The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-01 00:00:00

SKETCHES IN PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, MONDAY.
It was exactly five o'clock when the Speaker put the
question from the chair that the Irish Land Bill be read
a third time. He was so quick, and went through the
process se rapidly, calling upon the Ayes and the Noes to
declare themselves, that the bill Was nearly passed with-
out a word. But Mr. Hardy was too sharp for the
Speaker, and, amid much laughter, he got up
to deliver, in the absence of his leader, the
final criticisms of the Conservative chieftains. The
Treasury bench was pretty full at this time—Mr. Glad-
stone in the middle, Sir R. Collier on his right, Mr.
Fortescue on his left Sir J. Coleridge, Mr. Sullivan, Mr.
Bruce, Mr. Glyn, the Marquis of Hartington were
the others; and, fast asleep—nay, not fast, but loose
asleep, for he kept on nodding ahOut and nearly falling
off his seat—was Mr. Forster, who, I believe, has not
made a single speech upon this bill. Mr. Lowe, who
dbth not like the measure, was absent at first, so,
. too, were the chiefs of the spending departments and
that universal favourite, the First Commissioner of
'Works. Mr. Hardy had not much to say, and he did
not attenapt to make a speech. His strictures were
direcdto certain points. He said he did not like the
bill, mit he was not going to take any part in rejecting
it, because he was very anxious that a measure of the
kind should pass during the present session. Moreover,"
intimated Mr. Hardy, though not quite in these
words, " there is another and a better House.
Yes, thank God, thlre is a House of Lords.
and they will do their duty; they will doctor
the bill and make it palatable to the Conservative party."
Sixteen minutes sufficed for the Conservative leader,
—vice Mr. Disraeli, retired from business ?—to say his
say. He was followed by Mr. Maguire who, throughout
the debates on the bill, has kept silence even from good
words. He was moved to speak by Mr. Hardy's refer-
ence to " another place." He warned the Conservatives in
strong and weighty language that the speech just made was
if seriously meant, full of peril. If it should embolden
the Peers to seriously alter the bill, and return it to the
Commons in such a state that. these could not
accept it, their lordships would be responsible for an act
most hurtful to Ireland, most dangerous to something
besides Ireland. That country wanted rest, repose, and the
Minister who could confer that gift, so as to allow the
people to enjoy the full benefit of the bill, would confer
the very greatest boon that it was possible to bestow.
Mr. Maguire bore testimony to the generosity with which
both English and Scotch members had treated the sister
country, and giving heartfelt thanks to the Government
for all their exertions, he sat down amid considerable ap-
plause, having spoken twenty minutes.
Sir F. Heygate was the next to rise. He had a very
different tale to tell. The bill was bad, all the amend-
ments moved by his side of the House had been negatived,
and to shew how useless the measure was as a message of
peace, he pointed to Canada at that present
moment—a reference which elicited some very
unmusical interjections. Mr. Bryan, who moved the rejec-
tion of the bill on the second reading, was there, natty
and beauish as ever, with a red rose in his coat, and when
he got up there was some curiosity on the Treasury Bench
to know what he would say. Mr. Gladstone and his col-
leagues stretched their necks round to hear better what the
leader of the forlorn hope would announce. He soon un-
folded his secret. He was not going to oppose the measure
again. Other Irish members had said on the former occa-
sion that if it were not improvedthey should vote against
it on the third reading. They were not going to vote
against it ; therefore he was bound to suppose that it had
been improved, and there was no longer any obligation
on his part to offer any opposition to the bill. Captain
Ithite, his associate three months ago, did not put
in an appearance last night. In fact I have scarcely seen
him in the House since that March midnight when, resist-
ing Mr. Gladstone's eloquent appeal, he persisted in
forcing a division, and came back with his fellow-teller
looking absurdly small.
The debate had lasted fifty-one minutes when Mr.
