House Of Lords, Tuesday, ...
The Times, 1824-04-07T00:00:00

Sir AJIAES GRAftAm brought up from tht ComMonS mne mresn 4 per cents. bill 1 and General GAscoy:t brought up the cruel treat- ment of cattle bill.-These bills were read a first time. The Earl of GOSFORL) presented a petition froin the town of Tanderagee against negro slaver IRISH B71JRE^AL BILLr.I * Lord HOLLAND stated, that a petition had been put into his hands, with a request tolay it betbre thir lordehi a. It related to a bill on the stibject of Catholic buriais, which bad come from the other house, but which he had not yet had the particular opportunity of reading. lW'ith the provisiTons of the bill he was unacquainitet, and the persons who had signtd the petition were equally unknown ta him. Under these circumstances, he should have wished to post-I pone presenting this petition, in order that he might previously have time to iniquire into the facts; but as he undeistood that it was the intention of the noble lord at the head of tile Treasury to mnove the comnmliment of the bill that evening, he was under. the necessity of now calling tb-eif Ioirdships' attention to the subject. As he had said,he had no knowledge of the correctness of the tacts stated liy the petitioncrs, or of the provisions of the bill. e ursderstood the object of the bill to be to facilitate the b(trial of Catholics in Ireland, which had in some cases experienced interruption; but it was rathE sttiange, as the object of the bill was tO allay. angry feelings, thait it sh6ald be thouight necessary to hurry it so rapidly tbrough th I,iDsse.'The p'etitioners stated that tihcy hada read the bil, and that. though in its prearphle the principle of toleration was recAgnized, yet its prqvisiotns Were in a contrary spirits Here the noble lord reatd tile petiion, which we understood to be signed by a fev persons. The petitioners stated, a*i.ong ,tihe things, that thsa tendency of the provisions wduld boe tI product! the ollision of different parties andct adisimion in Ireland.afd to increase tc animosities whichi the bill propo~edto allay; a'nd that theire hail beeittn sitnte-ruptiOii to, the bu-. riaLof C *tholic. previotisly to the appointment of Dr. sagec to the abee nturi Tvhcdnoble lerd baed observed,thatheoad taken thisun- uul r moae. freang tu e peoni tition, because, while he u ishedto lay hid bhee oabe,ed tnbeThe had,oiw part, no pinion to give on thbe uouThue hastoLIein RPOOL woula 'tit oppose the r tation for lay- inx teo petition on the twble. 'With regard to the bill, their lord- thls st but e a tvare. tiat i e had received much of the attention of the otherr housex toF Parliament, into ewhic it had been iltboauced c4id conefuericl of some. transactions of a disagree, a6le nature, wvhich hati bccqqr iii certain parts of Ireland. Tihe bili.was brought up from. the' Commons' -on Thiursday lest, and hid been orderei to be pntd. There had, therefore been no undue hasl5in 'forwaxhiig 'the- mieasure. He certaily had' vesterday stated' thiet lie ivas desirous,of ba,ing'the bill commtimttedl !this~pightbut.hq Lt the shine time ifitiniate4 thiat'he would postpone tl etbirdPeading,tfoFridavY fi6ies when any amendment wbich migh. be r.lioughi r.ece,ssany could equ'ally. well 'be proposed. A~ gr,~at m'as,.qF' t'he 'bhJectios~i5&Wlijch. lhad heen-matde' to- the bfil were touusdd'eii ~iskdrg.sadirg.offb tinsbjedt4 which would be casily. * tT Ear .;ElY~.NLE.'W5San aXtous as-ansy' body' could be bllacthis.~silfshOtild"lhoar,4a golflhteien 'Irelanda!; but'biCwlshed Th9ii'godsbips t~i~.tt &.~~har part of t petittpi"whicli stirted' the -' . .~ ~. ~ ~'',.t.'it4,'s..e,~i,'ipAtaltth9'rdator ox clulr6Iiyard ana that if not pretunfea w!ttlit H i 4tti interme'nt lionll be allowed to .tase place.: . kls cleagynian Ivoul&ibve the power of a v.eto if I .i . ,sVt,.'< , 1he1E;arl--g 'l1.A aW4RDN thougbtths .>$lkji52M=,w,,f the,permis?io0f to biuiy might experience some ilo rli4etrniinlsterid s!eree be,esidencoE tb ih,.i ,. biatlte' ijiiAie bbf3& or '4) nile4igreat it onvefien o tst be petdenced-b;ttd ptides. Rle also objected to the exception agatnst bueysnl, an s,pvpre"ssd monasteries and aibbeys, .whjhc, .ha4 hot bec n employedlfortintetinenL writhin the last ten yearsI atdt, o g t fi nndigs'eetnetlt fkvIbUryingnught e pre- plicstotainuc I CO& f e? arel ?e~11 TERPOOW intimated bta'rmadines to oiieto arnedmeidets ' Iculateid to reeioovo-the obeccyons,ststgd,bzythc ioble earl. IF theCrC-eY;ltedl AmOng-pant sa dLOt;On?8t re wobld'so'on i'all bpon the meanes Iith r Ig rt tdbAlepoweri&w tt- Lhbe .ProtcstXamt clerrjyan l,had sxefcFt.setl, it,ls .irfectl ' kgaL There t. s:: bo -doubt that! the-a qrIsdi6tio. of- . tl;tqbchturchyard' b^Iongca- t, he recto1 of vicac' ot, the piarL% 1a,n4 tbit Ju- rs&Fiehiixi pplSed epefltyto- Protcetaats of'the phijspT,of. Irelandl and to C:atholei;.s because,if . it -werthfe tYi,S oE ,a~p~ izrthe, a . Protest^Shtlerg titan fet~ot, other pasl shA' ieMaflrt s buriaI service, nUch 'ot6et Protestant dergyzun u lipg,fr~tO, ni D the , con- clntd'f th ectde-Orvicar, The bill wouhi.? re,rqowe ~sereK.difculty both withrcspectto6Dissenters anti Catholics;. 