The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-30 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TITURSDA_Y; JULY 30, 105.

allusion to himself. The Hon. and Learned Gentl—
that there should be no church estabb,3--
sect should support its ow"
once advance' -

said
—went, but that every
clergy. This he had more than
as ills opinion. Was shere anything that could
justify the temper and language of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman at what he had said. He was sorry that so many
Hon. Gentleman had chosen to rise in such a manner as to call
for the interference of the Chairman in such a pointed way.
He was quite at a loss to understand how the observations
that he had made could affect so many Hon. Gentlemen. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had not attempted to answer
his Hon. and Learned Friend, as to one of the schools under
the Board of Education being in a convent. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman asked whether there was any evil in it,
but he did not dispute the matter of fact. Indeed in his own
parish the school-room was placed in such a way that the
scholars hadlo go through the yard of the convent to get at
it. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had alluded to his
spiritual ferocity ; his, however, was not like the ferocity of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, for that exhibited itself in
a death's-head and cross-bones.—( Loud cries of " Oh !")
Mr. O'CONNELL—And your's in a calf's head.--(A
laugh. )
Mr. YOUNG said he should support the resolution.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said he did not accept this Bill as a
final settlement of the tithe question. As a member of the
Established Church, he would not make an offer so dero-
gatory to that Church. He contended that Catholics and
Protestants ought to be exempted from all payment on ac-
count of the Established Church. If the principle of that
Bill were carried into full effect, there never would be a
surplus. No settlement could be considered final, which did
not extinguish tithes as ecclesiastical property.
Sir H. HARDINGE said, the observations of his Hon.
and Learned Friend had been attacked by Hon. Gentlemen
on the other side, and, he thought, had been mistaken. He
understood his Hon. and Learned Friend to object to the
sum in question being paid out of the Consolidated Fund,
and thus made permanent, instead of being voted from year
to year, and therefore subject to the control of Parliament—
( Hear, hear.) He also objected to the charge thus made
on the Consolidated Fund, being secured on the surplus.
His belief was, that this would turn out to be no security at
all, because there would be no surplus. He was not opposed
to the grant if it was properly applied; on the contrary, if
he had continued in office, he should have proposed it from
year to year.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the imputation against
the late Government, that they proposed this grant, not be-
cause they approved of it, but only because they were pressed
by the necessity of the time, did not proceed from his side of
the House, but from one of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite.
He believed when he heard it that it was thrown out most un-
justifiably, and he was now very glad that the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member had declared that in a future year he would have
proposed the grant, had he continued in office.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE said that he never in any of
the previous years when the grant was proposed, expressed an
opinion or gave a vote on the question. When it became his
duty to bring forward the vote, he looked to see what had
been done by his predecessors ; and finding it was impossible
that benefit should not result from it, if it were fairly and
honestly applied, lie did not hesitate to give it his sanction.--
( Hear, hear.) He had every reason to believe that the sys-
tem would in future have his support, but he would frankly
state that much must depend on its being carried into effect in
a bona fide manner. If such a course were taken, he thought
it must prove salutary ; but if not, the system must prove
most objectionable. If what his Hon. and Learned Friend
had stated were true—if the Protestant children were treated
in the monasteries and nunneries as he had described, then he
would say that the intention of the grant was perverted, and
the Commissioners, if they did their duty, would take care
that such abuses did not continue to exist.— ( Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the explanation just
given was exactly what might have been expected from the
frank manner in which the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman
usually spoke. He agreed with the Hon. and Gallant Gen-
tleman that any contravention of the rules laid down by the
Board ought to be looked into. The rules, if good, ought to
be observed : if imperfect, they might be amended. If they
were contravened, an authority ought to be exercised to secure
their due observance.—( Hear, hear.) He must say it was a
subject of regret with him that when the Government, on a
former evening, brought this question before the House, the
Hon. Secretary of the Treasury under the late Government
did not attend the Committee, and defend them from the at-
tacks of Hon. Gentlemen opposite, to which they were exposed.
Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House had supported the
late Government on this question ; but they, in their turn,
were not fortunate enough to have the support of those by
whom the estimate was signed and proposed.
Sir H. HARDINGE said he believed that the Hon. Se-
cretary of the Treasury, with several other Hon. Friends of
his, as well as the majority of the House, did not expect the
vote to be brought forward on the evening when it was moved.
Mr. R. WYNN begged to say, in explanation, that he
came down to the House intending to support the vote, but he
foulid the feeling of the House so strong in its favour that he
thought he might be spared.--( Hear, hear.)
Sir J. HOBIIOUSE said that on the night in question
there were forty-one of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, greatly
to his astonishment, who voted against that very grant which
had been introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite.—
(Cheers.) It was certainly most unfortunate that when the
vote did come on—owing, he would not say to any defection,
but to some unaccountable accident or other—not one of the
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who would have supported the mo-
tion had they not been absent, was present.__( Cheers.) That
being a vote which was viewed very invidiously—that being a
vote Is hich was much objected to—it unquestionably would
have been more fortunate for the present Government if the
speeches which they had heard this evening had been declared
on the former occasion.—( Cheers.) •
Sir H. HARDINGE said it had not been stated that the
miscellaneous estimate would come on that evening.
Sir J. C. H OBHO US E said it was to his very great disap-
pointment, on account of the high estimate he had formed of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite, that he did find
him opposing the grant which had been proposed by the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman's political friends when in po*er, and
that none of the late Government were there to support them
in their utmost need.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. JACKSON said, having been so pointedly alluded to,
by the Hon. and
,Learned Member for Dublin, and by the
Right Hon. Baronet, he trusted the House would allow him
to make one or two observations in reply. It was true he
took a part in the discussion of this question on a former occa-
sion. lie came into the House by mere accident in the very
middle of the debate. Not having had the slightest idea that
the Miscellaneous Estimates would be moved, he and some
Hon. Friends had withdrawn for the purpose of obtaining some
refreshment. Finding that the question was under discussion,
he did what he conceived to be his duty—he opposed the mo-
tion.—(Hear, bear, hear.) He begged to declare that he
never on any occasion had said or done any thing, directly or
indirectly, which could be construed to signify his approbation
of this vote. On the contrary, he had stated in the hearing
of his Right Hon. Friend, who was at present in his place,
(Sir R. Peel), that when the vote was brought forward by
the late Government, he did object to it in private conversa-
tion, though he did not get up and say so.—(Ministerial
cheers.) He understood these cheers, and he thought he could
show to the Hon. Gentleman opposite, that more premature
cheers were never uttered on the other side of the House, and
that was saying a great deal.—(Hear, hear, hear.) During
the period when the late Government were in office, the
Noble Lord who then sat upon the Opposition side of the
House addressed a question to the Right Hon. Baronet repect-
ing this grant. He was at that time a very young Member
of the House, and he put it to Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who
knew what was the course of proceeding in matters of
this kind much better than he did, whether it was competent to
him, there being no/question—no motion before the House,
to rise in his plaeeand enter into a discussion of the subject,
and express his disapprobation of the vote. He remembered
that on a very recent occasion, when a question was asked re-
specting foreign affairs, an Hon. Member having entered upon
a discussion of the subject, was peremptorily put down. If he
had risen to discuss the propriety of this grant when the ques-
tion was asked to which he had adverted, he might have ex-
pected to have shared the same fate. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman opposite had referred to his connection with the
Kildare-street Society. He was not ashamed to avow that he
had been for, he believed, twenty-five years the Honorary
Secretary of that Society; indeed he might say that no cir-
cumstance had given him greater satisfaction than the reflec-
tion that he had devoted his time to a Society to which Ireland
might be said to owe her present improved system of educe-
tiyn.—( Cries of no, no.) The Hon. and Learned gentle-
man referred to a Report containing the evidence cf Dr.