Gladstone rose. He answered Sir Frederick Heygate's
complaint that the bill was a bill for the tenants, in very
energetic language. " You have been legislating on behalf
of landlords for generations, and what is their position.
now? Is property secure ? Is life secure ?" The Go-
vernment held that in passing a measure which would
give justice to the tenants, they were doing more for the
landlords than any other measure could accom-
plish for them. The Premier then went on
to praise the House of Commons for the in-
dustry which it had shewn by discussing this measure
for nearly two dozen nights. Far from complaining of the
amendments which had been proposed, he thought that
the thanks of the Government were due to those
who had made them, and though it was not to be
expected that the Government and the Opposition
would think exactly alike upon these, yet he could bear
witness th there had been no factious obstruction.
Then, wit good deal of ingenuity, Mr. Gladstone went
on to shew that the favourable reception which, upon the
whole, the Opposition, and also the Irish members, had
given to the bill was a reason why the Upper House
should not spoil it. The landlords themselves, Mr. Glad-
stone said, would, be was confident, declare that they
woad rather that the bill should pass than that it should
be lost, and great would be the responsibility
resting upon those who frustrated the desired
consummation. The Premier sat down amid loud
cheers, after speaking twenty-one minutes. It seemed
then as if the bill would be read without further discussion.
But amid uncomplimentary sounds Captain Archdall rose
to make a thorough ultra-Tory speech. The bill was
wholly bad, it was the offspring of fear, and so mis-
chievous did he think it, that he felt bound to record his
protest by dividing the House against it. There was a
shout of expostulation at this announcement. This noise
was succeeded by a cry of pain, an (" ooh !
ooh I " as though hon. members were simultaneously
undergoing the application of the forceps at the hands
of a dentist), when Sir John Gray got up. He was
listened to for a few minutes with tolerable patience;
but when he proceeded to denounce the bill as incomplete,
unsatisfactory, and as affording no settlement of the
question, he had an anything but gracious reception. At
first there was a solitary cry of "'Vide." That was taken
up by other members, and then there was a sort of sub-
dued refrain, in which several scores joined. It would die
away for a time, like the sighing of the wind among the
trees on a summer evening. Yet it betokened
an approaching storm. But when Sir John proceeded
to pull .a quantity of papers out of his pocket, the
gentle murmur became a tumult, and as he still
persisted in speaking, the tumult became a downright roar,
like the grand music of a hurricane, and not a word
uttered by the member for Kilkenny could be heard.
He appealed to the Speaker for protection ; but the
Speaker did not seem to see it, tend the corpulent Soli-
citor-General for Ireland smiled thereat. All this while
Mr. Gladstone was reading a heap of letters and, when read,
putting them away in his despatch box. Mr. Forster had been
aroused from his nap by the fearful noise, and blinked
owlishly. Some of the absent ministers had taken their
seats on the Treasury bench, so as to be ready for the
*vision. When at last Sir John Gray sat down after a
Venty-seven minutes speech and Mr, M`Carthy
,downing started up, an exceedingly loud and bitter
cry of anguish arose from hungry legislators. How-
ever the member for Cork county speedily let it
be known that he had no criticisms to make, but he wished
only to protest against the sentiments of Sir John Gray,
and to thank the Government, in the name of the electors
of County Cork, for the bill which was then before the
House. Colonel Barttelot's appearance elicited another
cry of agony, but he too quickly changed the note
into one of approval as he appealed to Captain Arch-
dall not to divide the House, and denounced Sir John
Gray, as the author of half the mischief in Ireland. The
Government thought it necessary to answer the proprietor
of the Freenzan'A Journal, and so Mr. Chichester
Fortescue got up to repudiate altogether Sir John Gray's
representation of the effect of the bill. He was
followed by Mr. Henry Herbert, Pr. Brady,
And Mr. Murphy, each of whom was greeted with a hoot.
