The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-27 00:00:00

The third reading Wll9 negatived without a division.

CORNWALL 'SUBMARINE MINES BILL.
The standing orders, attcr some discussion, were rue-
perded, in ordtr that this bill, r.hich was to settle the
rights of the Crown with revect to certain minerals
in Cornwall, between high and low water markp, might
be read a second time.

TEIE RIGHT OF SEARCH.
Lord LYNDHURST, in'rising to put the qtieftieß2
of which he had given notice to the Secretary of State.
fcr Foreign Affairs with respect to the right of visit,
:aid,—Your lordships, no doubt, may most of you have
sad a speech which was made by Mr. Dallas, the Ame-
ricas Minister, a short time since, at a meeting of his
feliow-4r,jects to celebrate the anniversary of American
independence. On that occasion the hon. - gentleman
stg,d that the question of the right of visiting American
v;.,si,el3 in ,ime of peace on the high seas had been finally
is a subject, toy lords, of so much import-
aucs and such deep interest that it is material that we
should receive a cl,stioct and precise account of the terms
on which that settlement is based ; and I have therefore
given notice of a question which I intend to propose to
my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affaire, in order that he may give us some explanation
on the subject to which I have referred. Many persons
—perhaps I ought not to say " many persons," but se-
veral persona, and those in a high political position—
appear to think that Oat proceeding was not justified,
and that in point of fact we have surrendered a most
valuable and important right. Tne answer whin') T mat e
to that is that we hay. virril! d.rod LAG rignt, fir west, in
poinl. of taut, no such right as that which is contended
for has ever existed. We have abandoned the assump-
tion of a right, and in doing so we have, I think, acted
justly, oruderoly, and wisely. (gear, bear ) Now, my
lords, with your permission, I shall proceed to make a
few observations upon the general question, and to refer
to some authorities on the subject ; but I assure you
that I should not have troubled you were it not that I
thick it is of great importance that this question should
be distinctly and finally understood and settled. The first
proposition which I state is this :—That in no writer
on international law has that right ever been asserted ;
and, in the next place, that there is no decision of any
court of justice having jurisdiction to decide such
questions in which that light has been admitted. I
wish in making this assertion to fortify myself by
some authorities ; and Z cannot quote a higher or
a better authority than that of the English judge
Lord Stowell, who states distinctly, in the words which
I am about to read—in conformity with what I hare
stated—that no such right has ever been asserted by any
competent authority. His words are these—
" I can find no authority that gives the right of inter-
ruption to the ravigation of States in amity upon the high
seas excepting that which the rights of war give to both
belligerents against neutrals."

This is a distinct statement made by that noble lord, in
addition to which I beg leave to refer to the authority
of Wheaton, who states the proposition in these terms—
" It is impossible to show a single passage in any insti•
tutional writer on public law, or the judgment of any
c3rirt by which that law is administered, which will jos.
tify the exercise of such a right on the high seas in time of
peace, independent of special compact."
So that your lordship perceive that both on this side of
the water and in America, by the best authorities,and
by the highest jurists, that light, in the passages to
which I hare referred, is controverted instead of beit g
ndmiitjd. (Hear.) It has been agitated long between
this country on the one aide and America on the other.
The eminent jurist on the other side of the water makes
his statement and assertion ; four corresponding autho-
rity on this side of the water makes his assertion—and
those assertions directly and distinctly agree. For any-
self, my I Ards, I have never been able to discover any
principle of law or reason on which that right could bes
supported. I will refer again to the same high English
auebority—Lord Stowell—upon this subject, and you
shall hear whai; Le emphatically states with respect to it.
Tout di dinguished jurist says—
"No nation can exercise the right of visitation and
search on the high seas except on the belligerent claim.
No such right has ever been claimed nor can it be exer-
cised, without the oppression of interrupting and harass-
ing the real and lawful navigation of other countries, for
the right when it exists at all is universal and will extend
to all countries. If I were to press the consideration fur-
thtr it would be by stating the gigantic mischiefs which
such a claim is likely to produce."
I may add that another very high authoritp—' he Awe.
aeon Judge Storey—in a well known case expressed
the name opinion in almost the same terms and in lan-
guage as emphatic. So here again is a coincidence of
authority between the two parties agitating the question
—the authority on this side of the water corresponding
exactly with the authority on the o: her. But Ido not
think it necessary to refer to ar.y cases in support of the
question I am considering ; I will refer only to the
principle on which the question rests. What is the rule
with respect to the high seas and to the navigation o f
the high seas ? All nations are equal upon the high
seas. Whether they be strong and powerful or weak and
imbecile, ail are on a footing of perfect equality. What
is the position of a merchant ship on the high seas A
ship is part of the dominion of the country to which she
belongg, and what right has the ship of one nation to in-
of ary other nation, where the
rightsterft e
of princ:ple is so clear and
re
a there
equalship I
The
so distinct that there can be no doubt about it. lam
utiwilhog on a question of this kind to refer to any ar-
guments of my o wn, cr to any authority which I can
possess on the subject ; but hear what is said by Lord
Stowell with respect to the navigation of the high seas.
His language is this :

