The Sun.
London, England, 1870-02-23 00:00:00

EPPING FOREST.

The Steward of the Household brought up her Majesty's
answer to the Address agreed to by the House on the sub-
ject of Epping Forest. Her Majesty said she was most
desirous of concurring with the House, and would give
the Address her best consideration, in order to ascertain
how effect could be given to the Address.
THE NEXT PRESENTATION TO BENEFICES,

Mr. CROSS moved for leave to bring in a bill to
render void the sale of the next presentation to a benefice.
A man who had a right to present to a living, if he
chose to sell his right could do so, but as
long as he chose to hold the advowson he was
morally bound to exercise the right of presentation
The right of presentation was a public trust to be exer-
cised for the benefit of the public, and as such could not
be morally, although it could be legally, as we all very
well knew, disposed of for a money value. The legislation
he proposed was by no means new. As showing that this
was so, he traced the history of the attempts at legislation
during the past few years, at the same time giving instances
of the abuse of the law as it at present stood.
The present state of the law, he contended, could not be
considered satisfactory either as regarded the Church or
the public if such abuses could be practised under it with
impunity. And he asked whether it was not a scandal to
the country and to religion, to the parishioners and the
clergyman, to see advertisements from day to day in the
papers holding forth the great advantages of the next pre-
sentation, and in bold figures giving the age and infirmi-
ties of the present holder of the living, in order to
induce the purchaser to give a larger sum
than he would otherwise do.

Mr. J. HINDE PALMER quite agreed with the
general principle of the measure proposed to be intro-
duced. He recognised fully the great disadvantage to the
Established Church arising from the right of presentation
being made the subject of traffic and public auction ; he
considered it a great detriment indeed to see from time to
time in the newspapers advertisements, with recommenda-
tions of a secular character, with a view to increase the
price of purchase. But he threw out to the hon. gentle-
man to extend the measure to the sale of advowsons.
(Hear, hear.)
The motion for leave to bring in the bill was then
carried.
THE ELECTORAL DISABILITIES OF REVENUE
OFFICERS.

Mr. MONK called the attention of the House to the
disabilities under which the revenue officers labour in
reference to Parliamentary elections ; and moved
that a select committee be appointed to inquire
and report as to electoral restraint and disabili-
ties affecting the civil servants of the Crown in
the several branches of the Revenue Department, and to
consider the expediency of removing them in certain cases.
Many of the men, the hon. gensleman said, who had held
office in the Civil Service for a very many years, and had
by a course of rectitude risen to positions of trust under
her Majesty's Government, felt very keenly the
suspicions to which their electoral disabilities ex.-
posed them in the eyes of the public, and justly
complained of the injustice thereby inflicted upon
them. He put it to the House whether it was not a
matter of great political importance that the political
status of the officers of the revenue should be distinctly
ascertained. No reasonable doubt, he contended,
should be allowed to exist as to whether the dis•
abilities imposed upon revenue officers by the Act passed
in the reign of William and Mary had been revived or
kept alive by any subsequent Act. He knew it was held
by some persons that the 53rd Geo. 111., c. 124, kept
alive the former Act, but he- denied that such was the
case. So far as the Post-office was concerned, he thought
the Government would hardly dare to oppose his motion.
As regarded the customs, his contention was that the
officers of that department were absolutely politically
free ; all the Acts disabling Government officials from
voting at Parliamentary elections having been repealed.
All he asked was that an inquiry should be granted, to set
all doubts at rest on the point as to whether it was proper
in the present state of the law to deny to the civil servants
of the Crown the same rights as were possessed by the
public at large.
Mr. G RAVES said no doubt in times past there had
been reasons for the restrictions imposed upon civil ser-
vants of the Crown, but considering the present state of
affairs in the country and the intelligence and enlighten-
ment of the class of men affected by the restriction. it was

