The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-29 00:00:00

NESDAY, JUNE 2t, 1-361

Sir PEEL—This Bill is just the kind of measure that
is, atjotal.variance the purse pursued by the Hon. Gen-
tleman la sit yew —;.(Cllgero a.. Sir: my, Bill left.thp inattpr,, so
fav, a:\ robilvi, to .tbe member!, eC ihat Ntablvfshed
exactly as t found it.—( Cheers.) But it noc
any other religious ceremony with respect to Dissenters than
that which they themselves might think it desirable to adopt.
Although I was anxious that a religious ceremony shoull
exist in all cases, I felt considerable difficulty as to a hat that
ceremony should be; but still the. reamble of my Bill recited
that engrafting a religious Ceremony On the,rtlttrriago cOntrdtt
should be encouraged as much as possible. Now, sir, that
was the objection which the Hon: Gentleman who spoke in
behalf of the great body of the Dissenters raised against my
Bill ? Why, that did not impose that the rhafriage of Dis-
senters should be accompanied by a religious derernorly.
Mr. PAINEA=No, tio, that was not the objection as

stated it.
Sir It. PE EL—i am speaking froth Memory, but as the
Hon. Gentleman questions the statement which I hate made
as to what fell from him on the occasion to which I refer,
Will read Saint the imali which hat just been put into my hand
what he really did say. The lion. Gentleman there is re-
ported to have said that " he wished to unite his tribute of
acknowledgment to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
his Majesty's Government for the friendly spirit towards the
Protestant Dissenters in which this measure was conceived,
and for the clear and satisfactory manner in which he conveyed
his sentiments to the House. He did not think that there
would be felt against the Protestant Dissenters any objection
to the Bill as far as related to constituting marriage a civil
conlrac`, or to the registration of their marriages through the
medium of the Magistrates ; but there might be objections to
some of the details, though those, he hoped, might, without
real difficulty, be removed. He was afraid there might be a
jealousy created throughout the community by requiring that
the marriage of some should be celebrated by a religious rati-
fication, whereas with others that it should be only a civil can-
tract. To give the greatest solemnity to marriage in all cases,
he thought that some religious service ought to be engrafted
upon the civil contract, and that the service should be per-
formed by the Minister of the religious body to whom the
parties were attached."—(Cheers.) Now, did we propose
that we should not go that length ? Why, all we asked was,
that those who conscientiously objected to a religious cere-
mony should make a declaration ; and this the Hon. Gentle-
man deemed insufficient, because he thought the religious ce-
remony should be imposed in all cases by law.
Mr. B AINES—No, no, I did not say by law ; I merely
said that it ought to be superadded.
Sir R. PEEL—The Hon. Gentleman said, " That, to
give the greater solemnity to marriage, he thought that some
religious service ought to be engrafted upon the civil contract,
and that the service should be performed by the Minister of
the religious body to whom the parties were attached ;" and if
he did not mean that it should be imposed by law, what did
he mean by sayinc, that " some religious service ought to be
engrafted upon the civil contract?" Why, he must know that
that could only be done bylaw.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, in my
Bill I left the Dissenters at perfect liberty to adopt any reli-
gious ceremony they pleased ; and the only objection which
the Hon. Member made against it was, that I had not rendered
" a religious ceremony" operative, although it was evident
from the terms of the preamble, that my wish was to encou-
rage the performance of a religious ceremony as much as pos-
sible.—( Cheers.) I could not have done more, unless I did
so by law. As this Bill stands, it inflicts a positive injustice
on the members of the Church of England. Sir, I must say
that the Noble Lord opposite adopted the clause which has
just been defeated of his own good will, and because he
deemed it conformable to the wishes of both the members of
the Church of England and the Dissenters ; but for the Noble
Lord to abandon his own clause—a clause which he introduced
of his own accord and without solicitation—merely because of
the opposition of some Hon. Gentlemen behind him, is a pro-
ceeding not only without precedent, but by no means credit-
able to one who assumes to be the leader of the House of
Commons,L( Immense cheering.)
Mr. BAINES denied that there was any inconsistency in
the course which he took now and the line of conduct he pur-
sued on the former occasion.—( Cries of " Oh, oh.")
Mr. A. TREVOR rose, amidst loud cries of " Oh, oh,"
" Divide, divide." He only wanted to ask the Hon. Member
for Leeds one question, and that was whether in sober earnest-
ness he thought it was inflicting no injury on the members of
the Church of England—on the gentlemen of the Church of
England—to enable their sons to marry clandestinely a maid-
servant, perhaps, by means of a civil contract such as this Bill
proposed.
Mr. BAINES replied that a man might marry a maid-ser-
vant in a church as well as by means of a civil contract.—
( Loud cries of, " Divide, divide.")
Mr. HARDY had always understood that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Leeds was the representative of the Dissenters in
that House. The Dissenters had always complained as a
grievance of being obliged to have their marriages performed
in the Established Church, instead of being allowed to solem-
nize them according to their own religious rites; and, there-
fore, he felt surprised to find the Hon. Gentleman standing
forward as the advocate of a measure which would enable the
