The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-21 00:00:00

BILL

Mr. BOUVERIE moved that this Bill be read a third
time. • _

Sir J. GRAHAM thought this would be a good op-
pUrtnnity for showing to the country that without need-
less prolongation Of discussion they could come to a de-
cision upon an important subject; and, as the question
had been several times debated, and he had so often stated
his opinion on it, it would be inexcusable in him if he
were to detain the House at any length upon this occasion.
He was sorry the Home Secretary had left his place, be-
cause he fully relied on his support; but he saw the Lord
Advocate present, and was. sure he would vote with him
(Sir J. Graham) against the third reading of the Bill.
A certain sect in Scotland, which had arisen only
the'last five years, had built 750 churches,
lad desired to build about 30 more, and about 10
proprietors refused them the accommodation which they
required for that purpose. To meetthis -Case the pro-
position submitted to Parliament was, that any set of
persons calling themselves a religious congregation might
COMO upon the estate of any proprietor, and, subject
to" nertain ;safeguards which he would not detain the
House by enumeratingschoose any site which they might
think'Thest;cosivenient for their purpose.—(Hear, hear.)
They were then to go to' the Court of Session, whin
w.as. to sad the sheriff toinspect the locality, and if that
officer should be:of opinion that the site selected was a
convenient ones he had the power 'of setting it out, and
the owner of the estate was compelled to take the price
which might be agreed on for his own property, thus
taken against --his will-s-(Hear, hear)—and if the site
selected should be close to his residence he must never-
theless give it up.—(Hear, hear.) What was the opinion
of Dissenters in Scotland other than the sect in question
with respect to this measure ? They were opposed to it.
Wl at was'the- opinion of the Dissenters in England ?
The Hon. Member for Stockport, speaking in their name
on a`fornseroccasion, said that this measure was contrary
so the voluntary principle, and that they were opposed
to it. Now with respect to the Church of England—
that church in the plentitude of its power, and notwith-
stausling what was termed its Erestian connexion with
the state; never arrogated to itself any authority similar
tO that which was claimed for the sect for whose benefit
this Bill" was introduced.—(Hear, hear.) What would
be the use of the power which it was proposed to confer
upon the FKee Church sect in Scotland? A case came
recently before the Court of Session arising out of these
circumstances—a short time ago, the proprietor of Dun-.
ainate gave to the Free Church sect a portion of the
village-green. The proprietor. subsequently died, and
the Free Church proceeded to enclose the whole of the
green.' The villagers, looking on this as an encroach-
ment on their rights, pulled down the palings. The
ease was trought before the-Court of Session, and judg-
ment was given • for the-villagers, against the Free
Church. It was 41Ptiecessary.to detain the House longer.
`lags Y ill sa3 objectionable_ in
_p4riciple; it was altige-
ther unnecesmilry, and he recommended the House to
arrest' it's &tigress. With that view he moved as an
_amendment tLat the Bill should be read a third time that
day three months .—(Hear, hear.)
. Mr. DOI/I/ERIE said that his Right Hon. Friend
had not given a correct description of the provisions of
the. Bill. When the appeal was made to the Court of
Session- that tribunal • had authority to award costs
against the.parties making the application, in the event
of it being refused. If the Court should determine on
wanting the application, it would then send the sheriff
Ito look at the site selected, and if he disapproved :of it
he.was authorised to fix upon another which he might
think better.—(" Hear;" from the Opposition.) The
main fact upon which Parliament was called upon to
legislate was this, that a number of congregations were
in the constant habit of meeting for religious worship
In places and under circumstances injurious to the
health of the people and their ministers, and in a manner
which was not in accordance with religious liberty. A
congregation in one of the -Hebrides, an, island larger
than the Isle of Wight, was unable .to obtain' a square
'inch of ground for the erection of a church. It appeared
to hitt .that his Right Hon. Friend h.v-I somewhat
altered his tone on this subject, for on the Bth of June
be said, that 't though he would not go the length of
saying that legislation might not be necessary in the last
resort, he objected to the legislation proposed by the
present Bill; be thought that the object ought to b.s d-
ithered by-private, not by public legislation, because then
. each case would stand on its own substantiie grounds."
—(" Hear, hear," from Sir J. Graham.) The difficul-
ties in the way. of legislating by private Bills were in-
vincible, and, after all, there was little technical dif-
ference between public and private Acts of Parliament.
. The investigation before the Court of Session would be
Inore .satistactory than that which could take place
Wpm the tribunal to which private Bills were referred.
Mr. ELLIOT was Most anxious that some relief
should be given to those congregations; but, much as
he desired that, he could not reconcile it to his con-
science to extend" it to all sorts of denominations and to
persons who might set up associations of a mischievous
endency.
The LORD ADVOCATE intended to vote against
the third reading of this Bill, because it was a general
and not an exceptional measure. To say that justice
might be done by leaving the parties to prosecute their
terriedy by private Acts of Parliament was a mere
mockery and a' denial of justice ; but when, instead of
inakingtit applicable -to one denomination, the measure
• was extended to all, he must object to it. He was sorry
the Right Hon. Gentleman, in speaking of the Free
Church, which bad unquestionably met with great grie-
vances, and which he thought had been almost admitted
by .the Right lion. Gentleman, had referred to any par-
ticular case ; but it should never be forgotten, even by
• those who voted against the third reading of this Bill,
that there was one parish in Scotland every inch of