The two first spoke but for about a minute, and all of them
agreed in disclaiming all connection with Sir John, and
in thanking the Government. Mr. Murphy praised espe-
cially Mr: Chichester Fortescue, who raised his hat in
acknowledgment of the compliment. By this time it was
known that Captain Archdall could not find a seconder,
and would not press a division. At last the Speaker put
the question, That this bill be now read a third
time." In answer to the usual invitation
there was a shout of ayes, but alinost entirely from the
Liberal benches. " Those who are of the contrary opinion
say No," said the Speaker, and to that challenge' there
was mita single response. ' The Ayes have it," resounded
from beneath the canopy ; and then there rose up a
hearty cheer that would have been longer, but that hon„
members were rushing out to dine. It was at six minutes
past seven that the House of Commons read the Irish
',and Bill a third time nnaine contradicente.
• The Commons sat for nearly eighthours after this event.
I cannot say that I did. There was something going on
in the Upper House more attractive than gun licenses and
stamp duties. There was some very sharp sparring between
the law lords, who do know bow to hit hard. The Giiveru:
meat are determined to carry through their High Court
of Justice bill this session, and, on finding this, Lord
Westbury made a bitter speech, and said that he would
have nothing more to do with the nsure. Lord Cairns
was almost as anFry. He advised the Chancellor to post-
pone the bill until the Courts of Justice were finished—
a remark which made Lord Hatherley rise from
the Woolsack, and say that he had endeavoured
to believe in the sincerity of the learned
lord when he avowed his desire to expedite
the measure ; but now his—the Chancellor's—heart sank
within him. Eventually the bill passed through com-
mittee, and Lord Granville was just about to move the
adjournment of the House when a wigged clerk appeared
bringing some document which was hastily thrust by the
leader of the Peers into the hands of the Chancellor. Ajost of
their lordships had left when Lord Hatherley rose, and
asked, in his usual formal rapid manner, that this bill be
read a first time. It was read; but what was "it ? " The
Irish Land Bill; and in this undignified and silent moa-
ner that great measure which had just left the Lower
House amid rejoicings, WAS intmlucic.l to the Upper
branoh of thd Legislatted.

CONVENTUAL AND MONASTIC
INSTITUTIONS.

The select committee appointed to' inquire into the
manner in which the Monasteries and Conventual Insti-
tutions in the country hold their property resumed their
inquiry on Tuesday. The Right Hon. C. P.. Villiers
occupied the chair.
Mr. J. V. Harling, a solicitor conversant with the con-
veyancing of ecclesiastical property, was called, and in
reply to questions from Mr. Matthews said he
had been many years in practice and con-
cerned for various convents. He confirmed the state-
ment made by previous witnesses that convents were
illegal, and in the Saurin trial it was contended that the
intention of the 17th section of the Act of George 111.
was to have them illegal, and a rule was obtained on that
point, but it went no further. In 1800 a bill was intro-
duced into the House, of Commons in conse-
quence of the rapid growth of these institutions.
It was passed by the Commons, but in the Lords it
was opposed by two bishops, of whom Bishop Horsley
was one, and he shewed that there were already two Acts
of Parliament which were sufficiently restrictive. A good
deal of discussion took place with respect to the subject of
confession, and Dr. Horsley undertook to inquire into
the matter, and found that it was the fact
that two women, who had entered into their
novitiate did confess, but that one of them had entered
her novitiate in a foreign country, and Dr. Horsley was
interrupted by the then Lord Chancellor, who declared the
whole matter to be illegal It was singular enough that
the words "nunnery" and "monk" are only used in one
Act of Parliament, viz., the Act of Charles 11. in all the
other Acts, including 10 Geo. 4, the words were "religious
persons." There was no repeal of any penal statutes till
1846, except portions of the sections of Wm. 111, and the
Act of 31st George 111., merely relieved them on condi-
tions, but not in terms. The Act providing for
the registration of property deeds, the 22nd sec-
tion of the Act of Geo. 111., contains the only healing
clause. He did not think that the 7th and Bth, and 9th
and 10th of the Queen repealed the whole of the former
statutes, but only relieved the Roman Catholics of certain
penalties. At all events the 17th section of the
31st George 111. was not repealed. There had
been a great change in the character of the
religions, both had totally changed, and there was
now no such thing as a solemn vow in England such as
was contemplated by the penal statute. There had been
a diminution in the contemplative orders after the French
revolution. There may have been convents
introduced from abroad, but they were not contemplative
orders, not what our houses were before the Reformation.
