The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-23 00:00:00

TOE RUN, LON DON, TUESD A Y EV N I NO, A PRIL 23, 1

Th—..‘...^."........-..t00n.......
eB iii • - ----.-... .- -
04 ~ Was then read a second time. 1 entirely correct -(Oh, oh, some cheering, and coasi- planation with feelings- of disgust. Now here is entirely
that it
tybne rnotioa that the Bill be coeamitted in order I derable disapprobation.) a separate miestion. The Hon. Gentleman the 'Member
MReqoPti°slitrtP°rtned, • ' 1 Mr. HOGG (with inuah warmea)-I beg, then, so for Beverley thought it not necessary, and thought it
tithe //0-n-.4.A.Tek.i.li said
.._he wished to put a question i ' his
lenity to (declare that it wt's not m intention to take the would not be Superfluous labour, when he presented r
..I._ mberfor Knareshorough. Th it Hon. I sliglrtest notice of what appeared in that paper, or of report, to explain what he considered to be the law o.
title n'
d use,
his thl stated that a Minister of the Crown Iwe at fell from the Hun. Gentleman. I did not act • bribery, and how that law applied to particular tree-Bac-
solely upon my own impression, or upon my own opinion. dons ; but whether the lion. Gentleman rightly under •
izioee
aLtn:c)_dnfluence as a Minister of the Crown to
tut
peers of the Goverdment, he believed an 1 I arrirnot peculiarly sensitive, for I know that men in stood, or whether he mistook that law, is no question fler
tilt eut Veer-lay. public situations of life are liable to have their us to investigate or settle. The question is
.whether the
•uto a , - Coenmissioner, to make a false re- I conduct made the subject of iiublic continent, Hon. Gentleman acted honestly and conscientiously in
Ale I. that House
n.loer
tiff .of that for the purpose of crushing a I and lam not particulaEy sensitive when I know the discharge of his duty-,
e, I solemn' duty imposed upon
in hold se._ hear.) He was jus - i the quarter from which imputations come.-(Cheers.) him by the House; or aahether he acted corruptly or
nehohttasking who Was that Minister of the Crown I took the opinion of friends upon bath sides of the perverted the law for the purpose of either injuring ate
all_ ee hus med. his ._
!I
ii;owuagshett 0
.b.:._ _ power ; mho was the officer House, ben sou the Croton' mployed ; and who was the Mem-and of eentlemen out of this House, as to the individual or favouring any particular party in this
course I should pursue. They told me that this matter House.-(Cheers.) That must be the question. I have
'crushed, for it must have been that was unworthy of notice -(Cheers)-and they desired me no hesitation in saying, that neither of these charges can
to take no notice of it, either out of the House or in the be substantial. I think I remember stating at the time,
'PM ilaist 'f' a upon the wheel. The Hon. Gentle-
House and I confess that that advice accorded with my with respect to the Hon. Member for Beverley, that I
,t who th_6.7," e them a peculiar light on the matter as
Loh! powecr elinister of the Crown was who had used pression. inhavebeen foralone perm a
own im, • S' I
inter 4 'of the Government to induce a sworn Member of this House, and elsewhere I ha;ve been long that he did as any other man would have done who had
before the public. I hal no anxiety-I hope I did not undertaken the very arduous and responsible duty 0
thil:PO,A4ol,lilake a false charge to the House fur the lace a preeuinotuous confidence in my own character- chairman of an election committee. The Hon. Gentleman
crushing a Member of the House. But if but I had no anxiety-and, therefore, I felt satisfied with the Member for Knaresborough must consider that he
th4ll"ge turned out to be false, what where. they to the advice given to me, tha, the observations which were differed in opinion with the lion. Member fur Beverley,
V) ()fan II at a
-a er_ on. Member who accused a Minister of made by the Hon. Gentleman were not deserving of con- or that a certain feeling was produced as to the accu-
use own with •'nt to induce
using the authority of the Govern- sideraeioe.-(Cheers.) But it now assumes a very dif racy of the judgment of that Honourable Gentleman.
'Nate f , 'tune an officer of the Government to pro- ferent character.
hat ausehoods which would be a disgrace to human I should disregard. what. fell from the The question will be the charge against the honour and
Hon. Gentleman when he was itinerating the country,
honesty of that Hon. Gentleman. I must say, with the
ore?
Air . and vituperating men with wholesale and foul calumny. Hon. Member for Beverley,. that such a charge need not
not t lEBIUND said the Right
.Hon. Gentleman But when he avows before this Housed-when he states have been-noticed House; . ,
in this but, having been no-
n:11,4" able in
do lea he _ n this case. to avail himself of that syethin in his place in Parliament, that a..siyorn officer of. this' ticedi-havin become matter of question-let the Hon.
vie to as, ge orally resorted in that House, of coming 'lose, in the discharge of his publie duty, was infln- Gent omen tagke. what time he pleases let him look to
eettelta,,,!!Ke, an undue advantage of an Hon. Member. eneed b•- a Minister of the Crown grossly to abandon the weight of his language, and -to. the effect which it 1
that- public duty'(a duty which he was sworn upon oath might be likely to produce; but he is bound. to outmaee
ra onnttroe(sla Fernand) was prepared, as far as his own
;;_hhich herent, to state to the House the circumstances to dicharge) 'for'an ill and a foul purpose-Sir, it be- his allegations with respect to the integrity of the Right
tnneeteaw ,_hferred. During the discussion of the New comes' incumbent upon me no longer to treat the matter Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home De-
with indifference or contempt, but to call upon the pertinent, as a Minister of the Crown;i and hedisehlaloruaned-
It' 110,47. that House, it happened that he addressed Hon. Gehtlernan to substantiate his charge.-(Cheers.) to-make out the charge against the ion.euran ,
enediatei After he had sat down-he believed it was
tlroliat taY_ on his resuming his seat-the Right Hon. Ido not want him to substantiate the charge. I call ter of the Hon. Member for Beverley, in the
.discharge
on that Hun Gentleman to rise in his place, and leave, of his duty as chairman of an election committee, and
`ttllt are,..l Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ii%ealla.hyee'vrintitat?