All nations being equal have an equal right to the un-
interrupted use of the unappropriated parts of the ocean
for their navigation. In places where no local authority
exists, where the subjects of all Statesmeet on a footing of
entire equality and independenae, no one State or any of
its subjects has a right to assume or exercise authority
over the subjects of another."
That is a confirmation of the doctrine which I hays
stated, that the principle on which this question is to
be decided is the equality of all nations on the high
seas. Admitting this principle how can it be asserted
that the ships of one nation can interfere in any way
with the vessels of another Then, having laid this
„clown, the cnsideration next occurs that difficulties
may arise out of frauds which may be prac.ised on the
high teas, and it is said that the flag of America may
for fraudulent purposes be astumed by another Power.
But how can the act tf a third Power, or of the subjects
of a third Power, by possibility affect any right existing
on the part of the United States ? Take this case : —By
our treaty with Spain we have a right to visit and serrch
Spanish vessels with a view to prevent the slave trade.
But ho w can that agreement between us and Spain by
any possibility affect the rights of Amerisal Clearly in
no way at all. But then what aro our cruisers to do I
They are placed in a most difficulapcsition, because it is
quite clear and plain, if one of our cruisers see a vessel
hearing the American flag, and have reason to believe
that that fl g is assumed, he mos' examine and itquire
iota her right to carry that Sag as best he can. If the
result should be to give him a strong suspicion that .he
v-ssel has no right to the flag she bears, he tray visit
and have an examination of her papers, and if he then
find that his suspicions are correct he may dea 1 with her
in the manner in which be would be justified in dealing
with her as between England and the country to which
she belongs. The American Government has no rightt
interfere in this case. The matter is entirely haws^
the English cruiser and the vessel seized. But, i 141,14,
s'anuld turn out that the vessel is an America), ands.
a right to use the flag the situation is this—he must of
o iur6e apologise for his acts, and make umpeLotiyPtehn;
eation for any jury done. (Hear.) That is_aoad. The
position in which the two countries are
"If a palm) ma-
else of the Unitel States. B.
a'a
officer to seize a American Minister for Foreign AffAir4 thusP states
.. the
gistrate gives a warrant to a policy
f he ventures to execute
son, will make
par-
ticular person, the officear,bei
identity of the individual he will
shouldie the result of his inquiries sa.
the
fohreedoes not In .w the per.
turn out cor-
d
execute the warrant. If his information
ttihsefywhailroraanst,
taon
rect his proceedings are correct also
d arrested the wrong ; but if it turn out
made a mistake an
that he has
man be must make ample compensation for the injury
which he has done. The two mules seem to me to be
prfectly analogous. A distinction has been attempted
to be drawn—for which I think there is no foundation
—between the right of visit and the right of searcbJ
Visit and search are two separate wards in our vocabu-
lary of international law, but they express what is cow'
veyed by, a single term in foreign vocabularies "le droit
de vi.site ' What is the use of visiting if you can do no-
thing ! How can a mere visit convey the information

