that it has not the power of affording
immediate relief to the said John Thorogood, yet it is
of opinion that it will be the duty of the Legislature at
the earliest possible period of the next Session of Par-
liament, to make such alterations in the existing laws
for levying Church-rates, as shall prevent the recur-
rence of a like violence being ever again inflicted
upon the religious scruples of that portion of her
Majesty's subjects who conscientiously dissent from
the rites or doctrines of the Established Church."

On the SPEAKER'S asking who seconded the
motion, both
Mr. EASTIIOPE and Mr. HAWES intimated
their assent.

The question having been put from the Chair,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had only a few
observations to make upon this subject. He would not
enter, as the Hon. Member for Finsbury had entered,
into the general question of Church-rates. It appeared
that the Hon. Member had inconveniently mixed up
two questions, both in his resolution and his speech—
two questions which were wholly distinct. Whether or
not John Thorogood had been treated with undue and
improper severity in the gaol of Chelmsford, was one
distinct question. Supposing, for the sake of the
argument, that this person had been treated with un-
due severity—the Hon. Member went on to argue
that the system of Church-rates being cruel and unjust,
ought to be changed. But it did not by any means
follow, that because John Thorogood had been treated
with undue severity, that therefore the Church-rate
system was bad.—(Hear, hear, hear.) A man taken
up for felony, or for any offence, under the best of laws,
—might be treated with improper severity while 'con-
fined in gaol—but what- ground would that be for
abolishing the laws against house-breaking or forgery ?
The Hon. Member, therefore, had mingled two ques-
tions wholly unconnected, and in his argument had
constantly confounded them. One of the complaints
was that John Thorogood was treated as a felon, to
which it was answered by the Magistrates that he was
not, for that he was kept in a room 15 feet by 16,
19 feet high, and that he received many indulgences
not usually allowed to prisoners. It was said that his
imprisonment was indefinite and unlimited—unlike that
of the felons. It was the law of England that any person
not appearing to answer a citation before the Ecclesiasti-
cal Judge (Dr. Luslaington), must be imprisoned without
any definite term of confinement being fixed ; that
state of the law might or might not be bad, but it did
not follow that a man was ill-treated, because he was
under that law confined for an indefinite period, or
that he had any right to complain either of gaoler or
Justices, who, if they received a man sentenced to con-
finement by the law of England, and treated him in the
best way under the regulations, could not be blamed be-
cause the law affixed no exact date for the termination
of the imprisonment. It could scarcely be considered,
again, any very severe hardship that a person could only
see his friends from ten to four every day.---( Hear.)
There was one point which had not been adverted to
in the petition printed for the use of Members—it had
been said that no person was permitted to visit pri-
soners without an order from the Magistrates, and that
his wife had only received four such orders during the
whole. period of his imprisonment. The Magistrates
stated that the wife having obtained this permission,
had joined her husband, and that he had showed himself
at the window ; a crowd had collected, and he had ad-
dressed them on the hardship of the state of the law by
which he had been incarcerated. The Visiting Jus-
tices being of opinion that this ought not to be allowed
in a gaol, had refused to allow him any longer the in-
dulgence which they had previously allowed him. He
was of opinion, looking at the whole case, that the Jus-
tices had not imposed upon him any measure of seve-
rity greater than was required for his safe custody.
With regard to questions of the law, he must say, that
le, for one, did not wish the present law on that subject
to continue. He wished some satisfactory plan could
be devised, whereby the funds necessary for the re-
quisite repairs of the Churches could be obtained in a

TIIE SUN, L

less objectionable, and leas onerous wanner than at
present. A plan had been proposed which had not re-
ceived from the House the support necessary for the
carrying it into effect. He must at the same time state
that, however anxious he might be on this subject, he
did not wish to see any plan for abolishing Church-rates
without an equivalent, as he did not think it would be
fair to say that the Church should depend for its re-
pairs entirely on voluntary contributions, but he did
not think it tieteSsafy to enter into.the consideration of
that question at present. The Hon. Gentleman had
' said it did not appear that this individual had at all
wished to exhibit himself as a martyr ; he must differ
from the Hon. Gentleman, as he thought that a person
could not be considefecl hi any other light, who would,
most conscientiously, no doubt, submit to go to prison
rather than pay .ss. for a rate, although he might con-
sider it a most unjustifiable infliction. The Noble Lord,
we believe, concluded by moving the previous question
by way of amendment.