?obfatrhgeebs on; opposite to him a report, from if he can u.on the minds of this Mouse a doubt-or if he cannot make out those charges, he will be shown
leave upon' this House the slightest suspicion, that in the to have unjustly calumniated a Member of
.th.is House,t
ainst him (Mr. Ferran]) as a discharge of my public duty I was influenced by dis- and to have endeavoured to weaken the opinion of the
f
tholtheet wernu inhabitant of the Keightley union, which honest or dishonourable motives.-(Great cheering.) peorle as to the honour and integrity of the Members o
4ssistante false- That report had been obtained by If he should raise that doubt-if he should raise that this House.-(Cheers.)
rear,r A
Cooor-law Commissioner, Mr. Mott.-
euspicien-let me be covered with well-merited obloquy, Sir ROBERT PEEL-Sir, I really am sincerelys senor?
ett:l_cleire in,k'_ramittee of that House was appointed and let me depart this House as a man no longer worthy that the Hon. Gentleman, the Member
f for Sheffield
ettr‘e_s, potr..to the allegations of that report. Magic- to take his seat, being no longer vvorthe of confidence.- (Mr. Ward), has noticed in the House of Commons some
ettieid, lean? guardian; servants of the union, de- (Continued cheering.) But there is another view of the expressions which I intended to permit to pass over in
of tech ten. it the other, that it was untrue, and some question. If that Hon. Gentleman cannot raise that silence. But they have been noticed in the House of
tattnat It t" It was scandalously false. A Committee doubt in the minds of this House-if he fail to satisfy Commons, and an importance has thereby been attached
ataaetth. had declared,ce though he was sorry to say this House as to his grounds fur doubting my hem .u'r to them: I know perfectly well what would be the re-
that 'ttt et min: rnittee do justice under the circum- and integrity, then let that Hon. Gentleman be branded suit if I were now to remain silent with
,respect to
be ial;ltortw %ase, still it declared that many parts of as the asserter of foul and false calumnies-let him stand these expressions. I should b 3 continunly told
to tta`tclNi ter° overcharged. But he was not going to convicted as such before this House and before the coun- for the next fortnight, such expressions had been
insiat tlassy the report of that Committee. He came try, and it will be then for him to consider whether he alluded to, and I had not noticed them. Now I see it
The I,i!re- ti' and asked for fresh returns, to procure is worthy longer to sit in this assembly, or command stated, day after day, and rc ceived with loud cheers, and
and tj. 4ht Hot and and for the rate-payers of the parish. respect as a gentleman.-(Continued cheering) I repeat expressions of great disgust, that on one occasion,
Iwhen
Not e seerth. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury, my calm declaration, that I had trot the slightest retiring from t,h, e House of Commons to the lobby,__ was
Ara i these tart of State for the Horne Depart:nent, op- intention of bringing this matter before the 'louse, heard to say. that the Christian feeling of the House
11., at ttell returns. He in vain applied to that House to but when it was repeated by *the Hon. Member in his of Commons had beaten the Government on the factory
tattfroin oh.littere was an inclination at first to prevent place in Parliament, I must of course notice it, and question?' I never said one syllable or anything of the.
les; 'retialni, lalnit'g them, but, at last, the Noble Lord, throw myself not only on this side of the House but on kind. I never said anything which by possibility could
ah uel he th, for the City of London, said he thought it the other. I appeal to your feelings as gentlemen- be construed into a foundation for such a statement.
I,,a° se reture-l.st on the part of that House to refuse him those feelings which, I know, are always responded to. We find generally some foundation for reports, however
insfeeno Noes were counted on that order, and it Since I have had the honour of a scat in this House-I absurd and exaggerated they. may be ; but I cannot call
sanityn it the;he Government that they would be in a speak in the presence of those gentlemen who are in to mind anything more likely to form the. foundation
table ? Ti resisted his motion. But what was the the habit of appointing Committees-and I say that I for such a.statement, than that I, one night, in the lobby,
envte till flit returns, which were not laid on the have never sought to be placed on any Committee in my said, that if the Government took time, and gave an op-
the Nu). "„ e„nd of the session, proved that the report life-, and I may add, that I never refused Co discharge, portunity to Members. to consider the probable effect of
trevlicesdi '''.lla before another session came Mr. Mott, to the best of my humble ability, any duty the House interference with labour, very likely the Government
nt'lltea fro Commissioner, was dismissed, and thus might be pleased to impose upon me. They imposed wonld be. in a majority.-(Cheers and laughter.) I
the
the 9131 being brought to the bar of that House. on me the arduous-the painful-the sacred-tire so- never. said anything more nearly approaching the ex-.
te nave ecusances of the ease, it vvas the duty of ,
h ta trnate lemn duty of Chairman of an Election Committee, which pressions which have been imputed to me than that.
N._ eis et nt to give information to that House and The subject. then dropped.
k4''al of urtry as I discharged to the best of my humble ability as their
to the reasons of the dis- officer, and I claim from them the right to be The Committee on the Factories Bill was then post-
or t 1,14 art fir, Mott.--(Hear, hear.) He himself
'lta ' Ilea-tie'ght that question under the notice supported.sworn I claim this from them. If lam guilty, I poned till Friday.
will willingly submit to the consequence, and I will . ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL.
oftjt;"ttry to a Re appealed to the First Lord of the submit to be branded with infamy. But I require from ' Dr. yicHoLL, in moving the second reading Of
.the
ttte.ele, to justice to the rate-payers of the parish this House protection. If the Hon. Gentlemen cannot Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, said that although the subject
payer s • tie
4tltii oft, could tell him that there was not a state the grounds for his accusation, or raise a doubt in had been frequently under the consideration of both
law by hitsthat parish who was not fully prepared to the minds of this House, then I claim that he should be Houses. of Parliament, and many Bills brought in and
tatlY faise`:', and to prove that the rep Art was scanda- branded in the manner he deserves.-(Loud cheers.) - committees appointed to inquire. into the best means of
Fe,4l)• of and until the Right Hon. Baronet the Se- Mr. FERRAND-When, Sir, I uttered the language amending the ecclesiastical law since the year 1839, yet
lat'lla) antate for the Home Department told him (Mr. which. the Hon. Gentleman has now brought before the not one of them had been adopted. In that year, on
elttitghteatild!he country how it was that report was House I was all'udiog to the feeling of this'House on the the recommendation of the Duke of Wellington, a select
tt he haeet the box, he could not cease to repeat occasion when the lion. Gentleman presented his report, committee had been appointed to inquire into the matter,
tic, a lions said on this subject.
attlibhnttlit's'ottlTCK said hem ust complain that his noes- and I said that when then the Hon. Gentleman did so he nhen. a report was drawn up, in which considerable al-
displayed a good deal of " haggling." terations were recommended, and that the diocesan
tin igth been answered. He had appealed to him to Mr. HOGG-That is not the part. It is that part in courts should only exercise discretion in testamentary
tat tqlaen, an officer of the Crown had used his power which you said, the Right Hon. Baronet influenced me to affairs. In the year 1831 a committee was ap-
flat,tteen'te over an officer in the employment of the pointed, which produced a report making similar re-
commit perjury.
