The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LON

in the law of marriage—should themselves show such little
forbearance. Was it not curious that those who asked so
much of liberality should give so little of it in exchange?
They, whose ancestors suffered persecution to the death fur the
cause which they thought the truth, were now the foremost
to call for pains and penalties upon others ; sitting in the iron
chair of nonconforming infallibility, they converted the Scrip-
ture into a code of intolerance, reading it by that lurid light
with which Geneva was illuminated when Servetus was con-
sumed !—(Loud and continued cheering, amid which the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman sat down. )
Sir ROBERT PEEL then rose. He said, notwithstanding
'he preponderance of argument on one side of the question,
unexampled within his recollection on any former debate—
( Hear, hear) —still he was unwilling to permit the debate to
close with tut briefly expressing the grounds on which he had
letermined with his colleagues on giving it his most decided
and persevering support. He had undertaken to give it that
support under very different impress lons with regard to the
success of the measure than he now entertained. He undertook
to give it his support at a time when he had good reason to
doubt whether it would be conducted to a successful issue; but
he entertained so strong.a belief with respect to the justice of
the principles on which the Bill was founded, that he and his
colleagues were prepared to make every other consideration
subordinate to the fulfilment of the duty which it appeared to
them was imposed on them, of supporting a Bill founded on
those principles. He was bound to say that he had formed his
opinion without any elaborate consideration of the historical
truth of the legal doctrines which had been presented for
consideration. He was not about to undervalue the great doc-
trines to be found in the law of England ; he held in venera-
tion the great doctrine of trusts, as contained in the English
law • but he did say, that if this, or any other doctrine, im •
posed the necessity of inflicting a great wrong, he would al-
e ays look out for a mode of remedying that wrong—first, because
individual justice required it ; and, secondly, because in pro-
portion to the importance of the doctrine, so in proportion was
increased the necessity of not subjecting it to the odium of
being made the instrument for inflicting wrong.—(Hear,
hear.) Ile thought it would be unjust to permit any rule of
law to be so applied that chapels now held by Dissenters from
the Church of England should be taker. from them, and ap-
plied they knew not to whom; for after they had taken them
from their present possessors might arise a very complicated
unestion—(Hear, hear)—as to on whom they should devolve.
rle found that before the year 1813, there were
a number of chapels founded with trust deeds,
some of which expressed that the doctrines of the Trinity
should be preached in those chapels, founded by those who dis-
sented from the Church of England, but who agreed with it
in that doctrine. Where it was clear that the intention of the
founder* was that Trinitarian doctrines should be preached
there, it was not intended to disturb them, they were to re-
main intact. But there were other chapels in the deeds of
which there was no mention of the particular doc-
trines, further than that they were to be devoted to
the " worship of Almighty God, by Protestant Dis-
senters, of the Presbyterian denomination." He could
understand why Unitarian founders should say nothing
of their intentions; the principle of the existing law was
against them ; there was a motive for concealing their inten-
tions ; they were obliged to deal generally, because the law as
it existed, told them if they contravened the doctrine of the
Trinity,. their endowments would be forfeited. But there was
no reason why the Trinitarians should remain silent. The law
respected their endowments, if their intention was expressed.
What motive could they have for not being more explicit?
Was it not probable that they objected to any conformity,
and did net wish to bind their successors to one rule of
faith ? He was also determined to support the Bill,
from a knowledge of the injustice that would be done without
it. He instanced the case of the Unitarian chapel at Tam-
worth, which had one bequest left by the daughter of the mi-
nister, who had preached there for fifty-three years. At pre-
sent they had in the town of Tamworth congregations of all
sects and churches, living in peace and concord; but once let in
a " speculative attorney"—(Bear, hear)—armed with the
Ironer of bringing actions, and they would soon in-
troduce religious discord where there was now re-
ligious peace. He also instanced the case of the remon-
strant Synod of Ulster. Would the House of Commons
permit the grievous infliction on every chapel that had been
done to the remonstrating Synod of 'Ulster? In 1829, the
Synod separated from the General Synod, and were to remain
in possession of all their chapels, privileges, and immunities.