sons and daughters of Dissenters, as well as of the mem-
bers of the Church of England, to leave their own places of
worship and contract clandestine marriages elsewhere without
any religious ceremony, or the superintendent being allowed to
ask them why they came before him, and the reason they had
not gone to their own places of worship.—(Hear.)
Dr. BOWRING rose amidst loud cries of " Oh, oh," and
" Divide." He must deny that his Hon. Friend the Member
for Leeds represented the opinions of all the Dissenters ; on
the contrary, there were large bodies of them whom he knew
wished to retain their own ceremonies in the performance of
marriage.
The Earl of LINCOLN said that whatever boon was
granted to the Dissenters by the Noble Lord's Bill, sure he
was that the members of the Church of England would have
nothing to thank him for.—(Hear, hear.) Looking, how-
ever, at the extraordinary and unprecedented conduct of the
Noble Lord—conduct that was wholly unworthy of a Member
of the Government, not to speak of a leader of that House—
lookinc, at the Noble Lord's disgraceful desertion of the clause
which he had himself introduced, and the violation of principle
which the unaccountable abandonment of this clause betrayed,
he (Lord Lincoln) would be wanting in his duty to the reli-
gion to which he belonged, if he did not move by way of
amendment to the motion now before the House, that the
passing of this Bill be postponed until that day six months.—
(Cheers. )
Lord J. RUSSELL begged to remind the Noble Lord
who had cast so much censure on his conduct of what seemed
to escape his notice, or which he had altogether forgotten—
namely, that the Bill was now in the same shape identically,
and involved exactly the same principle, as it did when it was
first introduced.—(Hear, hear.) If stress was laid upon his
giving up the clause alluded to, surely it was only right that he
should state the facts as they really existed. The truth, how-
ever, was, that the Noble Lord conceived the facts to be dif-
ferent from what they were, and hence it was that they had
fallen into the present misapprehension. After the Bill had
been introduced, and when it got into Committee, a discussion
arose in which it was suggested that if a certain alteration was
made in it, the objections which the members of the Church of
England had to it would be obviated, and as he was anxious
to conciliate all parties, although content to go on with it as
it then stood, he did not hesitate to introduce a proviso which
he was- led to believe would remove all objections, without in-
juring the efficiency of the measure. This he had done, but
so far from getting rid of opposition it seemed only to increase
it, and therefore, as he was disappointed in the effect which
his concession was intended to produce, he did not think he
was bound longer to adhere to it. The Bill was now restored
to the shape in which it originally stood, and as there was no
departure in it from the principle on which it was founded, he
felt persuaded that the House would admit that he was fully
justified in the course which he had taken.—(Hear.)
Mr. E STCOURT should certainly give his vote in sup-
support of the amendment of his Noble Friend.
The House then divided. The numbers were—
For the original motion
For the amendment 54
Majority
The Bill was then passed.
Lord EBRINGTON moved for the production of Lord
Aylmer's despatches of the sth of March, 1835, addressed to
the Right Hon. Edward Stanley ; and of the 18th of March,
1835, addressed to the Earl of Aberdeen. The Noble Lord
said he would content himself with making his motion for the
production of these papers now, and take another opportunity
of bringing the subject to which they related under consi-
deration.
Lord PALMERSTON did not mean to oppose the motion
of his Noble Friend.
The other Orders of the Day having been disposed of, the
House adjourned at a quarter-past two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Jump 28.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at
five o'clock.
Lord HATHERTON presented a petition from Helston,
Staffordshire, in favour of the Manchester and Cheshire Junc-
tion Railway.
Sir J. BECKETT, and other Members of the House of Com-
mons, appeared at the Bar to request a Conference with their
Lordships on the Leeds and Selby Railway Bill.—Agreed to.
Messengers from the House of Commons brought up several
Bills with the Lords' Amendments agreed to.
Mr. Campbell, from the East India House, presented the
annual returns from that Company.
The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce, Edinburgh, against the Scotch
Universities Bill.
Lord LYNDHURST gave notice that on Thursday next
he should move the second reading of the Transfer of Property
Bill.
The Duke of BUCCLEUGH presented a petition from
Glasgow, against the Scotch Universities Bill. Also a peti-
tion from Ayr, and one from the schoolmasters of Kincardine,
to the same effect.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.—IRELAND.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said it would be impossible for
the Committee appointed by their Lordships, to draw up rea-
sons for disagreeing with the amendments made by the House
of Commons to the Irish Municipal Bill, to have them pre-
pared before Thursday next, as it would not be in their power
in a shorter time to place before the other House the several
points upon which their Lordships relied.
The Earl of HADDINGTON presented several petitions
against the Scotch Universities' Bill.
On the motion of the Earl of ROSEBERY leave was
given to extend the time for signing the protest against the
decision to which their Lordships had come last night, to five
o'clock to-morrow, or the next day the House should sit.
On the motion of Earl SHAFTESBURY certain Peers
were named as Managers of the Conference on the part of
their Lordships on the Leeds and Selby Railway Bill.