tea 7) Tilt° induce him to make a false report.- Mr. FERRAND-The Hon. Gentleman is, I believe, commendations. In 1833 a committee was • appointed
that that the 11011. Gentleman had done nothing but labouring under a mistake when he salts that I used such which recommended that these courts should have the
et, to eth e report was false. The charge still remained language,power. allowed to them of granting probates, and in 1804
,IQ rPos eer of the Crown had used his power for such I did not say anything of the kind. If the
Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had given me notice a Bill was brought in which recognised their right of
, t111..1,51-Crintl howscandalous the charge was the Hon. on, granting probates, but. it was never !aid upon the table:
ter to' l'aiti.tupt shown.-(Hear, hear.) of his intentioe to put these questions to me, or if the H
Member for Montrose hadedone ao, I should have bad In 1836 another Bill was brought into the House
aside
, Leant In 'l‘l, D did not know what the Hon. Mem- .. Lord bys, the then Lord Chancellor, but it was set asi e,
eh t Ito ; natng such language.the newspaper in my hand, and I should have been pre
tth Elltack slin pared to have read the language which I uttered. They andh referred. to a select
.committee.,. or, rather, a_ Com-
k q ale said his language was plain, and
it ''' no ant•WaShave not given me that opportunity, knowing, that as I .Mbt. tCL` appointed to consider a petition presented upon
ate 4RR t plain, . had not the newspaper present, it would be a good time this subject, and the recommendation was that the dio-
-Itbi e klieg AND said the Hon. Member was not go-
keg al.. aims Ile had used language in that House for them to take me at a disadvantage, and they. have cesan courts should have the power of granting letters
'1,4 ' unbeenn. done so. When I used the lannuaee to which the Hon. of administration in the case of all sums under 3001.,
i ell hem ing him us a Member of that House,
4a t. era" •-. Member for Beverley has referred, was alluding. to the and that the heads of these courts should be allowed a
tab ontAste --(Hear, hear.) feeling of this House on the occasion on which he pre- salary not exceeding 500/. a year, and that they should
4 'ate „thER said he must call upon the Hon. eented his report; and I said that when the Hon. Mem- have certain testamentary jurisdiction. N. otwithstand-
at 1'.1,t •ewaet his expressions. ben for Beverley was " haggling" and " higgling" ing , all those measures having been introduced so
I,lll4hhe Ropet-11401:_gD said "he would willingly do every through an excuse, those on this side of the House lis- • frequently to Parliament, yet they were fol-
nerehttOnrititer wished., tened with feelings of disgust. There was but one lowed by no practical result. Now many of the
(tft er neat CIC wished to know whether the Hon. Member on this side who cheered, and that Member principles of the Bill introduced last year were founded
till') heat'ated the charge to which he had referred?
e r a ro was the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for upon the report of the committee of 1836, and although the
"14 ' RR . a
1/ ANT) _ the Home Department.-(Laughter.) Now I believe Bill did not get the sanction of the House on the second
4 t
da on. Ge said what he stated wee,. that the that is as nearly the language I used on that occasion as reading, yet there were a great many persons by whom
Si relate. ntleman had used his influence to procure
t't "' 6l't• nossible.-4Cries of" No, no.") Yes; and if I had known the principles upon which it was founded were warmly
fc, t 4 th x.A.R I would have been prepared to read the very words to supported. From the feeling expressed out of doors, it
ant, e Intl tAlt said, until the last words which fell , toe House, and, as I told the Hon. Gentleman, those words was determined upon to retain the testamentary power to
' l'i he q bete tle4ensber he had looked with great indif- in the leading article to which the Hoa. Gentleman has diocesan courts; and also to the archbishops' courts, be-
-0 J'n. It/ea, the charge and to the discussion itself. referred, to the best of my knowledge, are the words I cause it was necessary that there should be an appeal
tate\( qtr. a• nuoer had deliberately asserted that which
takt.4 teraham) had hardly thought he could uttered. But if the House and the Hon. Gentlemen to those courts, and ultimately to the Crown ; and also,
less i
think proper, I will to-morrow bring down the .7'imes because it would be wrong to deprive the bishops'
Nllll his upon himself to assert of him, much newspaper with me, and I will be prepared to stand by courts of that power which the diocesan courts possessed.
,i'lw,l, e (si Presence and before that House, viz , those words again to-morrow. Lail! not retract them, There were three hundred and thirty courts
t' ,4c4 attstilottrahhaulehr,
.Graham) had used his official for the words I used were the result of deliberate obser- throughout the kingdom which possessed testamen-
t! ni 414 it false repot a He (Sir J. Graham) vation as to what took place when the Hon. Gentleman tary jurisdiction. Now, ft was proposed to. abolish
ett th Nvi) worth while to move that the words be
q'tl; qt ' whi husual in such
e eine° was c was the course - those courts and establish (with various qualifications
ham Election Committee. The Hon-Gentleman could recommended by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners)
'''',,eleti"Y stastello mistake that the Hon. Gentleman had not have forgotten that he felt himself called upon to in their stead thirty-three other courts. He pro-
d the IN tl, after some deliberation-because he
pa ees • • explain the proceedings of that Committee. There was posed that a regularly qualified judge should be appoint-
a'etl t„ tient. eerily the question in the first instance, a strong feeling in the country that the Hon. Gentleman ed. to each court, who should be paid by a fixed salary,
tt`tin • ass I°ll was then re eated-that he was pre- should not hold his peace as to his conduct on this oc- that appropriation of the profits or fees of the court
ithe Ateell%verl'at that he' (Sir J. Graham) had used his casion ; and after the report was presented, the Hon. and the practice of the court should be as much as possi-
lvowyss, or nu. influence to obtain a false report for Gentleman found it necessary to stand up for half- an ble the same as that- of the Admiralty Court...lie also
;I'°lllicieq. be i. crashing him (Mr. Ferrand). He thought hour together and attempt to explain the proceedings in prop.osed to introduce into the Bill a power which. wouldt
\,, kv,,let,,, thileinossible, considering that assertion, and that Committee. lam a public man as well as a Mem- confer upon those judges the power of summoning wi -
Itts aetit,r et he Position which he (Sir- J. Graham) held be' rof this House, and I have a right to form an opinion nesses, and of issuing commissions. It was proposed
Nee 'beret It• Ala Zesty-considering that the assertion to theproceedings of that Committee, or of the mein- that the rule of practice in court should be determined.
ttssib, L' awe, '3' made-he was quite sure the Hon. abserswho Pwere upon it. - I will not hesitate to give my by the Queen in Council, and that the salaries
Likcill, o'Q tO (-I;na' a: Well as himself, feel that it was im • opinion upon them or upon what I should consider the of the registrars should be fixed and independent of the
.eitt, Adana ud redress then, but he hoped that the
It `4441t, ° teas prepared to take theproper course public conduct of this House. If this House, or fees of the court. With respect to the right of
.appeal,
be 'tit e the h. any friend of mine should tell me
.that I there were several provisions made in the Bill, one
a de, ljatt e arge.-(Opposition cheers.)
