The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 3.
REFUSAL TO BURY A DISSENTING MINISTER
IN CHICHESTER.
(Continued from our Fourth Edition of last night.)
Lord BROUGHAM bore his testimony to the defective
state of the law in ecclesiastical cases, and mentioned an in-
stance in which a Right Rev. Prelate had to pay several
thousand pounds costs for merely having done his duty, and
nothing more nor less than his duty, and for doing less than
which he would have been censurable.

The Bishop of EXETER said that the Noble Duke who
had introduced the subject of the proceedings at Chichester
spoke with great discretion when he said that the verdict of a
coroner's jury was a primci facie ground for supposing that a
person had really died in a state of lunacy. He rejoiced
that the Noble Duke had used that phrase instead of saying
that it was absolutely conclusive, for he apprehended that
many cases had occurred, in reference to insurances and
other matters, in which such verdicts had not been held to
be conclusive evidence of the state of a man's mind. If a
clergyman, then, had good reason to believe that a man
had died by his own hand while in a sane state of mind, he
(the Bishop of Exeter) held that he would be quite justified
in withholding from him the rites of the Church, notwith-
standing any verdict to the contrary. In saying this he was
not speaking his own sentiments only, but the sentiments of
one of the best, the most pious, and not the least learned of
the prelates that had ever adorned the Church of England,
he meant Dr. Wilson, the Bishop of Sodor and Man.
The matter here dropped.
COUNTY COURTS FURTHER EXTENSION BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM having presented several petitiolis in
favour of this Bill, moved that if be re-committed.

The LORD CHANCELLOR rose and contended that,the
state of the law was not such as to require the alterations
which the Bill proposed to effect. He objected that it was
inexpedient to give a general authority to persons to go
into the county court, and refer matters in their own digcre-
ton, without leaving the Court an option whether it Would
or would not take upon itself the office with which the par-
' ties proposed to clothe themselves. He did not see any ne-
necessity for any such legislation. This applied to the 'five
first clauses. The facilities they afforded were already 'Pro-
vided by other Acts of Parliament. The next series of
clauses referred to the Court of Reconcilement; but it did not
appear to him to be suited to the feelings and constitution of
the people of England. It would enable a cunning man to
know the case of his opponent; and having done that
he would go to law with him.—( Hear.) If it were to be
said this would do no harm, he answered that was not
enough ; they shoull not pass laws except to do a positive
good.—(Hear.) As to the clauses which dealt with equity,
it did not appear to him expedient to adopt them. What
they proposed would be found, in a great degree, already
done by the 9 and 10 Viet., c. 22, s. 13, for this Bill did,the
same thing as that Act. As to the proposal for judge= on the
circuit hearing causes, he would say that from his experience
it was seldom that they had the time or the opportunity for
doing so. As to the proposal for permitting clerks to at-
torneys to appear for their principals, he said there could not
be a greater nuisance. The proceedings at the criminal
courts showed that such persons, that is persons attending
about the courts in the names of attorneys, have been proved
to have despoiled the poor of their money, under the pretence
of procuring counsel and having a legal „defence for them on
their trial'.—(Hear, hear.) He could speak from personal
experience of the mischief caused by persons acting
as attorneys who were :not attorneys. What sort of
business must that be which was to be repre-
sented in a court of justice by a six-months'
clerk to an attorney? The Bill would give a licence to the
lowest set of attorneys to lend over their names to unworthy
persons, and, taking it in connexion with that of the attend-
ance of counsel not instructed through attorneys, was a pro-
position which he was sure his Noble and Learned Friend,
on further consideration, would abandon. As tithe-rents were
now only recoverable by distress, it was proposed by this Dill
to give the tithe-rent owner a power to recover where per-
haps there had been nothing titheable raised in the land. The
most facile remedy was by distress ; but for it was to be sub-
stituted personal action. The only ground for the clause
was, it wounded the clergyman's feelings to levy a distress,
and it was proposed to give him the power of sending a man
to prison. He did not approve of any such proposition, and
not approving of the changes proposed, he moved that the
Bill be committed that day six months.
Lord BROUGHAM ,was greatly surprised by the course
now proposed to be taken by his Noble and Learned Friend.
If his Noble Friend had given him the slightest hint, if he
had suggested to him the entertainment of a shadow of a
doubt raia re§tipg vpvil mix' A 4 W aay vf