The Duke of RICHMOND broughrt. ei*; Pirst Report
of the Railway Committee, and moved that it be it't,44ll/. 4
„1,9r4 WILLIAM said, that in his opinion a more
Pot-mot, su.blect, rir;l)tipt bo, bought before the consideration
of Partrarnei,'.: ,rfteln-O ppt ,tpe,culations in railways.
Parliament had been too mucir.oi Pf.'N,osidering Rail-
way Bills as isolated measures. It was a subject sve'ltivy A-C the
interference of the highest atthorities of the State ; but sure
he was that, however much he might admire the genius
Or the spoculat*.ons of individuals engaged in those great na-
tional works, that tinieo the? were directed by some supreme
atithority, and unless care was taken, the mv7,e4lations of one
set of men would be destrucive of the just tr'dveir t~mh specu-
lations of another.---(Hear, hear.) He was satiSfieSi titittt
if they legislated c7i wand principles, they wotiiii
Mc:Yeas° the Wealth of their Vosisity much greater than the
wealth and property of the country had b.Ten.increased about
a half a century ago by inland navigation. He cntirely con-
curred in the resolution contaigied M the Report which had Imen

read.
The Marquis of CLANIZiCARDE saii it would be im-
possible to lay dottir one unifirm system, to provido for all the
damages that might be creittrd by any individual railroad Pill.
The Duke of WELLINGTON !mid all he had done was
to express a hope that the Government and the Parliament
would do something to prevent monopolies and the stop-
page of improvements.-- Bear.) lie was aware of une
place where roads were or would be necessary in a very short
time, which would not be possible if a contemplated railroad