- q estion which used laneuage that was too strong, I will re- of which was, that right of appeal would lie
that th-tlleed.,,f the
there was another u •to the Prerogative Court in London. But if
tract it, but I will not beintimidated, as I have been
eat
.11ieht ater importance.lt had been asserted
he , net n 'loin Secretary
oQil.nitien_ of State had made use of attempted to be intimidated, by men who have not dared the parties did not assent and agree to pay the
remain • hthe
costs the causes should with courtbelow.
Oa tu hire ce to induce the lion. Member who to meet me on the hustings-(Laughter)-.but who. are
to
'tan t (Mr. Hogg, we understood the Hon. jealous of the unanimous regard and affection which has Thus far he had stated what W:3,5 intended to be the
\va le,t• ° refer t ) been shown to me by t?ns of thousands of injured men- practice of those courts ; and if, with these improve-
ments and increased powers, the courts should not prove
ih,, i4l_ ic,n 0„ 0 , when Chairman of the Netting- men whom you (pointing to Lord J. Russell) have de-
tih Otaeality he to commit perjury ; for such
ee'hOconirteatl, as __
Welt
of the charge, as he presumed asbe made with almost universal concurrence.
ceived-yes, and who have cast you 011.--(naughter.) as'enetffieceiebilidtthe public would desire, further improve-
I will stand to what. I have uttered out of this House,
e4,4teg t 0 was
w 11 as the other members of an Elec- and I will maintain it. Inm both the provinces the diocesan courts and the
' ' his Sworn to deliberate and decide, ac- Sir R. PEEL rose, but gave way to '
et. testis conscience.lt appeared to him that that
,whe Ilea. seriein e brow Sir J. GRAHAM, who said -Sir, there is no "hag- were attended by the same pleaders,..
..
prerogative were superintended by the
te tha `diet cearge ght against the Right andsam same
it judges,
was , ti earned-
o, o , himselfohaira, and against the Hon. Gentleman gling" or " higgling" here--(Cheers-) We are in the. fore, proposed to unite their jurisdiction, giving comport ,
th_4t. il he an au of the Committee in question, and British House of Commons ; and the Honourable Gen- sation to the present holders of the abolished offices. It
nil a Ettit PAY to hear some explanation of it. tleman has accused me, as a Minister of the Crown, of was further provided that the reg.isttraiaerss
to
ef thethe acboeluiseheeild,
4 a e)cp 4NI)-I b having exerted my influence as a Minister to obtain a-- courts should send in thedirhraevg
ACSit
Se
ressio beg leave to say that I never usedregistries
power of directing
tt ' Ante) 11.--(Oh oh, y false report for the purpose of crushing him. There shall- and that her Majesty shout
(.11lit:restlinlooti,-„I am boiLd 'to say that the impression be -no surprise. He says that I, as a Minister of the where the wills and papers shoueld be deposited._ The
tatt teeth...! Inculcated in the country at large- Crown, used my influence with a Member of this House- Bill provided further, that ell probates and settlements
te-'' In tt •"'. the Chairman of a Committee of this 'Sir. FERRAND-No, I did not say so..
t.liett'teecift
ttiheueeodn,fieichtairge of his duty, which was to decide under- them, which had not yet been contested, should
sir J. GRAHAM-I understood the Hon. Gentleman be declared valid, because in making this change,
ng claims of two parties, had grossly to refer to the Hon. Member for Beverley, as Chairman and
it reducing the number of courts from 330 to
to
het • to
duty' '1), tut ta Y, and that lee used subterfuge in order
of a Committee of this House, with whom I used my in- 33, was thought advisable to grant, as it were, a
.4 o,_
r) a 'Member fluence. - - general amnesty. Tho Bill . also
air tahh)ea aious
tt
the
of this House who was supposed Mr. FERRAND-7No, no. and preserve-
d' (the ale of Ulu I
tle persons in power, and who was in order to provide for the better custodPyreP
Sir J. GRAHAM--Very well. I will have no stir- tion of those papers, the registrars should periodically
atlo.ty ill stehairmane
of
of the working classes-that osed. that,
hotae 14 4eh a Nva I the Committee) discharged his phirise. Again, I repeat, that we have no " haggling" or report to the Secretary of State, who should have au-
a, t tlall'on him
Iv3h:s to cause the whole House to cry in" here, but to-morrow I will not appeal to the thorny to direct surveys to be made, and such altera-
should appear to
he made the report to the House, generosity or the fairness of the Hon. Gentleman, but dons and repairs as from time to time
tli: thatthe enlY, the Soutar •
4. 110, of the Bight
solitary voice which cheered him,
trred t 7 Itetattnesut Hon. Baronet the Secretary for I will appeal to the generosity and the
.fairness of both him to be necessary. There was almsoea provision in re-
sides of the House, .and I expect that • to-morrow the ference to brawling in churches, which. would .
he I,_ lls Hy_ runent. And I had no idea when I en- Hon.. Gentleman will come down with a specific charge the recurrence of vexatious proceedings, such preventas had
'ar'rre 'use that such against me-not only as a Minister of the Crown, but as ' given rise to so. much complaint ; and it was further 1
l' 4 1 i's W° old a question as that which is
Itt 1 co p u have been brow ht forward, and of a Member of
.this House, whose. honour he impeaches, proposed to abolish all penalties for non-attendance at
4tttee will u u
ave no • - and whose official character he impugns. I call on him,
' divine worship. Marriage licenses were now granted by
t'ell -at justad, intention o taking part in it; or rather I call on the House to compel the Hon. Gen- peculiar authorities, such as the Dean and Chapters,t
cell several „ no
to something which has been
allltetttelllsehieen made, these public meetings to which refe- tleman, to be specific in his allegations, and I challenge &c. ; but it was intended to confine that power to
how
a the ne by the
ceteinch was, that euch was the sense the Hon. Gentleman to any inquiry before any tribunal Bishop, to whom. it properly belonged,. giving him, heoun.
-before any Committee of this House, however consti- ever, authority, with the sanction of the Queen in C.