not desirable that the restraint mould U@ ahy longer Cori
tinned. On these grounds he had great pleasure in
seconding the proposal.
Mr. GLADSTONE regretted that, after the exhaustive
debate upon the subject which they had had already when
settling the question cf reform, hen. gentlemen mild not
allow it to re..t for a time. Common humanity on the
part of the prooccutors of the case of the civil servants of
the Crown, should prompt thcm to give the House a short
lease of tranquillity. They ought really not, by
tenacious and repeated attacks, to force upon the
House the adoption of a resolution through very weari-
ness, and a desire no more to hear of it. It was acting the
part of the unjust judge in the parable. (Laughter.) The
terms of the motion chewed that there was something of
tactics in its but the speeches of the hon. gentlemen who
moved and seconded it left no doubt as to what was
their direct object in seeking the appointment of a
committee. Both gentlemen made avowals which left no
doubt that their object was to reverse practically the vote
of last year. Indeed, no case whatever had been made
out for a partial inquiry. He disliked referring to matters
which were thoroughly sifted last year ; but the principle
that applied in this case applied in many other cases.
As regarded that House, a contractor was not
allowed to take part in legislation, not because all contrac-
tors were impure, but because the combination of influence
in matters of money with iufluence in matters of legisla-
tion, was supposed to be, at all events, inexpedient. And
the balance of reasons in the case of the civil
servants of the Crown favoured the notion that
they should be placed under an amount of dis-
cipline. They were entrusted for instance, with
matters to which the check of publicity could not he
applied, whereas everything occurring in that House was
exposed to the full light of day. (Hear, hear.) But he
besought the hon. gentlemen, on the simple ground of
consideration for the overburdened shoulders of the Execu-
tive, to give a little time to enable them to rally from the
repeated assaults to which they were exposed.
It would be very much better, both for them
and the Government, and to the latter it would
give a peaceful interval in which they could fully consider
the propriety of occupying themselves with the question.
(Laughter and hear, hear.)
Mr. R. GURNEY said he should support the motion,
because he thought it but just that such a state of things
should not exist any longer.
Sir G. JENKINSON said the right hon. gentleman a
the head of the Government had not taken upon himself to
offer arguments againat the motion ; all he did was to ask
for rest, but it was well known there was no rest for the
wicked. (Laughter.) He thought the prohibition was
unjust, and that there was good ground for inquiry.
Mr. CRAWFORD said they did not ask the House to
forejudge the question. All that was now sought was to
ascertain how far these inequalities extended, and whether
it was just that such should continue.
Mr. MONK said he had not heard one argumen
against the course he wished adopted. He hoped
the officers of the Customs would avail themselves of
the information that had been elicited that they were
politically free. (Hear, hear.) He believed the officers
of the Excise were free also, but the declaration that such
was the case could only be made in a court of law or in the
committee he asked for. Allhe wanted was to ascertain the
status of the three branches of the Civil Service. As it
seemed to be the desire of the House that he should not
press his motion, he would, under such circumstances
not persevere in asking for the committee.
The motion was then by leave withdrawn,
SUBURBAN COMMONS.
Mr. COWPER movel for leave to bring in a bill to
provide for the improvement, protection, and manage-
ment of commons and waste lands near cities and towns.
The object of the bill was to withdraw all
commons within a certain radius of large towns and
the metropols from the operations of the Inclosure Com-
missioners. It was most desirable that recreation grounds
should be as numerous as possible, in fact they appeared
to him to Le almost a necessity, because they were highly
conducive to the happiness, and improved morals of the
working classes. They were the correctives to the tempta-
tions of the public-house and gin palace, and as they were so
highly beneficial he did not think the House would refuse
him leave to introduce his measure.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
CHELSEA BRIDGE.
Mr. PEEK called the attention of the House to the toll
on Chelsea Bridge. He said it was most desirable that
the toll at present levied, which was a great hardship,
should be abolished, as it acted most detrimentally to the
property on either side of the water, and inflicted the
utmost inconvenience on those least able to bear it. He
did not think there would be any difficulty in procuring
the necessary funds to extinguish the toll, as there were
sixty acres of land in the vicinity of Battersea Park, which
if sold would easily realise the required amount. He con-
cluded by moving " that in the opinion of that House the
Government bridge at Chelsea should henceforth be free
from toll."
Mr. W. H. SMITH thought it most desirable that the
bridge should be at once thrown open, and thus give
facilities to those who were deserving the consideration of
the House. The bridge was erected and maintained by
the Government, and the Government also demanded the
toll—a peculiarity which he thought was highly favour-
able for throwing open the bridge.
Sir P. O'BRIEN said the question was whether faith
should be kept with the country. The cost of the bridge
was voted by Parliament on the understanding that it
would be repaid, and he did not see that the hon. gentle-
men who had moved and seconded the proposition had
shewn any good and sufficient reason why the faith then
entered into should be broken. He therefore moved as
an amendment that the resolution should be negatived.
Mr. BRODERICK supported the resolution, on the
ground that the property in the neighbourhood of the
bridge would be greatly enhanced in value by the bridge
being thrown open, and also because its opening would be
a great boon to the poor people who inhabited the district
on either bank of the river.
Mr. ANDERSON said the constituency he represented
grudged very much the money expended out of the public
'unds upon London. For that reason he opposed the

motion.
Mr. CUBITT supported the motion. The Government
could not concede what was asked by the motion. He
hoped they would free the bridge from toll on Saturday
afternoons, in addition to Sundays, Chriamas Day, and
Good Friday, on which days it was now free.
Mr. AYRTON, on the part of the Government, argued
that the state of the exchequer would not permit of this
source of income being dispensed with.
The House then divided, when the numbers were--_-_
Ayes
Noes

Majority against the motion ... 141
MARRIED WOMEN'S ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

On the motion of Mr. DODDS, seconded by Mr.
GOLDNEY, leave was given to bring in a bill to facili-
tate the execution and acknowledgment of deeds by
married women.