4s to thbe Eun servige, the coniMon practice among Roaii C e stobd, wid to h5ve it performcd-.in aroom ,wbercJ snislk.pOrtiof eabth wits citsecrnteeo They would now, upoapp ;tien,;iave the opportnnity oflierfomlng 'tb'eir-funeral tervtc>i snst yariib church- yard.Wjtb tegaid to the petition, he cot ld inform theirlstuni thrit tfih yfflecion' it'e5st on:arhtev. jlrelgte -moat. tinfthded. That right'rev. prclate was residinmat L,smingtoti oW$r3vxc4tirev whenthe'trlansicti&ng took nlace to *hich the petiLn . hsueq and kneiV nOthin ofuhem. A tO the provision foor lahiggye ibiiiO oftthe. parish minisier, hconsidered it nectsgrry. 'i heiordiihtp5 i tmsnt either legislate so as to meet all cases and -ircunistice, or they imist'ha4te-d-discretion Fomcwhere. -.It certainly .was not Jieir that that'di%cretion could be ibufed-i when' thc object ftl6e bilL whiclIeoqtMngd-it iAs so clearlv defined intthlc prre ble of,te very clause. bsy whi ait was girve.. After sthting thpt%he miinstes of the Churcil of tMVLfd cannot at present diL+pense Wlith tbc choirch ser- vicc t oi pemint any other to be substituted3 it proceed. thss- " To the 'end', thereof, that all classes, of .his.. Majisty'li sub- jects niay,-B.' p-rrrnittetl to have the- -asemcnt of burial.accord- ing to the' ifes -of-the several redigons proiesied. by thein; be it enacted." &e..:,- No' preamble could -nmore ' strougIy e press the intenton of tie legislAture thail the oniehe.,bad, read. Tkis, how- ever, was not alL lt:vvrsprovided by4anooheLdIauseW that if pe,m's. siori be withheld, the<'cfiatipnZ niinister- of the.Chu-b of beland mustdeclare the clause 6ffhiq refisalinwriting. * AcopP olhis do. cument must be forthwith-laid -befoic his-diocemn?rbyR *om-it unist boiiiniediately trans,mitted to the Lorti Lieutenat- '-t was siitfob him to say wyhat sbm.eobstinate dergymanit might -not d)o but after such an idm6nition as --t9h 'ambI ihaA . readi Sollbwed up by such a pra'vislon as he badLdesciibetl, :;f J9Lgt4r,ly ,tbat any capricious obiection wYould be-made. . | The Earl of IMIERICK observed, that the ?atholfSs of Ie)nd had s strongc desire to have burial-places in suppresd,- convIntI; and it the existing law vas altered, he had no doubt tbat gyxenge- nfents would be made for that purpose with the prcrpnlemrs Lford HOLLA ?ND was convinced by what the noble -earl h,'I stated,that the object of the bill was conciliatory.;butstilltethought it ought not to te hurried forward with so much hlate. Lord KING undcYstood that a request for permission to perform the Roman Catholfe servicc was to be made to the clergymnan of thepa-ish. Why not ,nt*th, words " which -he is hereby required fo grant ?" The obliZtalion ought to be, diistinctly ex- pressed. It seemed that the 'riecs5itv tor- this bill, had arisen in consequence of the conduct of sonWe tholish clergymen. thad been said,tbat the constitution of this coTL3try was essentially Pro. testant, and it appeared that the clergy had only thought that the chuirchyrTd OughIt to be essentially Protestanit Alw. Thie bill, how- ever, was very w.isely framed in accordance with -the advit which had been given to some of those obstinate clergymen, which 57a5 to leave the outside of the church to the Catholics, if they wishl1h to keep the inside of it to themselves. The Barl of DARNLtEY said a few words in explanation, arndl ia favour of the principle of the measure. - Tbe Earl of DARROU.By spoke at considerable lengthi in support of Ot bill, thebeniefits of which, he obserCLed, wvle not con- fined to Catholics, but extended 50 all descriptions of Dissenters. rFhere hiad been instances of permis.Nion to attend a fuperal in a. parish churchyard having been refised -to Presbyterian clerg'men. Suchi refusal would be prevenited by this bit; for, Rs the intention of Parliament was so clearly expressed, the pemlsslan gliven in ate clause which had been referred to was synonywOus v7t ,'b lifatioi. lie thought it improper to delay proceeding with ;he b'il, becau,se its postponement would only affbrd an opportunity Zr the irritation of parties and excitinig opposition. ' Lord HOLLAND, In co;sequence of wvhat he had hq%rd from the other side, and mnore particularly from the noble earl whb; k'onke last, would give his cordial and warm support to the lbil. fle .id nOt altolether concur iD the necessity of passing the billimmediately, hut, taking the object to be as described, he was must friendly to it. The petition was then laid on the table, anti the htinse resolvec into a committee on he hill. Sonie verbal amendments were Made, nad the report was ordercd to be br6stghi up to_morrow. The silk dutiek bill was read thirt tiue, and passed. Adiourned. unypTT or rORDS. TUESDAYr, APRIL 6_