do
ti‘tht aatnight 1,7 'louse respecting the Factory Bill,
tA, 'a it dine Stated ',tin- Baronet at the head of the Govern- toted. I will not challenge the name of any Hon. Gen- col, to issue commissions giving to persons in certain ls-
„the utseussion'll__ osae night, when leaving the House tleman who may be placed on that Committee, and I tricts the power of granting licenses. He now called on
4;4:stio tense had tnthis Bill, that the Christian feeling challenge the Hon. Gentleman to prove any such charge the House to censider whether this was not a great
, 11. as that he has brought against me. measure of improvement, by which nearly three hun-
lhht.oh,--Lem beaten_, the Government on the factory
Lin it4Lt theanott cneers.) I cannot help hoping that Mr. FER.RAND-To-morrow I hope the Right Hon dyed of those courts were got rid of. The Bill had also
received the sanction of the other House of Parliament,
iY th uttee 1,.? of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ferrand)
tt, alii: aarnil.ll4 to say that he has been misled Baronet will be pressed to explain how he became- pos:
and he had not heard of any objection alleged against it
sessed of that document which he took out of his box to
own feelings on a subject by the country at large. If the Bill did not carry out
aid 4he talc": of his
pi
astefati_s_ .1 an interest, and that he had not at- use against me.-(Cheers and laughter.) I beg your
pardon, but it is no laughing matter; and I think t ein - all that he could wish, and all that those whoa pproved
of the Bill of last year would desire to see accomplished,
t h:',4uti he
tent
not
to the words- he was using, terruptions of the Hon. Member for Bath are excessively
there was, however, nothing in it to prevent them carry-
tkietnlnis ae.ena at the moment aware of the deep im- calculated to make on the unbecoming.--(Renewed laughter.) I again repeat that
to in out further improvements at a future time.. Ile
klarkof ,n- Zhthey I expect that to-morrow the Right Hon. Baronet-a g
ben eta o naturally supposed that the Hon. Gen-would earnestly urge upon the House, undea theeecir-
,, tht tt be bett for he is on his trial as well as myself-well be hie
explain to the House in what manner he became pos- cumstances, to accept so large a measure of imPrave-
a,hlr. 1,4 the,, er acquainted with what is passing
tittt• •Utit,,,T could be. sessed of that report, which he drew out of his box, and meet, . .
and not to throw it to the winds in the ho e of
•o
a / nu
tei f have s . 0-I am quite prepared to stand bn.
krttlang
ftaid, but I never recollect such expresj- which he used against me almost immediately, if not getting
a better measure at another time. He Oita, gin'
immediately, on my resuming my seat in the debate. on that all was done that could be. done at prest tenwitlis
Or, Ong fro
.i,,n, .. the new poor-law.
Mr. HOGG-I hope that I shall be permitted to bring the concurrence of a large portion of the peop etc e
titht FERN (-eta Oastler.
tte li AND-I am not Mr. Oastler's keeper. The concluded by moving the second reading of the Bittnate
ti net r but ht het the Home Secretar was a short
h'-' ago,cith Baronet the report to which- the Hon. Gentleman has referred,
and to read that report to the House ; and if it shouldg GEORGE GREY had thought thateetkhen the.:
Right Hon. Gentleman brought this Billebeforinthil
t,ilteo:lteet te 111: now at liberty.-(Layughte;.) But not be liable to the imputation which has been cast upon
oat
I used relating to the Not- lit by him, I hope the House will call en that Hon. Gen- House he would have pointed. out
.the pfietichlarha just
a el: elect:lanwhich it differed from the Bill which he had ore•
thastldetne nan, I have to state that I never said " the
amen to disavow that which he has uttered, or to re- brought in, and which he recommended to the 11.111-''l,' '
. k„". --....(e' . I said, "those who sat on this side of the quire him, in any manner you please, either before this an able and conclusive speech. That Bill was carried'
heattlioGnries of " Oh, oh ") or any other tribunal, to bring his proofs ; and I will be
s.atisfie.d, if he should raise a doubt or suspicion as to my upon the second reading in the House of Commons, by
qlt to ‘-'e-I hope the •e, erta , state to Hon. Gentleman will be kind
1 hat 11/_ 1 h 0,,, the House what he did say.-(Lourl integrity, to su .. le consequences. If on the con- a majority of ninety; and he had not heard one word this
i7g4vo e did 7 he Will be kind enough to state distinctly submit to tl
treat:, he should fail to do so, I hope the House will visit evening from the Right Hon. Gentleman to alter or lessen
it t alp the re e hope that he will either avow or
nv NV tt ate, and T the impression which was then made upon the House.na
he manner he deserves.-(Cheers.) (Hear, hear.) The measure now proposed was totally
tol; n on, . Port of him in t
his speech, which never would Lord J. RUSSELL-I do not think that it very inadequate-it departed altogether from the principles of
/4,„ :eh w 4 `3:e if I had not seen a prominent part of ; much matters what are the particular words and ex- the Bill which was last year introduced by. the Govern-
tt. ~ given in on
/ ",b4, That ,a_. eof the healing columns of the 1 pressions which were either used by the Hon. Gentle- ment through the Right
.Honi. Gentleman himself-which
litt_rt ale Particular statement reseecting myself I I man, or wore reported in the Times newspaper. The (eehoeer ttw, oat:ldr statement which has been alluded to I question will be whether the Hon. Gentleman can al- was carried, and in which le. (Sir G. Grey). ga.v? his
1:1:;.441,4•) nut a inever heard of until this moment.- leg e, or can give proof in support of such allegation, that most cordial support. This Bill abandonedi the princl-
ples which had been assented to by the highest cedes',
ten et itl? tell hope the lion. Gentleman will be kind ' the Right Hon. Gentleman caused, or directed, or pro- astical authorities, who pronounced these courts. to be
that he spt?e_, House whether he has seen the re- I cured, a false report to be made to him fur a specific
p ipurpose. It would be beside the question to say that nuisances to the Church, and to expose her to enmity and
oats.. win dci m the Times newspaper, and I ho e ' reproach by their arbitrary and tyrannical proceechngs, by
ttt /4_ will 41;71%1174 state to the House, and I hope the I the Right Hon. Gentleman had received a report in which many families were ruined. He (Sir G. Grey)
t4ertrte the that haat I have a right, not only to request 1 which some of the facts were inaccurately stated, and would oppose the second reading of this Bill, because he
ellesChts anhi.":,-cetirentlentan was interued loud that he used that report, relyinon the authority of
ht Hon. Gentleman believed that its effect would be to perpetuate these ob-
te' retrtetea cr, of
.this House, in the dischargeta of L an inspecting officer. without having verified the facts, noxious courts.-(Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
had told the House that this was a great measure of re-
tetlittrre 4,4M-a right to demand that this House ' The question is whether the Rig
anretti?w the s 'ton. Gentleman distinctl to avow or used his influence with the intention of procuring form: Without admitting so much, he would consider
y
+4l, ,inftltly that it was a great advantage to get rid of the peculiars,
Peech as reported, and which has been . such a result. Then with regard to the Hon. Member and to improve the administration of the remaining
1..
hes,ti.)ateprut forward in a leading article of the 1 for Beverley, the Hon. Gentleman said that the Hon.
'ett,'''-Eltp PA ~„,7---(Great cheering-) ' Member for Beverley had thought it necessary to make
oh , end 'hee4D as courts. It was also very well to take away the juris-
the the - saw the trading article in tl 'an explanation as to his conduct as chairman of the I
re diction of the courts in case of tithe, of scandal, and of
tatah, words which I used, and6
"11 ref what I asserted committee, and that certain Members of this House- smiling.-(A laugh.) But if they created thirty-five-
erred to ar th 1 certain side of this House-had listened to that ex- .
Dr.
,NICHOLL--Thirty-three.