Of the whole 200 religious houses in England more than
four-fifths of them were active, and not contemplative,
and many of them were not really convents or nunneries.
There had been no increase in the old English monasteries,
but the increase against which the acts were directed
were Jesuits, seminary priests and " disobedient " persons.
Those were the words of the Act. He was thoroughly
conversant with the Act of 1800, and had advised the
registration of all the deeds which were registered.
Convents were not charities because there was no endow-
ment. All that was required was the enrollment of the
deed conveying the property without making a declara-
tion of the trust, and it had been decided in the case
of Doe v. Lloyd, it was not necessary to do so.
If the endowment were made for a school it would be
legal, and it would not be rendered illegal because it was
superintended by monks or nuns. If a deed coupled
with the conveyance a trust that the school should be
managed in all times by monks or nuns, it would
be void and he should certainly not allow it to be
registered ; the state of the law would not allow it to be.
Property was held by individuals in convents absolutely
whether acquired by purchase or gift, and there was no
declaration of trust. It was quite discretionary to
keep up any particular number; there is no obligation
to do so though they do. Everything depended
on their honour, and no obligation could be enforced
against them either at law or equity. When one of the
joint tenants died or resigned the property went to the
others. He represented two hundred convents in England,
and he and Mr. Arnold acted for the ladies of
those convents. He also represented the Scotch
convents—in all about two hundred and fifteen.
If he told them the number of inmates and the number of
convents, they would get at the number in the convents.
He objected to state the number, because it might lead to
results that were not desirable. If the inquiry stopped
there, and no inquiry was made as to the property held, he
could give it. As regards the real property possessed by
nunneries, each nun would be entitled to two roods and
thirty-four perches of land. All leaseholds above
sixty years he had treated as freeholds. There
was a very small portion of leasehold. That in-
cluded garden and the site of the house. He did not know
of any case in which nuns enjoyed the benefit of land let
to others. Very few had more than they occupied. There
was one case where they were obliged to buy a piece of
land to prevent an approach being made. With
this exception their land was all residential.
Taking the whole acreage of England, and dividing it
among the population, it would be found that each person
wohuld have 1 acres, whereas the nuns only had 2 roods,
and 34 perches. In regard to the income of nuns,' he
found that taking the nominal capital they pos-
sessed, and reckoning it at 4 per cent., the
annual income of each nun, would be £6 16s. 3i.
They were largely engaged in education, both
in the' upper, and middle, and poorer classes, and in
the care of orphan children. The results for the whole
kingdom was that in England they educated in convents
990 of the upper classes, 3,115 of the middle, and 56,612 of
the poor, whose education was given gratuitously besides
which there were in the refuges 379 penitent women who
had been reclaimed and were provided for. In Scotland
there were 36 young ladies receiving their education in
convents, 377 of the middle class and 3,299 of the poorer
kinds providing for 102 penitent women. On entering a
convent a novice brings a dowry of various amounts,
some are admitted without any, and indeed the propor-
tion who bring no money is considerable. Some
have expectations. Some on th other hand,
bring £l,OOO. The making of a will is simply required in
order that if a legal representative were wanted he would
be forthcoming. Wills of that kind rarely passed pro-
perty, and he did not know of any having been proved.
He could not say that he had not made wills passing
property. The old dowry used to be £l,OOO, but practi-
cally it is now much less, sometimes not more than £lOO. The
portion of a young lady is always fixed before profession,
and in case of anything coming to them through marriage
settlements some friend would advance the money. In
the case of minors they could not enter a convent without
the full consent of the parents or guardian. There is
really no solemn vow such as that which used to be known
to the law.