They continued to hold them till after the decision in Lady
Hewley's case, when actions were brought against
them by parties most interested in the matter.
Those who in Ireland would be injured if this Bill did not pass,
came to the Government and stated that they were generally
opposed in polities to the present Government, but that they
knew that the Executive Government would not tolerate such
a wrong.—( Hear, hear.) They explained their case to the
Government when the Bill of the Hon. Member for Kendal
was before the House, which related to the English Unitarians,
but as they knew there would be a great opposition to the mea-
sure if they were included in the Bill, they did not wish to in-
terfere with the English Unitarians. The Government thought
this would he a manifest injustice towards them, and they depre-
cated passing the Bill in that way. Before coming to Parliament
he had made strong attempts towards an amicable arrange-
ment. He asked the Synod of Ulster to leave the decision
of the question to four Members of Parliament chosen from
both sides of the House, or to a Commission chosen by the
Queen, but they refused both those offers, and proposed to
leave it to their Chancery lawyers, which he ( Sir H. Peel)
after reading Lady Hewley's case, and the judgment of I ord
Chancellor Sngden, in his turn refused.—( Hear, hear.) It
was not till they had exhausted every effort for the purpose
of bringing about an amicable adjustment and failed,
that they came to Parliament.—(Hear, and cheers.)
He doubted whether they were not injuring the principle of
law in perseveringly demanding its application to effect an in-
justice. He did not believe that in the part the Government
took he or his colleagues were indicting any injury, or throwing
any discredit on that great establishment the Church of Eng-
land, whose interests and welfare they were bound to consider.
—( Hear, hear.) On the contrary, he believed that it would
conduce to the character of the Church of England to exhibit
herself as the at bitrator of contending sects.—( Hear, hear.)
The Church of England had no interest in the
adjudication of the matter. To the Church the
funds could not belong. But was it not better for the char-
acter of the Church of England to say, that she did not want
to profit by the weakness of others by sending them to courts
of law, or referring to Masters in Chancery the religious
opinions held by men one hundred years ago ? He did not be-
lieve it would be for the interests of religion, that the religious
• opinions of those persons who founded those chapels, should
undergo diseassion in the public courts.—(Cheers.) Not-
withstanding the obloquy cast on those who supported the
Bill, notwithstanding the imputations cast on their re-
ligious belief and opinion, he believed after the lapse of a time
those stipulations would carry no weight with them. He
believed the sincerity of one's religious opinions was much
'better established by his acts and conduct than by professions
'made in the House of Commons.—(Cheers.) The frith of
the Church of England differed from that of others ; their
• hope of salvation was different ; but it was not inconsistent
with the spirit and precepts of that religion which they pro•
fessed to bear in mind—that, though faith was great, and hope
was great, yet there was ene thing greater—that comprehensive
• charity which induced them to be tolerant even of the errors
of others whom they supposed to be wrong.—(Loud cheers. )
But they ought to be specially careful not to inflict penalties on
• those who differed from them in creed, on the ground of those
religious differences, but which ground they dare not avow.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he entirely agreed with the Right
• Hon. Baronet when he stated that he had never heard a case
in which the arguments were so overwhelming on one side.—
, ( Hear, hear.) He should not, therefore, think it necessary to
state the reasons which induced him to support the Bill, and
he rose merely to say that he considered this Bill had been
, brought forward upon sound principles of policy and justice, and
-to add his testimony in favour, both of the Bill itself and the
conduct of the Government. With regard to the argument,
he thought that after the able speech of the Attorney-General,
whom he rejoiced to see again in his place, and bestowing that
lucid argument on every subject which he took up—(Cheers)
—it was scarcely necessary to hear the brilliant speeches of his
Right Hon. Friend near him and the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite. The Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford had