? e ere quoted, and on a
are 1
,4, . Sir GEORGE GREY said there were thirty-five in

h r sehed de. If they created those thirty-Jive new
courts, with salaries suz:a al to induce moil of high.itanl-
log at the bar to take office in them, together with a host
ofregistrars--he believed that then, if the courts,proved
to the nuisances which they now were, Atli to ex-
pose the administration of juctica to the reproach which
they now exposed it to—the effect of the Bill would be to

' hpr ur the kiagdo:n to the juris lotion
0: the Chureh.—(Cries of No, no ") Such wretl,l be
!.he e'3e3t of the suggestion of the - Noble Lord.
His other proposal, also, to which he intimated
the readiness of his constitaents to fteetel.., was
that all the contested business inight be removed to
Loa•loe, and all the mere formal business might remain
ie the country. That was only saying that all the pro-
fitatile business might be retained, and all that was
troublesome might be sent elsewhere.--(Hear, hear.)
The lion Member' for Oxford had pot it to him (Sir J.
Graham), whether this measure was to be regarded as
an instalment of legislation only, and whether it was' to
lead to further changes; or whether it was to be con-d-
-dered the matured determination of the Govern.
ment ? He did not hesitate to say at once, that
he msinteined the opinion he had often expressed
in reference to the principle of the Bill of last
year, in preference to that of the present measure.
lie did thin& that it would have been more expedient,
upon the whole, for the testamentary business of the
country, both as to real and personal property, to have
been placed under the responsible jurisdiction of a
judge nominated by the Crown and sitting in London, in
preference to being placed under the control 'of the Ec-
clesiastical Courts. This was the plan he (Sir 'James
Graham) should have preferred. But if his Hon. Friend
asked him whether he contemplated any further legisla-
lation on this subject, he would say that, from the cape •
rience he hal had of ecclesiastical Bills, both now and
heretofore, he could not conceive that, during his (Sir
James Graham's) lifetime, he should ever undertake to
bring in another. With respect to the details of the
measure ha intended to introduce a clause by which no-
tice would be given to all proctors hereafter enterine.
Doctors' Commons, that if any further alterations shoula
be made in the jurisdiction of that court, they should ac-
quire no claim to compensation for the abolition of any
office, or the loss of any business that might be the con-
sequence of the change. At the same time, after the
best consideration he could give the subject, he was not
prepared to say that the present Bill was the one he
should have preferred ; but he believed, from the expe-
rience of Lord Grey's Government, of the former
Ministry, and of the present one, that it contained
as much of salutary alteration as, at the present
moment, could be proposed with any reasonable chance
of success. There were other points of the Bill to be
considered, but they were mere matters of detail. The
Hon. Member for Oxford recommended that the judge
of the diocesan court should be paid by fees instead of
by a salary, He quite differed from this recommenda-
tion. The judge of the prerogative court at present
only derived an income of 801. a 'year from contested
wills, but from his fees on common form busi-
ness he received 3,0001. a-year. He preferred
allowing the judge to be paid by a fixed salary.
The Hon. and Learned Member for Devonport said the
present was an inadequate measure, particularly in re-
ference to the diocesan courts. He had already declared
that he should have preferred the principle of the Bill of
last year. But to carry that principle to its full extent
was impossible. He admitted that on the second read-
ing of that Bill there was a numerical majority for the
Government; but the discussion plainly showed that the
measure was a condemned one. Many Hon. Members
wished to carry out the recommendation of the Real
Property Commissioners ; but he had always consi-
dered it of importance to maintain a bar of civil
lawyers in this country; if they took from their court
the jurisdiction of real property there would be no time
in periods of peace to train up a bar of civilians. That-
was a matter of importance and ought not to be over-
looked. .It had been urged by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Devonport that the amount of con-
tentious business in the local courts was small. He
(Sir IrGraham) admitted it. A great part of the per-
sonal property brought into those Courts waS. funded
property. The present Bill made it compulSiiry on the
ordinary to nominate a layman duly pi:elf:fled as
judge. He believed that the measure; even in its pre-
sent form, would be a great advantage. All peculiar
courts were abolished, all consistory courts were
abolished, all archdiaconal courts, with the exception of
four, were abolished. The number of local courts were
diminished from 330 to, he believed, 34. With regard
to jurisdiction, all jurisdiction with regard to defama-
tion was taken away. The jurisdiction will regard to
minor civil affairs, in connexion with religion, was ma-
terially diminished. He had already. alluded to the
Crown with regard to the contentious jurisdiction and
the regulation of fees, which was reserved to the Queen
in Council. All sinecures were abolished by the Bill,
anti ample security was taken for a complete registra-
tion. He would say that his opinion was, 'that the pre-
sent Bill was not so perfect as the one he' had the ho-
nour of submitting to the House last session, but he was
satisfied it was a great improvement on the existing law.
He believed that the complete transfer of local jurisdictions
was a matter in which the feelings of constituencies should
be taken into consideration when no great principle was
violated ; and he did not feel that it was derogatory to
the honour of the Government to say that they yielded
to that conviction, and to ask the House to agree to the
second reading of the Bill. He had a confident expecta-
tion that this Bill, coming down as it did with the sanction
of the ether House of Parliament, was a great improve-
ment in the existing law, and he had a strong hope that
such a measure, on such a difficult and intricate subject,
would be conducive to the best interests of the country.
Lord R. GROSVENOR explained. He had said that
he approved of the jurisdiction of those courts ; but he
was desirous of having a registry without reference to
that jurisdiction.
After a few words from Sir J. GRAHAM,
• Lord J. RUSSELL said, that both the Right Hon.
gentleman who proposed the second reading of the Bill
Ind the Right lion. Gentleman who had just sat down,
seemed to feel the difficulties of this subject. He did not
wonder at it, for it could not be forgotten that the Right
Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, stated last year to the House that he would
aot alter his mind on the subject—that he had given it
the greatest consideration—that he was persuaded the
plan he proposed was the best that could be adopted—
and therefore felt called on to persevere with it. The
Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government
spoke with great pride of the exertions which he
made some years ago • for the improvement of
the law, and with regard to this subject he stated
that he had proposed a Commission to inquire
into it, and that he was determined on carrying into
effect the plans which were recommended by persons of
the highest authority. The Bill accordingly of last year
tarried into effect the plan recommended by those per-
sons of high authority and of every description. That
Bill passed a second reading by a majority of more than
eighty, and the Bill was never again brought seriously
under the discussion of the House. It was totally altered
in a committee pro forma. The Right Hon. Gentleman
now totally abandoned the whole principle of that Bill,
which last year he had made up his mind to defend and
to carry; and be it remembered, too, that the Right Hon.