Doyle ; his object was to show that Dr. Doyle, in the evi-
dence he eam before a Select Committee, expressed himself
as favourable, with one or two exceptions, to the plan of
education acted upon by the Kildare-street Society.—( Loud
cheers.) They had issued a million and a half of a book of
travels, whi Ai contained a passage representing that absolution
was given at Rome to a man who had committed murder
—it was the only portion of the book disapproved of by
the Catholics. This was objected to, and the passage was
expunged in the new edition. The Testament which they
used was the Rhemish edition, They did not give the Old
Testament, and all they stipulated for was that the Scriptures
should not be garbled. In conclusion, the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman referred to a letter published by the lion. and
Member for Dublin, headed "Tithes, tithes, tithes." The
Ifon. and Learned Member there said that he should not be
content till his principles were carried into full effect ; yet the
other night he talked of this measure as final, and recommended
it on the ground that it would establish peace in Ireland.
Now the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was surely inconsistent
here, it being very obvious that if fresh claims were to be
made hereafter, so far from peace having been established
the struggle would be vigorously renewed.
Mr. D. RONA YNE said the excuse of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman who had just sat down, for not having
opposed the estimates when the were formerly before the
House was that he was a very young Member.—( Cries of
.
" No, no.")-
Mr. JACKSON—What I said was, that this being on the
only occasion when the grant was referred to, no question being
before the House, I could not enter upon this discussion.
Mr. RONA YNE said th.at the excuse made by the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman I':'nen he last gave an explanation of
the course he had taken, most certainly was, that he was a
young Member, and th
without obstruction t,
be made (Hear, hear, hear.)
fora year.—
The Hon. and I -
Oentlernan had pow taken a somewhat
different r- at he therefore would allow the grant

„.ounde ” ~.
HUME asked in what manneyths. House was to have
an &tottzoLint of the expenditure of the money proposed to be
ororted?
Lord MORPETH said that the moneys issued under the
direction of the Treasury would be always accounted for.

Mr. HUME thought that it would be much better that the
money should he voted annually.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that there was no objection
to the insertion of a provision, in the Committee on the Bill,
requiring an annual account of the money expended to be
produced.
Mr. HUME still thought it would be more desirable that
the House should have an opportunity of discussing the sub-
ject of the grant, on annually voting.
An HON. MEMBER said that the ahsWef of the Noble Lord
was most satisfactory. He should now be ready to give his
support to the proposition before the House—otherwise he
should have entered his protest against it.
The Resolution was then agreed to, and the House resumed.
CORPORATION REFORM (IRELAND).
Lord NIO R PET H then rose and said that he trusted no ob-
jection would be made to his Right Hon. and Learned Friend
(Mr. Perrin) stating now the nature of the proposed measure
of Reform in Irish Corporations.
Mr. CRIPPS was understood to intimate that the County
Coroners Bill ought to be taken first.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted the Hon. Gentleman's
right to bring forward the measure first, but hoped that he
would give way on the present occasion.
Mr. SHAW said that a general impression had been en-
tertained that the question of Irish Corporate Reform would
not he brought on that night.—( Loud cries of " No," and calls
for Mr. Perrin.)
Mr. HUME said that the Bill of the Hon. Member for Ci-
rencester (Mr. Cripps) was one which would require con-
siderable discussion ; the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Per-
rin) only required to make a statement, and no debate would
ensue upon it.
Mr. CRIPPS said that the greater part of the Bill had
been already gone through, and that the discussion of the re-
mainder would not occupy more than half an hour. He then
moved that the Order of the day for the Committee on the
County Coroners' Bill be then read.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL earnestly hoped that his
Hon. Friend would not persist, but would allow his Right
Hon. Friend (Mr. Perrin) to proceed with his statement.