which belonged to a Noble Lord, and not only had he
refused a site, but had also refused to 500 parishioners
agsinst 'whose character, good feeling, and pro-
priety of conduct not one ,word could be said, liberty
to worship-God- in the open air, even on a barren moor
hear)—and, if he were not mistaken in the fact,
the. Noble Lord had taken out an injunction against their
meeting there, arids,hail obliged them to worship God
during the whole inclement winter season on the high
rOitcli.--(Haar, hear) That was a strong case—(Hear,
sear)7-and he would mention this fact, that until such
gine ,as,the Noble. Lord felt he, was bringing too hard
upon himself -public observation, and they had proposed
to receive the sacrament under the inclemency of those
....northern skies in the middle of winter, the Noble Lord
did mot consent to give them a place for performing that
solemn ordinance of .their church. They were advised
• 310 t to accept that compliment, being told that the Noble
.Lord would bo obliged to give them a better place of
worship; but that sect, so much abused for its violence
--(and he-dared-say- there- had been violence), did upon
that particular occasion receive that accommodation in
the hope that from the action of public opinion the Noble
Lord might, be brought to regard the Free Church with
snore favourable feelings, and might be disposed to grant
' -)0en). sifts.-7-(1-1Ppr. be „ ,
the Houie then divided, when there appeared--

For the third reading... BO
For the amendment -
, ...,, „ Majority..., 39
. .. So thti.Bill was lost
--t.. . , :.... ~. •SECOND READING.
1 ' ;,..:The Payments of Debt out of Real Estate Bill wts
rend a seen/id time.
' •'' .The Other orders of the day were then disposed of.
.....,, BILL TO CONSOLIDATE TUE METROPOLI,
•-v .._ TAX COMMISSIONS OF SEWERS.
f ' Viscolait `SIORPETII said that he should certainly:,
b4vebeen very happy to have extended the whole of the
provisions of tho Public. Health Bill to the metropolis,
and to have extended thee principle of representation
'Which was adopted in that ,BilL.,.But .he felt great diffi-
culty, in a community which comprised upwards of two
millions of inhabitants, in having proper representation,
or applying the provisions of the Bill ; especially where
the natural lie of the drainage was not found to corres-
PO SO 010 boundaries and divisions of their uui9uf,

_ ,

purishes‘,.-or districts. Under these circumstances, he
did not find himself able to introduce such sweeping al-
teratiertsin the present sewage commissions7a: to put,
them on the representative basis which he desired.,
,The
drainage of the metropolis was at present vested
in even commissions, besid.s the Retzent-street
COMMission. It is now proposed to include the
City of London in the guardianship of a gene-
itarcommission, and to put it under the same rules
astlhave. been applied to the outlying districts. The
provisions of the Bill would enable works of public
'drainage to be carried on by the united commission ; to
Which powers, in conformity with the Public Health
Bill, would:---as to house drainage and the removal of
nuisances—l-be given. The principle would be adopted
of spreading all charges for permanent operations over
long spaces of time, say thirty year:, so as to make the
burden less felt. He also proposed that the parties to
be entrusted with sewerage operations should remain a
commission appointed by the Crown. The important
work of devising drainage would be thus put in the
hands of the best persons capable to untivrtake the re•
sponsibility ; and it would be enacted that this commis-
sion should report annually to Parliament. Thus the
body would be brought under the direct control of the
Legislature. He proposed also to limit the duration of
the commission to two years. These were the leading
features of the Bill, for leave to bring in which he had
now to move.

Mr. URQUEIART protested ag-Anst the Bill. He
would oppose it al. initio.
In answer to Sir H. WILLOUGHBY,
Viscount MORPETH aid, that as the Bill only aimed
at consolidating atil effecting economies, without making
any change in the principle of the existing c;:mmissions,
he hoped that it would er,nounter no opposition.
Mr. C. ANSTEY. inquire) whether there was any
covert motive in introducing sue,!‘ a Bill at such an un-
seasonable hour, and in the absence Of all the metropo-
litan Members? •
Viscount MORPETH said that in ansivez to the in-
jurious insinuation of the Hon. Gentleman, only
to say that the Bill stood regularly in the notice paper,
and the metropolitan Members might have remained had
they thought fit,—(Hear). .
Mr. C. ANSTEY would divide the House against the
Bill. .
The House proceeded to a division, but as only tnirty-
two Members were present, it stood adjourned at two
o'clock.
•