which you desire to obtain ; and the moment you ask
for an examination of the papers, the moment you ask a
single question the visit becomes a search—in other
words you are t xercising the droi4 de visite. Bat sup-
pose a party visits only in the strict sense of the word—
what right, I ask, has any person to go on board a vee-
eel to visit it without the consent cf the master 1 The
came principle applies that I have just laid (11;7.
Treaties have been entered into with foreign countries
giving the right of visit ; but why enter
into such
treaties if the right of vieiting is a nationalr ight founded
on internati .nal law. What took place in the year
1115 after the Treaty of Vienna! Lord Castlereagh ap-
plied to the French Government to establish some system
by which cruisers e ultl visit the vessels of either country,
but the Duo de itichelieu replied, that France never
would consent to a maritime police being established over
her own entjects except by persons belonging to her own
country. I think I have gone far enough to establish
the position with which I started—that there is, in truth,
no such thing as the r ght of visit. Whatever arrange-
ment may have been made with the American Govern-
ment, we have renounced no right that we ever pos-
pissed. It would be material, if possible, to adopt seem
plan by mutual understanding fit verifying the flag.
Ilear,bear.) lam told that sorne negotiation and some
correspondence is going on for that end. It is a difficult
question, and I hope it may be brought to a favourable
termination. I conclude with what 1 stated at the be-
ginning, that the Government were wise, prudent, and
ust in the course which they have pursued. To pro-
'termite a claim which you cannot enforce consistently
with law, or ti make an attempt to enforce it which
must lead to resistance, and which may afterwards
lead to war, would be a most unwise and impru-
dent mode of proceeding. tHear, hear.) No war is so
deplorable as a war founded on injustice. Be-fore sitting
down I must, in justice to the hon. gentleman to whose
statement I referred before, read to your lordships the
concluding words of his ep-ech, because it ie in complete
accordance with the high character which he has always
b me both in America and in this country, where be
acts ise her representative. The hon. gentleman said :
" While I am able to announce to you this gratifying
fact, I think it should be accompanied aloo by the assur-
ance that the termination of that for which we ha-re
Wagged for nearly half a century has been brought about
with a degree of honourable candour and fair dealing on
tho part of the British Government deserving of every
acknowledgment on our part."
That statement is in perfect unison with the excellent
claracter of the honourable gentleman to whom I have
referred. (Hear, bear.) My lords, I thought it my
dirty to make these observations, and to bring this matter
clearly before you, accompanied by the quotations
which I have read—with which, no doubt, many of your
lordships are perfectly familiar—in order to afford an
opportunity to any noble lord to refute the positions
which I have laid down if they are capable of refu. ation.
The question which I wish to put to the Foreign
Secretary is this,—whether he is prepared t i lay on
the table of the hon-e the correspondence with the
American Government with respect to the right of vial-
ation
The Earl of MALMEStURY—I am very glad, my
lords, that my noble and learned friend has made an op-
portunity—if I may so say—for giving us his opinion on
this very important matter. (Hear, beer.) That opinion
must be of immense importance in Europe and America.
j-must say that it must finally settle this dispute, and,
if it be ever again mooted, my noble and learned friend's
opinion will be quoted, as he himself has quoted the
opinion of his great predecessor, Lord Stowell. It is a
pleasure to me to hear that be concurs entirely in the
opinion of the law officers of the Crown, which we took
before replying to the note of General Case. They as-
serted unanimously that the international law was
exactly as it has been described by my noble and learned
friend. Upon that opinion her Majesty's Government
acted, and at once frankly confessed that, having no title
to make the assumption which bad hitherto been mode to
a general right of visit and search, they abandoned both
those claims. At the same time we placed before the
American Government the paramount necessity of draw-
jog up some instructions perfectly identical in character,
which might be placed in the bands of the naval officers
of the two countries, and, if possible, of all maritime
nations, so that, all acting in the same manner, commerce
may no longer be obstructed, and we may never again
run the risks of those quarrels which have been caused
by former assertions of a greater right. Negotiations
have gone as far as this—that we have given up the ae-
gumption which we have so long made to a right of visit
and search ; and the American Government, on the
other band, have stated that they are ready to listen and
consider any suggestions which we may make with a
view to the verification of the Rag. We have made the
same suggestion to the Government of France ; and that
G eeernmeirt, appreciating the great importance of the
question, have. agreed to consider any proposition that
we may make, and on their part to suggest any proposi-
tion which may appear likely to be of serviee. But
there can be no doubt that, although we all agree that
the dignity of our several nations would be compromised
by allowing a right of visit and search, it is inevitably
necessary that some security should be taken against a
fraudulent use of the national floe. (Hear) Further
than that negotiations have not proceeded, and although
it is not usual to produce papers under there circum-
stances, yet lo r Majesty's Government have no objection
to place on your lordships' table the correspondence which
has taken place as far as it goes. Your Lordships will un-
derstand that it goes no fur:ber than that we have aban-
doned the right of search and visit, and that the Ameri-
can Government have agreed to entertain and consider
in a fair sprit any suggestions we may make in order
to obtain some security against the fraudulent
adoption of the American flag. Toe French Govern-
ment have also been communicated with, and they are
ready and even ar.xioue, to assist us in attaining that
object. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ABERDEEN said, —lt has happened to
me, when former-4 at the Foreign-office, to have to write
a great many despatches upon this subject, morel hope
than will ever fall to the let of the noble earl (Earl of
Malmesbury). But the correspondence which then took
place left the question completely settled, and, there-
fore, it was with great astonishment I heard of anything
which could give rise to compleint on the part of the
American Government. It was in the years 1812 and
1343 that a long correspondence took place between
the American Minister and myself, and Mr. Webster
declared over and over again to the late Lord Ashbur-
ton that the matter was perfectly and satisfactorily
settled. The noble earl talks of referring to the law
officers of the Cro en as if it were a new question. The
instruction's under which our officers acted, and I sup
pose they are the awe instructions now, were drawn
up under the supervision of Dr. Lushington, Sir G.
Cockburn, and the Admiralty. They were communicated
to Mr. Everett, the America.' Minister, and I never
heard a word intimate I against them. I was astonished
to hear my noble and learned friend (Lord Lyedburet)
quota tte stat?ruent of the highly rsopeeted A mermen
Minister who is now in this country, to the effect that
we had given up frankly and finally the right cf visit
and search. Twenty years ago we repudiated the assertion
of any such right, and Lb, ri f re what the noble earl the
Secretary of St.te for Foreign Aff eirs can have given up
I am et a 1 )ss to understand. Any such right was given
up then as frankly and finally as it possibly con to given
-up at this moment. After my noble and learned friend's
quoting the high authority of Lord Stowell, it rr he ap-
pear ludicrous in me to quote myself. At the same time,
in ceder to show how the matter stood, I will just quo e
a note of my own. Though an humble authority, still I
was speaking the language of the British Government,
and that language was received by the American Govern-
ment with acquiescence and satisfaction. My words
were these :