Mr. Villiers : What is afinal vow?
Witness : In some order the members are almost all
their lives in a probationary state. First they enter as a
postulant ; they then become a novice, afterwards the
are admitted as a quasi member of the association, which
asked for a further protection—sometimes seven years,
some times nine—and which might be extended according
to the discretion of the Superior, and according to the dis-
position or capacity of the aspirant, and it is very often
many years before they become final members of the associa-
tion. The heir atlaw in a convent would be the last of the joint
tenant. A resident in a convent might make a will in re-
spect to other property than that which they owned as
joint tenants, but they could not leave it to the convent
as such. That would be illegal. They could leave it to
an inmate. He could not point to any statute since the
Roman Catholic religion in this country had been legalised
which had rendered convents illegal.
By Mr. Jessel : The Jesuits are the only body known
to us as a society. He had never heard of property being
given to convents in consideration of teaching. He
should not think £7 a year enough to support even a
nun, but when they were dishoused they had only
£4 a year. The remainder of the money required for their
support was made up from teaching. The cost of their
living is very moderate. He should like to see their
property well secured and setttled, and the doubts enter-
tained put an end to. Monks, qua monks have no
property. The property is of the individual. By the
Roman Catholic Relief A-ct Monks could not reside
here, and they were liable to fine and imprisonment, but
it said nothing about their property, so that he could not
say as far as he knew that property would be liable to
forfeiture under the enactments of the Roman Catholic
Relief Act as regarded monks bound by vows. There
was, in fact, nothing in that Act which touched their
property. They wanted no alteration in the law if their
property was treated as private property. It was a
grhjvancp that monks were not allowed to hold property.
Every other person in the State could hold it, and why
should not they. hitherto they had no choice in the
matter, and were obliged to hold it as individuals.
By Mr. Newdegate : The statute of 31 Geo. 111. re-
lieved women of the penalties of transportation in-
curred by monks, but the act was simply decla-
ratory not prohibitory. It merely declared that
women should not 14 subjected to the penalties
He admitted that the operation of this statute formed a
restraint upon the formation of male orders of Roman
Catholics in this country. The penalties under George IV.
were new penalties, but there were many unrepealed
penalties before that, such as the punishment of death and
the forfeiture of goods. In his opinion the passing of the
Act of George IV. was a re-enactment of the old penalties,
lut communities of monks exist in this country, and he
oped they always would. There were also Jesuits in
s country; and he had seen letters attached to their
names. He knew the Catholic directory, which so far as
the Church offices are c9nperned is an authority. The
words " permissive superior "merely related to the Church
offices, not to the convents or monastic institutions. It is
a useful book, and may be all true, but it is of
authority. In respect to the list of the monastic institu-
tions (which the hon. member read) he had no information
to give on the subject, but as soon as there was any
legislative enactment declaring them to be legal he would
answer the question. He desired that monastic institutions
should exist' ligally in ngland in the spirit in which they
were contemplated by ilia Church of Rome, and to relieve
them from restraints. There were one or two cases in
which the ladies let a portion of their property, but a very
small part. He included houses with land.
The Committee adjourned at 4 o'clock.

CALIFORNIAN SILK.—The silk manufacturers are
looking forward to the time when raw silk can be ob-
tained from California equal to their demands. The
specimens already obtained from Californian cocoons are
pronounceed by experienced manufacturers as equal to
thg best silk of India or Japan, the fibre being very strong
and fine; free from impurities, and rematkably smooth
and glossy. Thg difficulty hitherto has been in getting
proper machinery fOr reeling the cocoons in the districts
where they are grown. When that difficulty is removed,
as it is in a fair way to be, the silk growers and the small
colony of silk manufacturers in the country look forward
to a bountiful harvest.—Boston Advertiser.