The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, I,ON DON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23,.1.836

would be advantageous to the tithe:-owner----it would be ad-
vantagous td the landlord and to the tenant: The great ad-
vantage to tlic Wirt would be that there would no longer be
a tax epOn his inoustry and capital. At present the tenant
could not place increased
to b:lv A gritsjiionr_fovte.iime_eirpqr
land, but he became !jai,
produce teken feealir,3 •c:oiiid be the
a!,i:• longer, and, the tenant Would ilied be,felle4 fnim a
very 'annoying and diWvantageii,iis,ifilpd&t: The .ight Hon:
Geetleinari proeceded 0, ciintend that this measure, if carried,
'lvor:hi he of the greatest possibly adVantage to the country:
Sir R: PE E rote, and aaid.--:Sir; stith referegee id the
in sure Wore the HouSe, apprhhend that On thd pitesent
OcOasion we are merely betted to bensider whether such a
prima facie case has been Made out in favour of the princi-
ples which it ociiitains that We can feel Ourselves at liberty to
alloW the Bill to go through a second reading:---(Hear.)
to far agree in the principle as to, offer no Opposition in the
measure in its preterit atagci, keit I shall fdserve to mysalf the
right of ead•havotring, in the Committee to effect such modifi
cations of those principles as I shall feel to be advisable.—
( Hear' hear.) With respect to what has been said by the
Hon. Member who has expressed himself so strongly as to the
disposition of landlords in this House to protect their own
interests to the prejudice of others, I certainly do not concur
in the justness or fairness of that complaint.—( Hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman has stated his intention to move an amend-.
meat and take the sense of the House upon a part of the prin-
ciple of the Bill of which he disapproves : but when he so far
concurs in the general principle of the measure the more con-
venient course would be to move his amendment when the Bill
is in Committee. The Hon. Gentleman will then have a suf-
ficient opportunity of evincing his sympathy for the tenant by
moving that one-tenth shall in future be deducted from the
payment to the landlord. The Hon. Gentleman had stated in
the commutation of tithes the interests of the large body of
the people was overlooked • but it will be competent for him
when the Bill goes into dommittee to move any amendment
that he considers expedient. Perhaps, as be seemed to have so
strong an opinion on the subject he may move an amendment
to the effect that no measure will satisfy the country which
does not involve a new appropriation, and that fifty per cent.
at least ought to be devoted to public purposes. The Hon.
Gentleman had contended that whatever reduction takes
place will go into the pockets of the landlords, but with
all his sympathy for the occupying tenant, I do not think that
calling for, full payment would be a very likely mode of giving
satisfaction to the occupying tenant.—(Hear, and a laugh.)
Although the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman (the
Solicitor-General) was certainly lucid in its statement, I must
be allowed to say, that its argument did not appear to me to
be so sufficiently convincing as to incline me to concur in the
panegyric which he pronounced on the measure before the
House.—( Hear, hear.) However, when I say this, lam per-
fectly disposed to consent to the second reading, holding my-
self to be fully at liberty in the Committee to attempt
any improvements and modifications that in my judgment
I shall feel to be desirable.—( Hear, hear.) I shall not
now enter into any argument upon the general question. I
so far concur in the principle of the Bill as to be willing to
have its details considered and improved in Committee.
With respect to the part of the question whether GO or 75
shall be the minimum or maximum, I shall now proceed to
discuss. But as I differ from this part of the proposed Bill, I
shall be prepared to attempt such modifications in the Com-
mittee, and to propose such alterations, as appear to be best
calculated to remedy such parts of the motion as I consider
objectionable—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
the Solicitor-General has stated that this Bill contains two
principles of commutation—namely, that of voluntary agree-
ment, and that of compulsory agreement. It was stated that
the Bill possessed a particular ;claim to support, from the cir-
cumstance of its containing the compulsory principle, and that
this was an advantage which it possessed over the Bill which
I had the honour to propound in the last session of Parlia-
ment. Perhaps the principle of the compulsory agreement
may be a good principle ; but because it has been so described,
and because it has been held up to approbation, it does not
follow that I am bound to assent to it, or that in agreeing to
the second reading of this Bill I am to be held as by any
means giving my unqualified assent to the principles on which
it is founded--( Hear, hear.) What I stated was, with respect
to compulsory agreement, that I considered it much more ex-
pedient and desirable to commence with the principle of vo-
luntary agreement, and that if afterwards we found it neces-
sary to provide for the compulsory agreement, our experience
of the voluntary agreement would afford us a better principle
to apply to the regulation of the compulsory agreement—
( Hear, bear.) The peculiar circumstances of different pa-
rishes would of necessity render it difficult to determine
what principle of compulsory agreement should be applied to
them. If there were particular and peculiar circumstances
in the condition of several different parishes, it would certainly
be difficult to apply the some principle to all of them ; and
this was the reason that made me think that the experience of
many cases of voluntary agreement would, if the compulsory
principle should be found necessary, aid us in applying the
best and safest rule in the application of that principle.—
( Hear, hear.) I must confess that, considering the infinite