Mr. HARVEY was not surprised that the Noble
Lord had characterised the subject in the manner he
had done. This was a great subject, although
it was about the apparently insignificant amount
of five shillings. He knew the difficulty that
Members of the Legislature had in suppressing their
derision when they heard that a man should suffer him-
self to be imprisoned for the amount of 55., which,
whether important or not in a pecuniary point of view,
was of the utmost importance on the score of principle.
He agreed with the Noble Lord in the dissection he
had made of the subject between the payment of
' Church-rates by a person dissenting from the Esta-
blished Church and persons placing themselves in con-
tempt by not appearing to a legal process, because he
fully admitted the necessity that existed of compelling
every person to yield instant obedience to the mandates
of the law. But why did they not have recourse to the
same means in this description of contempt of enforcing
obedience to the mandates that they did when property
was concerned ? If an answer were withheld to a pro-
' cess issued from the Court of Chancery, a man was not
allowed to remain in contempt by submitting to perpe-
tual incarceration ; he was not allowed in this way to
deprive a plaintiff of his property ; but if he refused to
return an answer, an answer was entered pro confesso,
and he was not permitted to remain in contempt. The
reason of this was obvious, because the matter
in contempt related to property ; but when it
was a question of conscience instead of property
the cases were perfectly different. If a person in con-
tempt in Chancery was compelled to put in an answer,
why, he would ask, was not the same course pursued in
matters of ecclesiastical demand—why was not his an-
swer also taken pro confess() I' Because this course
would be inconvenient to those interested—because pro-
ceedings of this nature were undertaken against this
man because he bad rendered himself disagreeable—
therefore it was that this legal persecution was applied to
him, and it was so applied to him because he had thought
and acted for himself. He believed he was speaking in
the presence of many Hon. Gentlemen from Essex, who
knew well that in all cases of dispute concerning tithes,
or rates, or ecclesiastical dues, where the matter in
question did not amount to 405., the parties might be
summoned before a Magistrate, who might issue a war-
rant against his chattels for the amount in the same
way as for rent, or for any other debt. Why was this
not done in the present case? He would tell the
House the reason. Because John Thorogood was an
inconvenient man in the town of Chelmsford—his opin-
ions in religion,and his conduct in politics were obnoxious.
It was well known that the town of Chelmsford was a
great citadel of Conservatism, and disrelished all attacks
on their opinions, especially in all matters where religion
was concerned. Therefore it was that they had deter-
mined in every possible manner to harrass this man,
and had issued a process for the recovery of ss. 9d.,
the expenses attending which amounted to 61. He
would wish to know from the Noble Lord his opinion
as to the propriety of this method of proceeding. Was it
right—was it just—that because a man objects to a
demand of ss. 9d., which he in his conscience believes
to be unjust, that therefore he should be saddled with
an expence of 6/. ? What would be said if a Member
of that House had a demand made upon him for 100/.
—and, speaking of Members of that House, they must
talk of hundreds and thousands of pounds instead of
shillings and pence—what would be said if that Member
were to reply, It is no such thing, you have no right to
make this demand, I owe you 901., which I will pay
you, and no more. I shall not pay the other 10/. The
person demanding the sum refuses the 901., and the first
process that is issued is attended with an expence of
6001. torecover this 101. Why the whole House would be
up in arms—all party differences would be sunk in order
to apply a remedy to the evil, or at least to institute a
rigid examination into the merits of the case. Yet here
was the case of a poor man, a shoemaker, who has a
demand made upon him of ss. 9d., equal in amount to
half a week's salary—he liked to use that word salary
in addressing the House—he says, You have no right
to make this demand—l am a Protestant Dissenter—l
never go into your Church—l shall not pay it—my
conscience will not permit me so to do. Or he may say
It is not a legal demand—there is not so much due—l
paid you one half year's rate only six months ago—there
is now only due ss.—the party demanding refuse to enter
into discussion on the subject ; but say, We will have
all or none, will you pay us? Yes, or no ? The man
answers No! but subsequently he advises with a friend,
who says, There can be no doubt that it is a direct
robbery but rather than be subjected to the expense
and inconvenience of defending your rights, I should
advise you to submit to the demand. The man takes
this advice, determines to submit to what he considers
a robbery, and offers payment—but he is told ss. 6d.