Gentleman told them that this Bill came to them recom-
mended by the authority of the House of Lords, while,
as far as they knew from the public reports, it appeared
almost every person of authority in the House of Lords
spoke against the principle of the Bill, and that the
only reasons for keeping up the abuses of the present
system was that the House of Commons would have it
so. The Government had every reason to press the Bill,
but they ran away from shadows of difficulty, and threw
the onus of what was wrong in the present Bill upon
the House of Commons. The Right Hon. Gentleman
who proposed the second reading, said that some of the
persons on the original Commission, who recommended the
measure, had changed their minds, and that that some of
the persons who voted for the second reading in the
House of Commons meant to vote against its further
progress. The principle of the measure wus opposed to
the great authority of Lord Tenterden, Sir N. Tindal,
Lord Denman, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Cottenham, and
Lord Campbell. It was opposed to the authority of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of London,
Lincoln, Durham, and St. Asaph, and others of
the highest ecclesiastical , authority. It was op
poSed to the authority of Dr. Lushington, Sir
J. Nichol], Sir Jenner Fust, and other persons of
the greatest authority as civilians. But then the Right
lion. Gentleman said that seine anonymous persons had
changed their ;minds, and that some Members of the
House of Commons, who had voted for the second read-
ing, would not support it at another stage. Could any
Government have left higher authority than the names
he had quoted for such utterly unstable support ? His
Hon. Friend, the Member for the University of Oxford
was very much against the diminution of ecclesiastical
tribunals, which he thought would lessen the just share
of the Church in the institutions of the country. That
was a very natural prejudice on the part of his Hon.
Friend, and quite consistent with his views on the sub-
ject. But he (Lord J. Russell) must say, at the same
time, that he did not think the principle of
their institutions rested on any such grounds
of reason ; and the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
of 1829, the Committee on real property in 1833, and
tho Committee of the House of Lords in 1836, were of
opinion that a change ought to take place with regard
to the mode in which those matters of ecclesiastical law
were carried on. He believed that if a search was made
into the origin of this authority, it would be found to
have commenced in the 14th century, by usurpation on
the part of the Pope's Legate. It was not according to
the ancient principle of the law in this country. Was
it at all according to reason that at this day when people
left large property in the Three per Cents., they should
be governed by the maxims of the 14th century, which
were directed by the authority of the papal power in
this country. It was obvious that ecclesiastics should
not have authority in those matters. What then was the
principle which the Commissioners endeavoured to esta-
blish? That principle on which the Right Hen. Gentleman
rested last year, namely, that there should be a court in
which the chief judge would be named by the Crown,
and who would have the chief authority in the ultimate
disposal of personal property and wills. It was quite
another question, whether they would go further, ar d
make this court similar to the Court of Chancery, or
one with those already existing, or one in which ques-
tions of real property and personal property would be
decided at the same time and ruled by the same decision.
But this was matter for subsequent consideration. Now
the first plain question was, whether those matters were
to be left to ecclesiastical tribunals; whether the judges
were to be appointed by ecclesiastical authority, or ap-
pointed by the Crown; and whether civil matters were
to be governed by rules which regulated matters
of ecclesiastical authority? The Right Honourable
Gentleman agreed with him that the judges should
be named by the Crown. The Right Honourable
Gentleman said that the Commissioners were of opinion
that there should be a separation of civil and ecclesiasti-
cal matters, and that the diocesan courts should be abo-
lished. But he omitted some of .the history which sub-
sequently occurred. The bishops, at least a great num-
ber of them, stated it would be impossible to regulate
matters satisfactorily till the question of Church discip-
line were settled. He believed that there were dif-
ferences of opinion amongst the bishops themselves, and
other ecclesiastical authorities, as to the mode in which
the. Legislature should proceed in regard to Church
discipline. It was not till 1840 that the Bill on Church

gre-atly increase the obstacle; to their abllition.—(l-Lear,

hear.) Last session the Right HJa. Gentleman (Dr.
Nicholl) cited largely from the authorities, up in which
he rested hio Bill at that time. But on the present oc-
casion he alluthd to those authorities in a very light and
trenchant manner.—(Hear, hear.) But .he would en-
deavour to supply the deficiency from the Right Honour-
able Gentleman's own able and convincing speech.
First, Uwe was the report of the Ecclesiastical Com-
mission appointed in 1829, upon which were the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, the BiShops of Loudon and Dur-
ham, Lord Tenterden, Sir Nichola§ ..th,e„c'llief
Justice of the Common Pleas, Sir John NiCholl, and Dr.
Lushington, &c. In this report the -condemnation of
those courts was as strong as language could express it.
The Right Hon. Gentleman admitted that some of the

surviving members of that Commission retained their
opinions, but others had changed them, and thought
they had gone too far. But could the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman ask the House, on that account, totally to aban-
don the principles which, only last year, the House
adopted in a great measure upon the authority of those
Commissioners, of whom many retained their opinions to
the full?—(Hear‘ hear.) In the report, also, of the Real
Property Commissioners, the abolition of the courts was

recommended, if not as directly in terms, certainly as
strongly in fact, as in that of the Ecclesiastical Comtnis-

sion-ani this, also, was one of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man's authorities. That Commission contained the

names of men of the highest eminence in the legal pro-
fession. He (Dr. Nichol') produced, also, the authority
of the Committee of the House of Commons, moved for

by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for
the Home Department, and also the authority of the
Committee of the House of Lords, appointed in 1836.
The Right Hon. Gentleman was quite correct in saying
that a Bill similar in principle was introduced into the
House of Lords in 1836, but that Bill was far more
stringent in its reforms and better calculated to meet
the wants and desires of the country. However, the
peculiars were by the present Bill to be abolished, and
that was something gained, for he did not believe that
any one could be found to say a word in favour of them.
except, perhaps, the Right Hon. Member for Oxford
(Sir R. Inglis), who held everything in connection with
ecclesiastical matters to be sacred and inviolate. The
diocesan courts were, however, found to be too strong
for the Government, and to a power which they could
not or would not grapple with the country was to be
sacrificed. It might, perhaps, be difficult to trace ex-
actly and correctly the origin of these courts, but he
might state his own opinion, that their origin would be
found in superstition. But every ground which could
possibly exist for their jurisdiction had now ceased to
exist. Now the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir J.
Graham) had himself east year denounced and discarded
these diocesan courts, and he wished now to ask him if
he abandoned his former opinions, or if he maintained

them ?—(Hear.) Before these courts questions of the
utmost interest, both in testamentary and matrimonial
affairs would be brought—questions relating to the legiti-
macy of children, the rights of families, the happiness and
security of society—and he (Sir G. Grey) wished to ask
whether by this Bill such judges were secured as would
give the public a proper confidence in the administration
ofjustice?—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
(Dr. Nicholl) had stated the Bill to be an experiment,
but why did he not give them the Bill of last year as an
experiment? The principle of last year's Bill was con-
centration—the principle of this Bill was distribution in
the jurisdiction in matters testamentary and matrimo
nial. And this jurisdiction was to be exercised by
judges not appointed by the Crown but by the Bishop.