Mr. CRI PPS said that it was only owing to the absence of
his Right Hon. Friend (the Attorney-General) that the Bill
had not been gone through. If he did not persevere now, he
should have little chance of bringing forward the Bill at any
other time.
Mr. O'CONNELL hoped the Hon. Gentleman would not
persevere. The County Coroners' Bill for England was im-
portant, but the question of Corporate Reform for Ireland was
more so. Were it only for the sake of novelty, he hoped the
Hon. Gentleman would give way ; surely he could not deem
the Irish people blameable on account of the absence of the
Attorney-General for England on a former night.
Mr. CRIPPS asked the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
whether there had been no time that night occupied in the dis-
cussion of Irish affairs ?
Mr. O'CONNELL said that surely the Hon. Member
could not but deem the subject which had occupied the House
that night to be an important one. If he postponed his Bill,
there would be no lengthened discussion on the statement of
the Right Hon. Gentle Man (Mr. Perrin).
Mr. CRIPPS repeated his intention o (persevering.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that he should move that the mo-
tion for reading the Order of the Day be postponed till to-
morrow.

Mr. W. DUNCOMBE hoped that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman would not persevere in that motion. More than
one-half of the night had been already consumed in the dis-
cussion of Irish affairs, and surely some time ought to be given
to the consideration of English questions. However impor-
tant the Irish Corporate Reform Bill might be, it was really
asking too much of the English Members of the House—
( Loud cries of " Hear, hear !" from Mr. O'Connell and other
Members)—that they should not devote some time to matters
concerning England.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted the Hon. Gentleman's
right to bring forward his Bill at once, and thought that it
would be quite unjustifiable to attempt to set it aside unless he
himself were willing to give way. Therefore, if the Hon.
Gentleman persisted, and any motion were made for putting
off his Bill, he should feel bound to vote with him against
that motion. At the same time be hoped that the Hon. Gen-
tleman would give way ; and he was willing, if there should
not be time that night after his Right Hon. Friend's state-
ment had been made, to discuss the Bill, that the Hon. Gen-
tleman should have precedence on Friday next.
After a few inaudible words from Mr. Alderman WOOD,
Mr. C RIP PS again repeated his intention of persevering.
Mr. WAKLEY earnestly entreated him to give way, and
The order of the day was then read, and the question put
that the Speaker leave the chair, when
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the Bill be committed on
Friday next.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took
place, and the House went into Committee on the
COUNTY CORONERS' BILL.

On the clause providing that fees should be paid to the me.
dical men who were called upon to give evidence before a Co-
roner's jury,
Mr. C. BARCLAY moved an amendment, to the effect
that the fee to be given should in no case be less than 11., or
more than two.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that this part of the Bill would
open the door to the widest jobbing. This amendment might
as well propose at once that the fee should be always 21. ; it
might be regarded as certain that no Coroner would give his
cousin less than 2/. He hoped that the House would reject
the clause altogether.
Mr. CRIPPS said that the amendment was not his, and
that he objected to it entirely.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL also objected to it, and
said that the clause was not of his framing.
An Hon. MEMBER said, that at present no remuneration
was allowed to medical gentlemen for the performance of the
duty in question, which was one of much danger ; many sur-
geons had lost their lives by dissecting exhumed bodies, and
yet medical men were by this Bill liable to be called before a
Coroner's jury at any time. Ought they not then to be remu-
nerated? The remuneration might be accorded by the jury,
and thus all jobbing, so far as the Coroner was concerned,
would be avoided.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Such an amendment would only lead
to greater jobbing ; for the Coroner would in that case have to
summon such a jury as he thought would readily grant to the
surgeon (in all probability his cousin, or some other near re-
lation) as large a sum as could possibly be granted.
An HON. MEMBER said that the Coroner had nothing to do
with the summoning of the jury—it was the constable who
summoned it.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Yes, nominally the constable, but no
one could reasonably doubt that it was the Coroner's jury, for
it was he who signed the panel, and the inquest was in fact
his.---( Hear. )
Mr. WARBURTON considered that 2/. was but small re-
muneration for a respectable surgeon, when it was necessary
to open a body.