won't do now—you have let the thing go too far, you
must pay 6/. additional for the privelege you
have enjoyed of being subjected to the Eccle-
siastical jurisdiction. He had presented a peti-
tion to the House that day from two of his
constituents who had been subject to the process of
these Ecclesiastical Courts. Measures were brought
forward in that House for augmenting the salaries of the
Judges, which were sure to pass ; but when inquiry was
asked for into the practices of these Courts, or into a
subject connected with them, the House was told that
the subject was too large to enter on. Was the House
aware of what these Ecclesiastical Courts were ? Was
the House aware of the ecclesiastical tyranny existing in
this country ? The subject had been denounced by an
Hon. and Learned Member in most eloquent terms, in
terms of such a nature as almost to lead one to doubt
the sincerity ; yet still no inquiry followed ; and to-
morrow evening there would be before the House a Bill
for increasing the salary of an Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber, who already received a splendid salary as one of the
Judges of those Courts. Was the House aware that
there were seven distinct Ecclesiastical Courts ? He
would quote what Blackstone—for on these subjects ha
liked to quote Conservative authority—he would state
what Blackstone said on this subject. He described
these Courts as the remnants of Papal tyranny which
even the Reformation had left. There were seven of
these Courts, into any of which an unfortunate indivi-
dual might be dragged. He stated this in the pre-
sence of the Honourable Member for Oxford, who
had all the weight of the Colleges on his back,
and whose attention he wished to draw to this
subject. There was first the Archdeacon's Court, the
authority of which was confined to the locality of the
Archdeaconry in which it was situated—from that they
might be.introduced into the Consistory Court, as was
exemplified in the petition which he had that day pre-
sented, in which Mr. Apsley Pellatt had stated that,
having received a summons to appear in the Consistory
Court, because, as the summons assumed, he was de-
sirous of it, that he might escape expense, have prompt
justice and the benefit of the advice of Doctors learned
in the laws, in reply to this, Mr. Apsley Pellatt had
stated that he would rather the case should go before a
Magistrate or into the Archdeacon's Court ; so that
these gentlemen, who were actuated by a most re-
ligious desire for truth, began by stating a glaring false-
hood out of their regard to religion. Mr. Apsley Pellatt
went before Sir Herbert Jenner, and stated that lie
was not desirous of coming before the Consistorial
Court at all, and as for having the advantage of the
advice of a Learned Doctor he should almost con-
sider it an insult if he were to offer to engage him, for
all the Doctors had sworn to uphold the Established
Church, and how could he think of offering him a brief,
with a heavy fee, to argue in his favour against the
payment of a rate for the support of the Established
Church? The complaint against the Doctors was a heavy
one, although the payment might be light. He had
appeared and had pleaded his own cause, and thus, as
far as he was concerned, saved the expense of any
Learned Doctor for himself, although the costs he had
had to pay amounted to between 201. and 301. for the
Learned Doctor employed on the other side. But
this was only a preliminary judgment. If you were
displeased with the Consistorial Court, by an addi-
tional payment you could obtain an introduction into
the Court of Arches. Now, what was the Arches'
Court? Formerly the Archbishop of Canterbury used
to sit in judgment in the Church of St. Mary-le-Bow,
and as there was no great difference between a Bow
and an Arch, this was the origin of the Court of
Arches. But this was not all. If dissatisfied with
your position in the Court of Arches, you could, by a
further payment of forty or fifty pounds, obtain an in-
troduction into the Court of Peculiars, which was an
assembly of grave men, rendered signally significant by
all the paraphernalia of wigs and other helps to wisdom.
—(A laugh.) You might then pass into the Prero-
gative Court—(A laugh)—and if still dissatisfied, thank
God that you lived in a land of liberty and of law, and
that you might still find refuge in the Court of Dele-
gates.—(Loud laughter.) These were blessings bes-
towed upon us by the Church of Rome, at the time
she was anxious to bring all things into subjection to the
Papal authority ; and if you were defeated in all these
six Courts, the tender mercies of the law had provided
relief by instituting the Court of Review.—(Laughter.)
He knew that in a question of this sort many of the
Members would say the man was a fool not to pay
such a paltry sum as ss. ; but the amount was not the
question. It was a question of principle, not of money ;
and there ought to be some method of deciding these
questions in a prompt, cheap, and efficacious manner.