"The undersigned resigns all pi e'ensions on the part
of the British Government to visit and search American
vessels in time of peace ; nor is it as American vessels that
each vessels are ever, visited. But it has been the invariable
practice of the British Da. y, and the undersigned-believes
of all ►,avies in the world, to ascertain by visit the rtal
natiotmlrty of merchant vessels met on the high lea., it
there were good reason to apprehend their illegal &A-
ter. In certain latitueee, and for particular ojscts,
vessels are vi#ited not as American, but either as British
vessels engaged in an unlawful traffic and assuming the
American flag for criminal purposes, or as belonging to
,Stites which have by trea'y conceded to Great Britain
the right of search, and which right it is attempted to
defeat by frauclulentllt bearing the protective fl a, of the
Union ; or, finally, they are visited as piratical ou law
baring not the least title to any flag or any nationality
whatever."

-Minder those three categories we have exercised the
right to visit vessels so suspected. But if our officers
knew that an Anaarican ve eel war fall of slaves, they
'would have no right wLatever to or arrest her
unless they had good ground to suspect that she was not,
so American vessel. No doubt the flag is prina facie
evidence of nationality ; but the flag alone is not suffi-
cient evidence, and is nut sufficient to outweigh informa,
lion to the contrary received from any quarter, or any
other grounds of reasonable suspicion. No doubt our
cruisers may commit a mistake and overhaul an Ameri-
can vessd, believing het to be a Spaniard or a pirate.
k But it has been found over and over again that instant
and ample reparation has been offered for such an invo-
- )(rotary error, and that is aq that can be fxpeeted
be-
tween two 'nations acting in good faith with each other.
.I saw, some time ag', an extract from a despatch of
!.General Cams, which appeared to me to state the case
'With perfect fairness—(hear, bear)—and they are the
44r1' Words which I used myself. As I have said
' alreadii-tiave written more upon this Fubj, ct than I
. Lope it will ever be necessary for the noble earl to write,
! and the resulkaf that writing has been perfect content
and trarquillityit4lB or 18 years -until this year, when
•'ite heat for the ant time of British outrages. I believe
it has arisen from the zeal of our cruisers. The addition

of a aquadron on the coast of C ►ba, instead of operations
being confined to the coast of Africa, has led to a more
frequent exercise ..of, the right of !igit, and I am
Afraid the vat of our cruisers has converted into a
rule that which was only intended to he an exception•
Without any ground of euspici)n, the American flag is