were carried into executior.
The Duke of RICHMOND reminded the llcuse that the
Committee had reported twat they were not prepared to lay
before the House any details on the whole case. Many of
their Lordships were, no doubt, aware, but he believed the
community at large were not, that several accidents by fire
had taken place on railroads. 3,0001. of cotton goods had
been destroyed on the Liverpool and Manchester railway, and
and a farm house and corn-fields near Leicester and some-
where else. These fires might have been occasioned by neg-
ligence. He did not know whether the most likely way of
preventing their recurrence in the rural districts would not
be to make the Company pay the damage..—( Hear, hear.)
This would afford the public a cheap and speedy remedy.
The same system would not quite apply to crowded places
like London, for no Company yet formed, not even a railway
Company, could afford to pay for the rebuilding of London.—
(Hear, and a laugh.) It was necessary that some arrange-
ment should be made, because, if the Insurance Companies
found that the danger of fire was increased along a line of
railroad, they would naturally raise the rates of insurance, and
the consequences would thus fall, not on the proprietors; but
on the whole surrounding neighbourhood.
GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY.
Lord KENYON said that he would move that the
Grand Junction Railway Bill be now read a third time. If
that motion were carried, he should move certain clauses,
which the Noble Lord did not describe, by way of rider.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE had no objection to
make to the motion of the Noble Lord who had spoken last.
The Entails Relief (Scotland) Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Waste Lands Cultivation (Ireland) Bill was also read

a third time and passed.
On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE,
The second reading of the Manchester and Cheshire Junc
tion Railway Bill was postponed to Monday next.
APPOINTMENT OF MAGISTRATES.

Lord WH ARN CL IF FE presented a petition from Lancas-
ter complaining of the appointment of mill-owners, resident in

