The Sun.
London, England, 1867-03-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS.—LAST EVENING.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

PETITIONS.

Petitions were presented from various congregations
against the sale of spirituous liquors on the Sunday.

BILLS.

The West Kent Gas Bill and the Manchester City Rail.
way Bill were read a third time and passed.
Lord TAUNTON said that it was always the custom
during several sessions for the Board of Trade to
present a report to the committee investigating into
the merits of a bill, pointing out any of the
most prominent points, and all those clauees which
affected public or private interests. But he would submit
to their lordships' house that there were many other bills
affecting private interests upon which no report was ever
submitted. There was such a one now coming before
their lordships, that was the Harbour Bill of Liverpool,
which not only had great effect upon the local interests,
but upon all general interests. He would now ask the noble
Duke (the Duke of Richmond) whether it was true that
these reports had ceased ?

The Duke of RICHMOND said that he would explain
that Mr. Cave had come to the conclusion that only in
certain bills should these reports be made. The reason
why Mr. Cave had come to this decision was that these
reports had of late years not extended so far as the noble
lord opposite thought, but had only pointed out those
points in which the bill infringed the ordinary rules and
practices of the house ; in fact, it was considered a work
of supererogation, and much time had necessarily to be ex-
pended in framing the reports. With regard to the Tidal
Harbour Bill there would be a special Act of Parliament
for them.

Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY objected that, when
these reports should be submitted to the house for the
instruction of tho members, that they ought not to be
suppressed without the sanction of the house.
Lord REDESDALE said that there were certain bills
which ought to be made, but that, with respect to many
others, he must say, in justice to the late President of the
Board of Trade, that they were perfectly useless and very
expensive.

After some further discussion, the subject dropped.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL.

Lord LYVEDEN moved for a return of proceedings
taken under the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and, observing
that he expected the answer to his motion would be "Nil,"
explained that his object was to show the inexpediency of
continuing a measure which, passed at a time when Pro-
testant bigotry had been excited, had proved inoperative,
except to provoke irritation in the minds of our Roman
Catholic fellow-subjects. Referring to Ireland, he urged
the propriety of removing every cause of possible griev-
ance, and maintained that the conduct of the Roman
Catholic clergy during the late Fenian disturbances in
that country entitled them to a removal of an invidious
and useless piece of legislation.

Lord DENBIGH pointed out that the act caused incon-
venience in charitable trusts, because Roman Catholic pte-
latos could not legally be described by the title which they
openly bore.

The Bishop of KILL ALOE, regarding the Ecclesiastical
Titles Act as equally inoperative and irritating, supported
its repeal.

Lord DERBY assented to the return asked for, which he
was glad to know would be " Nil;" but he declined at that
moment to discuss the question of repealing the act in the
absence of its author, Lord Russell. He, however, gene-
rally suggested the possible danger of reviving angry feel-
ings by attempting to repeal an act which it was admitted
had entailed little, if any, real inconvenience to any par-
ties, and further pointed out that in Ireland the Roman
Catholic prelates had adopted titles which had been con-
ferred by the law upon bishops of the Established Church.
Any agitation of the question would raise the controversy
as to the relative legality of the Canon law and the law of
the land.in Ireland.

Lord KIMBERLEY regretted his former vote in favour
of the passing of the act, which he now regarded as a mis-
take that should be corrected as speedily as possible.
Lord GREY also regretted the passing of the act, but
reminded the house that by the Emancipation Act Roman
Catholic prelates in Ireland were prohibited from assuming
territorial titles. He, however, deprecated the re-opening
of the question at present, as he was convinced that the
whole subject of the Irish Church must shortly be dealt
with by Parliament.
The Duke of Cleveland and Lords Clanricarde and Stan-
hope—the two latter having voted in favour of the passing
of the act—expressed opinions favourable to its repeal.
Lord GRANVILLE explained his vote in favour of the
act to have been in deference to a strong feeling produced
in the country by an injudicious act on the part of the Pope,
and advised caution in dealing with the subject at present.
After some further conversation the return was agreed to.