sufficient evidence of nationality, and it is only when
there are grounds of suspicion that the British cruiser is
entitled to s.ee whether the suspected vessel is American
or not. That is all that ever was aserted by us, and when
the American Minister declares her Majesty's Govern-
anent have given up, frankly and fir ally, the right of visit
—a declaration which is received with great enthusiasm
by his countrymen—l am at a loss to understand what is
given up. 20 years ago we repudiated the idea of such a
right. We never made assertion of any each right, and
theref,re we cannot give it up. But the rr,ble eail the
Secretary of Sate for Fureicen Affairs added, that it is
important some mode should be taken to verify the na-
. tionality of any vessel on the ocean, without which we
can have no secnity whatever. (Rear, bear.) The in-
structions to which I have referred were framed in the
most careful and envious manner, and we hal the advan-
tage of the assis•ance of the noble earl now at the head of
the Government. If the noble earl the Secre'a• y of State
can make any regulations, or issue any instructinns which
shall be more effectually and more careful'y guarded, I
shag b 3 very glad to see them ; but, n..twithstanding
the desirableness of the ot.ject, I doubt whether he will
find it prac'Acable. (Rear.) I do not cf:roplain of the
nobl3 earl, because the subjec, was probably new to him,
but those who rovised him ought to have ree deected that
this sutiect rccupi, d, during many months, a great deal
of care and attention. At the time to which I allude the
question was at its height. It excited much more inte-
re-A =ban it does now, and assumed a much more serious
character. I will not folios, this subject further, but I
will read an extract from the last de-patch I wrote on
his matter : _ .

" I have no intention to renew the discussion, and it is
the less necessary because my last note has remained fur
more than four years without an answer, and the Secrete y
of State has declared to the British Plenirotentiary at
Washington, that the explanations given were entirely sa-
tisfactory. The President is assured and believes that
Great Britain will always respect the just claims of the
United States. We have no preten3ions to interfere in
any manner, either by detention, visitation, or search,
with vessels of the United States, know-. or believed to he
such. But we still main.;ain and will exercise the right
and necessity of ascertaining the genuineness of any
that suspected vessels may carry. If, in the exercise of
this right, any involtultt ry error should ba rua,:e ; if, in
spite of every precaution, any loss or injury should be
sustained prompt reparation will be afforded ; but that
we should abandon the right itself is quite impossible."

That is the footing of common sense and common justice
on which the question stands at this moment, and I was
much pleased to see from the despa-ch of General Cass
that he adopted the same opinion, and tbat he made the
same statement and used the words which I myself em-
ployed. The ex:q.cise of our right, if it be cauticusly and
prudently asserted, as it has been for the last 16 or 18
years, will not leave us in a very bad position if no
change is made. If, however, the noble earl can improve
the cyetem which bas prevailed during that time I can
have no ot.j.c ion.
Earl GRANVILLE—I never heard the state of the
law as laid down by my noble and learned friend ques-
tioned, nor am I awa:e that any complaint was made
against the late Government for the instructions issued
by them. No alteration in these instructions was
made by the late Government, and I wish to know
whether it is the intention of the noble earl to abide
by the instructions which have heretofore been acted
upon until the communications with the American
Government on this subject have been concluded.

The Earl of MALMESBURY—The noble earl who
spoke last omitted to mention one very important
matter. No doubt the noble earl and the Ministry with
which he was connected assumed that the law was such
as it has been laid down by my noble and learned friend.
Bat he did not say that the American Government in-
variably went further, and asserted that they had a
right to maintain their own police, and that whativer
might be on board a vessel, if the American flag were
flying, we bad no right to visit it. They said that they
constantly carried out a visitation by their own police,
and that they would not be meddled with by any other
ciuntry. Then came the question of discretion. I
admit that lately, I know not by whose orders, there
has appeared to be an increased activity exhibited by
our cruisers in searching American vessels. There can
he no doubt tbat the accounts given to the American
Government have been immensely exaggerated, and I
may state that after a careful examination I have no
found any instance in which our crui-ers have
behaved even with incivility to the officers of any
American vessel which they have boarded; but at the
same time I must admit that in the exercise of that dis-
cretion which is given to them under the orders of the
noble earl there has been a want of judgment in some
ewes, and that cur officers have visited vessels which
there was no fair reason to suppose were engaged in the
slave trade. The noble earl has asked me whether I have
altered those instructions. I have not done so. They
remain precisely as they were. But Ido not think they
are so safely worded as they might be, and I think they
might be improved se as not to expose our officers to the
risk of making mistakes which amount to an infraction
of international law, and which place them in an unfair
position such as no fficer4, and e.pecially young officers,
ought to occupy. Pending the arrangement which I
have sketched out, that English cruisers should search
suspected English vessels, that Americans should search
suspected American ves.els, and that French cruisers
should search suspected French vessels, without actual:y
altering the instructions heretofore acted upon, %re have
thought it right to suspend them until the negoVatlons
have proceeded further. We have also oedered our
cruisers on that coast to respect the American lag
under any circumstances. The Americans, on their
part, have added a considerable number of cruisers on
the coast, and have promised, during this period of in-
activity on our par, which, I trust, may be but shor,;,
to use all the activity they can in order that the Ameri-
can tsg, which I fear has been several times used by
slavers, may not be prostituted to the purposes of the
slave trade. (Hear.)
The conversation then dropped.
REGISTRATION OF DESIGNS.

