The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-08 00:00:00

MILLER V. THE EARL OF GLASGOW

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that very seldom
a question of greater importance than this came
before their lordships' house. It was particularly
interesting at the present period, when the state of
the church in that part of the kingdom excited
more than ordinary attention. He had already so
I fully given his opinion on the question, that he
I deemed it unnecessary to go into the details of the
case, further than as to the point on which he had
formerly expressed a doubt, and for the considera-
tion of which he had requested some time from
their lordships. The only point in his mind re-
quiring consideration respecting the Dunning case,
the decision on which was, in some measure, in-
consistent with that of the Methven ; but, in the
Dunning case the arguments were principally as
to the jurisdiction of presbytery, and it was
on that point that the decision turned ; never-
theless, there were some observations made by
the judges, on that occasion, which appeared to
him to be inconsistent with the principles on
which the Methven case was decided. In the
case of Steventon, which was similar to that
of Methven, and the argument in which was the
same, the Court adjudged on the same principles
which they had adopted in that of Methven, and in
which he (the Lord Chancellor) was inclined to
concur. His opinion, therefore, was, that however
much a parish might increase in its population, if
the church were in repair, or even if it were only
in such a state of disrepair that the rebuilding of it
was not absolutely necessary, the heritors could not
be called on to build a new church, or enlarge the
existing one, and it was only in the case of the erec-
tion of a new church that additional accommodation
could be demanded. It had been objected in this
view of the case by the counsel for the appellants,
and he (the Lord Chancellor) was bound to say with
great force, that if this view were adopted this im-
portant right would rest, not on the demand or ne-
cessity of accommodation, but on something of an
accidental nature, which had nothing to do with the
matter itself, or with the extent of the accommoda-
tion required, and that a church capable of con-
taining 800 persons, as in the present case, might be
required to accommodate 3,000 persons ; or that in
the case of Liverpool, which was only one parish,
and had increased within a short period from 10,000
to upwards of 100,000 inhabitants, no accommoda-
tion should be given until it was necessary to re-
build the church. He felt the force of these argu-
ments, and of the strong remarks which had been
made in support of them ; still he felt that there
were equally forcible arguments on the opposite
side. The difficulty was as to where they should
draw a line. Great transitions and great changes,
such as from a state of war to peace, and from peace
to war, almost uniformly produced a great
increase of population in particular districts. Many
towns in England had doubled their population
within the last 20 years, so that the extent of church
accommodation became quite insufficient for the de-
mand. Were they then, on such occacions, to re-
quire that new churches should be added to the old ?
That very addition implied the taking down a part
of the old, and would in almost every case raise the
question of whether it would be better to enlarge
the church or at once to build a new one. If the
population went on increasing at its present ratio,
when it doubled itself in every 20 or 30 or 40 years,
instead of as formerly in 300 or 400 years—if this
doctrine were allowed, there might be a continual
call on the heritors for new churches. It appeared
to him that this was an arbitrary doctrine, on which
no reasonable qualification could be made, and that
was of itself a strong argument against its adoption.
The learned counsel would therefore see that the
difficulties did not all lie on one side. The re-
sult was, that if the present state of the law on the
subject was defective, the Legislature was the proper
quarter to apply to ; in the mean time their lord-
ships, in their judicial capacity, had only to admi-
nister the law as they found it ; and it appeared to
him that the judgment of the Court below was
sound, and well decided in the present instance.

Affirmed without costs.
SCOT V. STUART

Of this case we gave a sketch on a former day.
The question was, whether a tutory dative ceased
by the death of one of the tutors.
The judgment of the Court below was reversed.

LESLIE V. SIIEPPARD.
Affirmed without any remark.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.