treated this subject as one of oroperty, but it was not so treated
in the petitions sent to that House, and he observed that the
first resolution passed at the meeting presided over
by a Right Hon. Friend beside him was, that the measure
would interfere with the rights of property, and would tend to
maintain a dangerous heresy. If it shook the rights of pro-
perty, let it be thrown out on that ground, but not on the
ground that.it was by others giving support to a dangerous
' heresy. Those who had opposed the Bill, had done it upon
two grounds, when one ought to have been sufficient. He did
not see why the rights of property should have prescription in
their favour, and no prescription be extended in cases of this
kind. Those eases were much more difficult, the
law-suits were more numerous, and the ultimate
decision would involve much greater confusion. A
question as to the right heir to property was a ques-
tion between individuals, and if one individual were
deprived another would be placed in possession. But atter
persons had held a chapel for one hundred years—after they
and their fathers, and their grandfathers, had continued
in uninterrupted possession—if the property were taken
from them by the decisions of the courts of
equity, there was no person to whom it could pro-
perly be transferred. The consequence would be endless liti-
gation, including the discussion of various creeds, and the
representation of what had been the opinions of various
religious sects. He said, then, that the Bill was entitled to
support, as tending to settle the question of property.
( Hear; hear:) He had already said that he would not add
anything to what had been already so ably stated. He should
give his cordial support to the Bill.—(Cheers.)
Lord SANDON rose amidst loud cries of " Divide." He
said he merely rose to suggest that while they were making the
usage of a number of years the interpreter of the founder's in-
tention, they should take care not to bind congregations not to
change their opinions in future.—( Hear. )
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading of the Bill 307
Against it
Majority in favour of the

_ • •• ......... -
The Bill was then read a second time.
The Forestalling, &c., Bill, and the New South \Vales, &c.,
Government Bill, were read a third time and passed.
The Vinegar and Glass Duties 13111 went through Com-
mittee, and was ordered to be reported this day.
The Limitation of Actions (Ireland) Bill went through
Committee.
SUGAR DUTIES BILL.

The CH ANCELIOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
second reading of this Bill.
Mr. STEWART hoped that there would be no objection to
the principle of the Bill being discussed on going into
Committee.
Io answer to a question from Mr. LABOUCHERE,
Mr. GLADSI ONE said, a certificate of origin was re-
quired on the importation of sugar from foreign countries.
The 13ill was then read a second time, and was ordered to
be committed on Monday.
Mr. BELLEW moved—. That that part of the minutes of
the evidence taken before the Committee on the Croydon and
Epsom, and South-Western and Epsom Railway Bills, which
includes the evidence of the engineers examined before the
Committee, with reference to the working of railways upon
the atmospheric principle, be printed.—Ordered.
Captain I'ECHELL moved for a return of the number of
paupers relieved in-door and out-door, with the expenditure for
in-maintenance and out-relief in each union and parish not
united under the Poor-law Amendment Act in England and
Wale=, for the years 1840, 1841, 1842, and 1843, distinguish-
ing the amount expended in medical relief, together with the
amount of the population of the same according to the last
census.—Agreed to.
Mr. HUME moved for a return of the date at which each
colony or foreign possession of the British Crown was captured,
ceded, or settled, the number of population, and those having
legislative assemblies, or governed by orders of the King in
Council, stating also the value of exports and imports, and
number and tonnage of vessels entered inwards and cleared
outwards in each colony in the year 1842.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, end the
House adjourned at a. Quarter to One o'clock.

THE REFEALERS OF LIVERPOOL.—The repeaters
of Liverpool had a crowded meeting at the Repeal-rooms, in
Paradise street, on Sunday evening, at which resolutions of
sympathy with O'Connell and his fellow-sufferers, and of un-
diminished zeal and determination in behalf of repeal were
agreed to unanimously, after which the sum of 681. was sub-
scribed for the Proalotioa, of the cause.—Licerpc,ol Times.