varieties of cases and the necessity of caution in the application
of this principle, made me feel that the knowledge and expe-
rience of the operation of the principle of voluntary agreement
should precede our resort to the compulsory principle.—( Hear,
hear.) But the Right Honourable Gentleman has said here
you have two principles of commutation—first, you have
the principle of voluntary agreement, and next you have
the principle of compulsory agreement. This is what
the Right Honourable Gentleman says, but I should like
him to prove to me that the principle of voluntary. agreement
is contained in the Bill at all--(Hear, hear.) Surely it can-
not be called a voluntary agreement where the party act under
constraint. Surely you cannot call it a voluntary agreement
in which one party says to another, " Enter into a voluntary
agreement with me now on certain terms, or I give you notice
that in six months you shall be forced compulsorily to adopt
an agreement."—(Cheers.) This, then is your principle of
voluntary agreement. Why, is it at all reasonable to suppose
that any man, whether titheowncr or tithepayer, would, with
the slightest suggestions of his interest to do otherwise, enter
into a voluntary agreement, when he knows that in six months
time a compulsory agreement must take place. I consider
that the recognition of the principle of compulsory agreement
renders the principle of voluntary agreement to a great extent
nugatory, for it is by no means probable that, with the cer-
tainty of compulsory agreements the voluntary principle of
agreement will operate at all.—(Hear, hear.) I certainly do
not feel bound to concur in this pert of the measure; and it
certainly has always appeared to me that the better course
would have been to have avoided the compulsory agreement
altogether, until at least the principle of voluntary agreement
had gotten a fair trial, and had been sufficiently tested.—
( Hear, hear.) The next proposition in the Bill to which I
feel it necessary to advert is that which provides that besides
an individual agreement there shall also be a parochial agree-
ment, and that the consent of a certain portion shall bind the
rest. This is following out the compulsory principle, and of
this portion of the Bill, with certain modifications, I should
have no hesitation of approving. The object seems to be, in
reference to one of the main portions of the measure, to pro-
vide some principle by which, after six months, unless an ap-
plication for a voluntary agreement be previously made, the
tithepayers and titheowners in a parish shall be compelled to
enter into an agreement as to the amount to be paid. Now, in
case the parishioners meet and proceed to differ on some point
of arrangement according to the provisions of this Bill, very
great inconvenience might, in such a case, arise. The Bill
provides that if, after six months, there be no application for
a voluntary agreement, in such case the power of the Com-
missioners comes into operation, and they proceed to decide
neon the terms of an agreement which then becomes cam_
pulsory ; but then this compulsory power is rendered liable to
great impediment and obstruction by the power •of appeal
that is given to individuals under the provisions of this
Bill. An individual may go the Commissioners and
say that he considers his portion of the payment excessive,
and that he requires a revaluation. Well, then, the consequence
is that a revaluation must take place; and then see all the
trouble, inconvenience, and annoyance to which such a pro-
ceeding is liable to lead. Now let me, for the sake of illus-
tration, suppose the case of a parish containing ten thousand
acres. Now suppose that an individual in that parish, possess-
ing merely a single acre, complain to the Commissioners that
he is overcharged, and appeals against the valuation, what is
the consequence ? Why, that a new valuation must take place
on his appeal. Why, now, if your compulsory principle be,'
good for any thing, if you think fit to apply it to the case of
parish, why will you not apply it to a single case? The case
which I have put is certainly an extreme case ; but it serves to
illustrate the defect of that portion of the Bill to which I am
adverting.—( Hear, hear.) Now with respect to the mode
of computing the average for the seven years. Suppose the
case of a person who for six years of the seven has not bad
any arable land, and has on the last year applied a portion of
the land to tillage, how are you in that case to estimate the
average? Then you have to consider that with the compul-
sory principle held out by this Bill, there is little likelihood of
voluntary agreement. Either the tithepayer will be unwill-
ing- to enter into the agreement, or the titheowncr indisposed
to agree, each having a different interest, and anxious to
succeed in obtaining his own terms. In such a case they
will of course await the operation of the compulsory princi-
ple. That portion which gives the right of individual appeal
scorns to be objectionable, as calculated to impede and embar-
rass all the other machinery of the Bill. It appears to me
that it would be much better if you introduce into the Bill
an enactment that the opinion of a respectable portion of
the tithepayers should be binding on the minority, and that
on an application of a majority of the parish to the Com-
missioners, the compulsory agreement should then take place,
and should be deemed final and conclusive—( Hear.) So far
from reconciling conflicting opinions, I think that this part
of the Bill would have quite a contrary tendency. I cer-
tainly consider that this will lead to much inconvenience, for
it will give a scope to individual'dissent which will prove in-
jurious. One portion may object to the rent-charge; another
may prefer the payment of tithe in kind, and in every case a
party may appeal to the award of the Commissioners. I cer-
tainly think that the award of the Commissioners ought to be
considered final, and that when the compulsory composition
does take place, it should be conclusive.--( Loud cheers.)