Alderman WOOD thought that the Chairman ought to re-
port progress, as in the disposition exhibited on the part of the
House to hear the motion of the Hon. Gentleman the Attorney-
General for Ireland, it was impossible that the provisions of
the Bill before the Committee could receive due consideration.
Mr. WYNN considered it too late to call for postponement,
after the House had gone into Committee on the Bill.
Alderman WOOD—I feel bound to persevere in my motion,
though the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. MILES—I should feel sincerely concerned for the dig-
nity of the House if such a motion as that of the Hon. Mem-
ber for London be persevered in. If he do persist in it, all I
can say is, that if I were to sit here until two o'clock to-mor-
row, I will not allow any other business to be proceeded with.
—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. F. YOUNG quite concurred in the view which
had been taken by the Hon. Member for Somerset. If he
were to sit there until Saturday he would not consent to have
any other business gone into before this Bill was considered in
Committee.

Lord J. RUSSELL observed, that though it might have
been a more satisfactory course to the House if the Hon.
Member who introduced the Bill had consented to postpone
the consideration of it in Committee, still, as the House
had agreed to go into Committee, it would not be at all cre-
ditable if it were not now proceeded with.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. WA KLE Y deeply regretted that the discussion into
which the House had been betrayed, should have taken place.
—( Hear, hear.) He hoped that this Bill, which was a subject
of great consequence, and which affected the interests of all
classes of persons, would be allowed to proceed.. He could
not help expressing his sorrow that a proposition for giving
but inadequate remuneration to those without whose testi-
mony a coroner's inquest would be a mere farce, should be
received at his side of the House in the tone and temper
with which it had been met. The hostility which the Hon.
and Learned Member for Dublin had displayed to the propo-
sition really surprised him, because his Hon. and Learned
Friend must be aware that there was an Irish Act called one
of the Grand Jury Acts, which empowered the coroner to give
the surgeon four guineas. But his Hon. and Learned Friend
was apprehensive, that if the surgeon who attended inquests
was fairly paid for his services, that jobbing would ensue.
He knew not in what manner these inquests were held in
Ireland ; but from the mode in which they were conducted in
this country, he felt perfectly convinced that no jobbing what-
ever would take place under them.—( Hear.) He considered
the fee of two paunds too small a remuneration for the per-
formance of so exceedingly disagreeable and painful a duty.
It was most dangerous to life ; and the insurance offices re-
quired a higher premium to be paid on effecting an insurance
on the life of a surgeon on account of this circumstance ;
and some offices, in consequence of their having to perform
such a duty, refused to insure the life of the person liable to
it at all. In many instances the surgeon had to examine cu-
taneous diseases, of which there was some danger of conta-
gion, and he had frequently to examine the whole of the organs
of the human body, and even after this examination it was not a
very uncommon occurrence that he was at a loss to account for
the cause of death. When such were the means obliged to be
taken by a surgeon to acquire information as to the cause of
death, it was quite impossible that any other person con-
nected with the inquest could know anything of the matter
considered as a medical subject. He objected to the amend-
ment which had been proposed, not because it directed that
too high a sum should be paid to the surgeon, but because he
considered-it too small. He was of opinion that the surgeon
ought to receive from 101. to 31., and in no case less than 3/.
( Hear, hear.) If he were paid 10/., it would not in some
cases he considered extravagant. He knew a post mortent
examination to last eight hours, and even then the inquiry
was not considered a satisfactory one. Would any man say
that a respectable surgeon in extensive practice would be
overpaid, if .on such an occasion he received 31. ?—( Hear,
hear.) The House should bear in mind, that whenever any
proposition for the. pay of barristers were made, it was ac-
ceded to without the slightest hesitation. Thus barristers
were for instance, sent on CoMfaissions of Inquiry through.