They were to be barristers of five years' standing, and
the Right Hon. Gentleman thought that because they
were to be confirmed in their appointment by the Crown
that good judges would be obtained. But he (Sir G.
Gre) asked the House if it were possible, unless ample
salaries were attached, to attract competent men to these
judicial situations ? The fact was, they could not make
the diocesan courts efficient for the purpose the House
ought to have in view. To reform them was impos-
sible, and abolition was the only real cure for the ?;riev-
ance.—(Hear, hear.) But let him remark that these
judges were not only to exercise jurisdiction in testa-
mentary and matrimonial, but they were to be armed
with powers like to those intrusted to the judges in West-
minster-hall. For by clause 86 of the Bill, it was
enacted that for the better punishment of contempt the
power of committing to prison should be given to-these
judges, the same as was entrusted to the highest judges
of the land.—(Hear, hear.). This was a most formid-
able power to give any one in a country district—such a
power, in fact, as he (Sir G. Grey) would only entrust
to men of the highest qualification, judgment, and
character. Now, having shown that the principle of
this Bill was different from that brought forward last
year—the one being for concentration of power, the
other for distribution—he thought the House had a
right to know the reason of the change. Again, on
the bona notabilia, what was the reason for the change
of the• views of Government from last year to this? The
evils connected with.the bona notabilia were . now actu-

- •
ally to be perpetrated and extended.—(Hear, hear.,
This evil had been the subject of just and indignant
complaint, and yet no effort was to be made to remove
or reduce it. It had existed for centuries, and it was to
exist still. The Bill was a bad and pernicious Bill in
every respect, and he opposed it not merely because it
was so, but because if passed it would be an effectual
bar to any attempt at improvement hereafter. Let it
but pass and there would be an end to all hope of eccle-
siastical reform. It was said, take the Bill as an instal-
ment. He (Sir G. Grey) should do no such thing; for
he was satisfied there was no hope of future or further
payment. And for these grounds he had now to move
that the Bill be read a second time that day six 'wails-
Sir ROBERT INGLIS said his Right Hon. Friend
had stated that this Bill was a great improvement and a.
step in the right direction ; and the Right Hon. Gentle
man on the other side of the House said he would not take
it as an instalment.' He (Sir Robert Inglis) thought t4t-
Bill objectionable in many respects, and the vote which
he would give would be very different from that which he
had come into the House prepared to give. His Right
Hon. Friend supported this Bill on account of its des-.
tructive character, but Hon. Members on the other side
did not think there was enough in the Bill to gratif3
their appetites for destruction. Last year he had ob
jetted to the principle of centralization embodied in th.
Bill—and he was free to admit that in this respect the
present Bill had been improved. He believed the object
of her Majesty's Government was honest and good, and
he would support the second reading, though the Bill
went much further than it should go. He would modify
the proposed Bill in one important respect—viz., grant
the parties interested the option of applying to the me-
tropolitan or to the local courts, which would often
prove to be of very great convenience. Another sug-
gestion he would make was, that an index of wills and
legacies should be prepared, which could be done at the
expense - of half a dozen or a dozen of clerks, and would
be vastly beneficial to the public. He would give to the
supreme central court the power of regulating the in-
ferior courts, so that there might be an uniformity of
practice. He was in favour of the abrogation of salaries
altogether, and the substitution of a system of fees.
He was grieved to witness the gradual withdrawal of the
name and influence of the Church from testamentary mat-
ters, and he feared the country would have reason to regret
it. If they alleged that any institution was abused, they
• ught at least to prove the abuse before they destroyed'
the institution. Let them paint out in what part of
their duties the Court of Peculiars hid failed. There
were some of their duties which they could not well pro-
cure any one but ecclesiastics to undertake, and if they
could not get others to discharge those duties, they
would, in destroying the courts, have carried their prin-
ciple further than the interest of the community re-
quired. He also excepted to the clause, which ordered
that all or any bills, deeds, and documents, in these
courts, might be transmitted to London, and refereed to
the Court of Arches or the Court of Chancery—he
thought this provision a needless violation of conve-
nience. He denied that the utility of the diocesan courts
was to be judged by the number of litigated cases that
passed through them—it was from the amount of unliti
gated business they disposed of that they were to be
judged. At the same time, he confessed that he looked
at the general principle of the Bill with a very different
spirit to that with which he regarded the measure of
last year. The present Bill did not sever the ec-
clesiastical jurisdiction of England from that in-
timate connexion with its • civil affairs which
it had for so long a period possessed, and did not
deprive the Church of England of some of its most im-
portant and most ancient points of connection with the
people. He did not believe that it was a matter of in-
difference to the people that the transmission of their
'personal property, should be made in the name and
under the authority of the Church—by that administra-
tion which the Church had been called on for centuries
to exercise. In this respect the Bill was a great im-
provement on that of last year, yet he still thought it
needlessly limiteikthe ;jurisdiction of the Church, when
all that wait reqirtred was an improvement of its admi-
niltration.
rd. ROBERT GROSVENOR said he had been
r:s*Viethoftywho etestroyed the Bill of last year, in which
1"e-4-etletite ably assisted by the Hon. and Learned Mem-
hei for:o4(4d, who then voted with him against it. He
,(Lord IL' 'Peosvenor) would not yield to that Hon.
!ebitsmber..lii•4ttachtnent to the Church of England ; but.
ehe Thought' more its jurisdiction in civil matters was
'llo;3;trii4 Kill/ better it would be for the Establish..
'Melit' He coup imagine what was the object of the
(Gii.yeriMeh. -ten tZoposing this Bill, which went to re-
eonitru6t.the diocesan courts, which were generally con-
demned. He apperoved of the abolition of ecclesiastical
jurisdiction in civil matters, but this Bill went
to perpetuate it ; the proposal of last year, to
'abolkth it was hailed with satisfaction from all sides
of House. They would not permit persons
to take out registrations where they chose, be-
cause they were afraid that Doctors' Commons would
lose some of its business. There was an excessive want
of a general system of registration. They had got
courts of registration already, and, instead of trying
to reconstruct bad diocesan courts, why could they not
pass a Bill making them courts of registry for wills,
deeds, and documents, and all kinds of property? That
would do more good than any reconstruction of the law
they could possibly devise. That suggestion had been
made more thaq once, and had never been answered.
Sir J. GRAHAM said before the House came to a
decision on this Bill, he thought it right that he should
have the honour of addressing it. Before he approached
swathadtowhna.dfallen
If he
understood the Noble Lord, he frankly ac
linow:edged
ftrhoemgetnheerNaloqbuleesLtioonrd, he must uhsatdn
just
te
that he was one of those who destroyed the Bill of last
year. He also stated himself to be as warm a friend to
the Church as the Hon. Member for Oxford. This he
proved by going further even than the Member for
Oxford himself,
as his suggestion would submit all the