Now, in disputed cases, or in cases of disputed valuation, see
what a difficult task you impose on the Commissioners.—( Hear,
hear.) How are they to proceed to determine what is to
be the value of the tithe commutations ? They must have to
examine into the nature of the crops, into the qualities of the
soil, the value cf the land, and where there are conflicting
parties this new valuation, instead of being a source of satis-
faction and advantage, will only be productive of dissension
and animosity.—( Hear.) In every case I cannot conceive
how they can ascertain the value of the produce of every acre
with any degree of satisfaction. This Bill has been greatly
praised, and the largest expectations have been held out of all
the benefits it will confer upon the country. 1, however,
would advise the Noble Lord not to be sanguine on this point,
for, unless those defects which I have pointed out be remedied,

your new .principle will be peddnctite of anything but ettis-
. . „.
• faction: It fias bCeti caiculated that gfedi ifficiiltleS lie in
the way of the settlement of this question. That iam frde td
.)
admit. It has been said of the measure before the House that
it possesses many advantages over alb others that have ore-
ceded it; Ind tlidt l!: haf, the trcr,it, cf being an attempt to 'set-
Ile this iPieStidri id i giiii:,it of fairnegs imVaPda all parties
whdie. iiiiekat§ drE iniolted; Tiidt it has been Conceived In
et spirit df fzili-rkiii is i:riaititi id lid preSnrEted. }jut it is ne-
cessary to see tit that is not a mere fiiiiiisibie kittest but to
regulate arid modify the details so as that it may be considdrdd
4 meristtfe Of fairness: The Right Hon. Baronet proceeded
to Cdmrtient iiiichi editaiii pdttions. of the details of the Bill,
which he did not approve of. .ilitil reilr.iCi td the landlords,
whatever had been said of the landlords in that Hem,
he was sure that no feelings of personal interest would influ-
ence them in the discharge of their duties. He was sure that
they viottid thiddftithti the consideration of this Bill with a
determination to do full justice to the Interests of all parties,
and with respect to the Clergy, considering their peculiar
position, and that, in addition, they were without any direct
representation in that House, he was sure that they would feel
it more peculiarly incumbent on them to be vigilant and cauti-
ous lest they should not do full justice to a body which was so
peculiarly circumstanced. The Right Hon. Baronet con-
cluded by stating that he was ready to enter on the considera-
tion of the measure, holding himself fully at liberty to attempt
to modify any part to which he objected. He was not opposed
to the general principle of the Bill, but he was dissatisfied at
many of the details. His Majesty's Government had stated
their desire to bring forward a measure satisfactory to the
Church and the country. He trusted that in the attempt to
establish the commutation of tithes they would not neglect the
interests of other parties which claimed consideration. The
Right Hon. Baronet resumed his seat amidst loud cheers.
Lord J. RUSSELL was glad that the discussion seemed
to be carried on in a spirit of fairness on all sides ; but
though all had stated their views in a fair spirit, the difficulty
of the question was sufficiently evident from the variety of opi-
nions that had been expressed respecting the present measure.
His Hon. Friend the Member for Wiltshire had called it a
Clergyman's Bill, but stated that he would not object to it on
that account ; and the Hon. Member for Southwark had called
it a landlord's Bill. However, he could assure the House that
the measure was framed with no bias on either side, and solely
with a view to the satisfactory settlement of the most impor-
tant question. The Noble Lord proceeded to refer to the
opinions that had been expressed with reference to the Bill by
several Members. The Right Hon. Baronet, who had just
addressed the House, objected to the valuation by the Com-
missioners. With respect to the voluntary agreement, he con-
sidered it very probable that the tithe-owner and the landlord
might agree to a voluntary arrangement. The Right Hon.
Baronet had stated the advantage that attended the voluntary
agreement, but objected to the compulsory principle. In re-
ference to that part of the Right Hon. Baronet's argument,
he would say that they had had already ample experience
from the experiments that had been made of the little like-
lihood there was that these voluntary agreements would be-
come general, and therefore they had felt it advisable to
recognize the compulsory principle.—(Hear, hear.) The
Noble Lord then proceeded to apply himself to Sir R. Peel's
argument respecting voluntary agreement. He differed with
the Right Hon. Baronet that the experience of the volun-
tary agreement would furnish a rule for the application of
the compulsory principle. He vindicated the propriety of
having recognised the principle of compulsory agreements
in the Bill, and contended that its recognition would
have considerable influence in promoting voluntary agree-
ments. There might, perhaps, be some difference on either
side, but when they saw the certainty of a compulsory
agreement they would accommodate their differences and en-
ter into an arrangement without any compulsory interference.
In the instances where the titheowners were clerical it was
generally the Case that they received only forty per cent. of
the amount of tithes really due. In these cases the tithe-
payers should'not be left under the impression that the com-
position would be merely voluntary, as the titheowner would
not then be likely to obtain anything like a fair per centage.

...0