the town, as magistrates.
The LORD CHANCELLOR admitted that it was very
desirable to refrain from appointing as magistrates persons who
had an interest in direct opposition to the enforcement of the
penalties they were called upon to impose. At the same time
it was quite impossible to establish any general rule, in conse-
quence of the difficulty of obtaining other persons.
UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Petitions against certain provisions of this Bill, and pray-
ing for further delay, were presented by the Earl of ABER
DEE N mid the Duke of WELLINGTON from different
Scotch Universities.
The Earl of ABERDEEN inquired whether it was the in-
tention of the Noble Viscount to move the Order of the Day
for the Committee on the Bill that evening?
Viscount MELBOURNE intimated that he intended to
do so.
The Earl of ABERDEEN then rose for the purpose of
announcing certain amendments which it was his intention to
propose. He considered the Bill as the consequence of a
report made by the visitors five or six years ago, which had
remained on their Lordships' table ever since. Having been a
member of that Commission, and having concurred generally in
the Report, it was impossible for him, as a man of consistency
and honour, to object to the measure they had recommended. The
principal objection originated in an error which had gone abroad.
All the petitioners imagined that the Boards to be appointed by
the Bill were to be the governing bodies of the Universities,
whereas they were, in fact, placed under the immediate super-
intendence and control of an University Court, constituted ac-
cording to the recommendation of the Commissioners. He could
not too strongly impress upon the Noble Viscount the fact
that the practical effect of the measure would wholly depend
the constitution of the proposed Boards. His first amendment
was the insertion of the following clause :—" Provided always,
and be it further enacted, that nothing in this Act contained
shall be held to alter or affect the rights, privileges, control,
and superintendence at present exercised, or which may law-
fully be continued to be exercised, by the Established Church
of Scotland, her general assemblies, synods, or presbyteries,
in any of the universities and colleges of Scotland." Ells
next amendment was, to prevent the visitors from interfering
in any of the details of university discipline or regulation,
and to confine their inquiries to the distribution and ma-
nagement of their property and funds—regard being had
to their charters, foundation, and the other means by which
they acquired or held their property. The next was to
limit the right of appeal to sentences of expulsion or dismis-
sal ; and the next, to limit the duration of the Boards to three
months instead of five, as proposed by the Bill. Further amend-
ments might occur to other Noble Lords in a future stage of
the Bill, but it was unnecessary to enter into them at that
moment. One of the clauses went to deprive the professors
of the right of electing to certain vacant professorships.
He believed he was correct in saying that this was the only
provision of the Bill which rendered an Act necessary ; for, if
he were not mistaken, his Majesty could, by his Royal prero-
gative, carry every other recommendation of the Commis-
sioners into effect. This was the only point on which the
Commissioners had not fully reported ; and as it was very de-
sirable to have their opiuion on the subject, he should propose
a clause requiring the Board to state their opinion on the
system of patronage pursued in the Universities of Scotland,
together with their recommendations thereupon. With these
amendments he would beg their Lordships to commit the
Bill, pro forma, and to allow the amendments to be printed,
with a view to its re-committal.
Viscount MELBOURNE could not admit the justice of the
Noble Lord's request. With respect to the authority pro-
posed to be committed to his Majesty's Ministers by the Bill,
he begged leave to say, when they were told they were
so likely to misuse it, that they were not anxious to have it.—
( Hear, hear.) Whose Bill was it ? It was more the Bill of
the Noble Lords opposite than it was theirs ; it was a Bill
founded upon the report of their own Commission, which they
had repeatedly taunted the Government for not having before
introduced. For his part, he would far rather not have this
power; for he well knew the difficulty of exercising it.
The Bishop of EXETER said that there was a great ex-
citement on this subject in Scotland ; only one University had
petitioned in favour of the Bill ; numerous petitions had been
presented against it, and private applications out of number
had been made to their Lordships respecting it. He thought
the Universities had a strong prima facie reason to complain
of the mode in which the Bill had been introduced. The
Universities and the Church of Scotland concluded that the
Bill was abandoned for the present at least. Under this im-
pression, no reference was made to the subject in the Gene-
ral Assembly, which soon afterwards commenced its sittings :
and it did so happen that the day on which the Bill was intro-
duced into that House was the very day on which the informa-
tion that the sittings of the General Assembly had terminated,
could arrive by post in London. He had no doubt this ex-
traordinary conjunction of circumstances was accidental; he
merely mentioned it as an ingredient in the panic which now
prevailed in Scotland with reference to this subject. It was
no matter of surprise that this singular resurrection of the
Bill had occasioned considerable alarm. The Bill was soon
after read a second time, and on the suggestion of a most Re-
verend Prelate near him, and a Noble Duke opposite, the com-
mittee was postponed until that day, to afford an opportunity for
communication with the Universities. That communication
had taken place, and their Lordships had seen the result. He
did not see, at this late period of the session, and considering
the enormous mass of important busbies before the House, that
any inconvenience would ensue from postponing the Bill to
another session.
The Order of the Day having been read for the House going
into Committee on the Bill,
The Bishop of EXETER moved that the Bill be com-
mitted this day six months.
The Earl of HAD DINGTON had heard with great satis-
faction the Noble Viscount state that it was not his wish or in-
tention to proceed with any undue haste with this Bill. He
hoped that when the Commission did appear, it would be of a
nature to satisfy the public mind. He felt assured that the
Noble Viscount would make the appointments with perfect
fairness and impartiality. He was also satisfied that the Learned
Lord Advocate, who had the management of this Bill in the
other House of Parliament, had no intention to do anything that
could tend to injure the just influence and authority of the
Church of Scotland over the national education in that
country. It was, nevertheless, quite obvious that if a Board
of Commissioners should be created by Parliament to su-
persede the authority of the professors in the Universities
over that national education, it would occasion an interference
with the present course of study established in Scotland, of
which the Church of Scotland would have good reason to
complain ; and he never would consent to any thing that could
by possibility impair the just influence of the national Church
of Scotland over her national Universities. With respect to
the motion of the Right Rev. Prelate, his objection to it was,
might that it would stop the Bill at a stage when it ght receive
many improvements. He would therefore suggest to the
Right Rev. Prelate the propriety of withdrawing is otion
in order that the Bill might go into Committee, and bemmade
as perfect as possible. The Noble Viscount had said that he
did not seek for this Bill—that it was not his Bill but our
Bill ; that it was not introduced by the present Government.
Now he (Lord Haddington) begged leave to say that " the
Government never dies." It was the duty of the Secretary of
State for the time being to take up the recommendation, let
the administration be whatever it might, of a Commission
which had been appointed under the authority of the King.