The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-06-04 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-FRIDAY.

On the order of the day for the committal of the Ec-
clesiastical Courts Bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, in a very amusing speech, moved
—" That it be an instruction to the committee to abolish
all ecclesiastical courts. and to transfer the jurisdiction
of those courts to civil tribunals."
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Dr. Mellott. advocated the retention of the courts in
the modified shape proposed by the bill, and denied that
be had any personal interest in the passing of the bill.
Sir G. GREY said that, seeing those courts were to be
not reformed but re-constructed and perpetuated, be
would support the amendment of Mr. Duncombe.
The SOLICITOR.GENERAL thought it requisite that the
testamentary and other jurisdictions of the ecclesiastical
courts should be retained, and if there were any defects
in the bill they might be remedied in committee.
The house divided, and Mr. Duncombe's amendment
was negatived by a majority of 115 to 70.
Mr. BORTIIWICK contended that they ought to have
obtained the sanction of the church to a well-digested
reform of the ecclesiastical courts, and, not having done
so, he opposed the motion that the Spealser should leave
the chair. On a division, however, he was defeated by a
majority of 62 to 25, and the house went into committee.
On the first cause, Sir G. GREY proposed an amend-
ment, to the effect of abolishing the criminal jurisdiction
of the ecclesiastical courts.
Dr. Me Flom. had no objection to abolish all that was
vexatious in ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but thought it ad-
visable to retain the power of restraining brawling in
churches, and also that of ecclesiastical admonition.
The committee divided, and the amendment of Sir G.
Grey was negatived by a majority of 62 to 44.
Sir G. GREY then moved an amendment to the effect
that cases of brawling in churches should be decided by a
civil tribunal.

This led to a second discussion, in which it was con-
tended by Mr. WATSON, Mr. ROEBUCK, and other hon.
members, that there was no case of offence or disturbance
to a congregation which might not be punished by the
common as well as by the ecclesiastical law.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought this at least ques-
tionable. After a desultory discussion cf some length,
Sir R. PEEL said he could conceive many cases in which
the courts of law could not interfere, and instanced the
case of a Quaker who rose to speak in the House of Com-
mons with his hat on. The Speaker interfered and com-
pelled him to remove it. He did not know that in such
a case as that any court of common law could interfere to
punish the party so offending.
The committee, after a few words from Sir G. GREY,
divided, and his amendment was negatived by a majority
of 109 to 61.

Sir G. GREY then moved, as an amendment, that the
jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts in church rates shall be
abolished.

Dr. NWHOLL opposed the amendment.
The committee again divided, and the amendment was
defeated by a majority of 107 to 66.
Another division took place upon an amendment of Mr.
C. BuLLER, to transfer the testamentary jurisdiction to
the common law courts, the amendment was negatived by
a majority of 121 to 58.
The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and the other orders
of the day were then disposed of.