Lord LYNDUURST presented a petition from the
Society of Arts and the Royal Institution of British
Artists, praying fur an extension of the registration
of designs and an amendment in the present law.
The noble and learned lord proceeded to detail the
hardship to which artists were now (objected, in
consequence of having no copyright in their pictures,
and by the pract ce which existed of having copies
of original paintings made by inferior artists, and
sold as originals. Extensive frauds were thus commi•-
ted by the sale of these spurious copies. 11e mentioned
a case where a lady of f ,rtune purchased a most valu-
able picture on the especial condition that no copy of it
should be taken, yet what was ber surprise on going to
the Manchester Exhibition, to see one among that col-
lec ion. By means of employing inferior artists, several
copies were , ften taken of one picture, a,d sold as
originals either by private sale or at auctions, especially
in such large provincial towns as Liverpool and Man-
chester. He kre v nothing c)uld be dme during the
preient session, but he wou'd now move the app,int-
ment of a select committee, and name its merut,-rs, in
order to aff,rd them an epportuuity of considering the
subject (luring the recess

The Earl of DONOUGH t4Oßls had no objection to
the committee, hut, on the contrary, thought it would
be eery bent ficial to the
The motion was agree 1 to.
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND SPECIAIL
SERVICE BILL.
The Earl of WICKLOW wi.hed to he iliforrned why
it was that the Church cf England f.4iiicial S rvices
Bill, which Nosed that moose on the 22., d of Marcb,
was not p..:reevered with. Ho complained of tie
conduct of tho Bitdrop of Londan in sanctioning tho'e
irrtgu:ar services at Exeter liall, and in leaving Mr.
Edouart to contest the matter alone, and he described
Such conduct as nrju2t and unfair..

- The Bishop of LONDON thought that, before the
noble earl applied to his c ineuct such terms as " urjust
and unfair," ee should be extremely i-ure of the fac s of
his case. (Hear, hear.) The only fac, which bore any
any particular reference to his (the Bishop of Londou'e)
conduct in this ma►ter was, the assert on that the ser-
vices at Exeter Hall were with his authori. y, which the
noble earl would see was not the case if he would only
consult the prirted correspondence which he (the Eat'
of Wicklow) held in his band, and had quoted. In one
of his (the Bishop of London's) letters contained in that
correspondence, the noble earl would find these words :
--" There services are not with my sanction " (Hear,
hear.) Before, therefore, the noble earl accused him of
conduct which was "unjust and unfair," it would have
been only just and fair for the noble earl to have read
his (the Biebop of London',) statenaen% (Hear, hear.)
The noble earl thought that he ought to have made him-
self a party to this affair; hut in cases of disputed law
he could not interfere privately—the question could be
settled in the Bishop's Court. Some gentlemen thought
that the bill eves uoneeessary, and had written to him to
Fay that they thought they could accomplish in another
way that which the act was to enable them to accomp!ish
in a particular way, and that tney intended to reopen
the services. He also received intimati'es from certain
other gentlemen that VI« y entertained opposite opinions.
This was a case of disputed law, and it could be speedily
settled in the Bishop's Court. Their lordships had
already decided by a large .majority that these services
were needed ; any interf rence of his would only have
done harm ; but if it should turn out that these services
were legal, he for one should not be sorry. (lieu, hear.)
In reply to a farther question,
The Bishop of LONDON said be had nothing to
do with the Westminster Abbey services', which were
managed by the Dean and Chapter. But he did not be-
lieve it was ever intended to protract the Abbey services
later than July, so that the re-epening of the Exeter Hall
services had nothing t., do with the termination of those
at tt.e Abbey. (Hear )
The subject then dropped.
WILLS, &c , OF BRITISH SUBJECTS ABROAD