On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    Chancellor of the Exchequer whether , in appointing this committee he intended to call in question the acts of past Governments , or only to bring upon the late Administration a responsibility for their conduct t If the former , he warned him that he would enter upon a course that would do infinite mischief . —After a debate in which an objection that too few Irish members were included among the number of hon . gentlemen of whom the committee was composed , was urged with much pertinacity by many representatives from the sister isle , on the name of Mr . Baxter being proposed as a member of the committee . Mr . Maguike moved its omission with the view of substituting that of Mr , Hehnessy , but , after some debate , the amendment was negatived on a division by a majority of 135 to 34 , and Mr . Baxter duly nominated to serve on the committee .

    ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF AMENDMENT BILL . On the motion for the second reading of the Roman Catholic Relief Act Amendment Bill , by which ' a Catholic was declared eligible for the office of Lord Chancellor , Mr . Newdegate moved as an amendment . that the bill should be read a second time that day six months . He argued at some length against the measure as being an invasion of the Protestant constitution , and practically abrogating the settlement of 1829 . —The amendment was seconded by Sir Brooke BRir > oES . ^ -Mr . Caedwell supported the bill , which was framed , as lie contended , strictly in accordance with the principles of the Act of 1829 . That principle recognised the

    complete equality of Catholics and Protestants , limited only by one or two special exceptions based upon causes which did not exist with regard to the appointment of Lord Chancellor of Ireland . — Mr . Whiteside said if the mode in which and the time when this measure was introduced were inconvenient , the arguments by which it was supported were still more objectionable . Sir G , Lewis had asserted that the exception in the Act of Emancipation was owing to an inadvertence of Sir R . Peel ; but , if so , ail the advocates of emancipation were equally mistaken , for this very exception was found in all the bills , of 1813 , 1821 , and 1825 . The principle kept in view by Sir R . Peel , as shown in his published posthumous papers , was not limited to { the exercise of ecclesiastical patronage by the Irish Lord Chancellor , but had regard to the security

    of the Protestant constitution and the act of settlement , ' since the Lord Chancellor of Ireland as Lord Justice , might ( as the present Lord Chancellor actually did ) exercise delegated regal power in Ireland . He urged various objections to the bill , which he denounced , in strong terms as an insidious as well as an impolitic measure . —The CiiAXCEtLOK of the Excuequeh observed that the late Attorney-General for Ireland appeared to have l-etrogriided very considerably from the tolerant doctrines which he had advocated from the Treasury bench , tie argued that the functions appertaining to the Irish Chancellorship were essentially legal aud secular , and as a disciple of Sir Robert Peel gave his cordial approbation to a measure which merely carried out the principle whereon the enactment of 1829 was bused . —Mr . VValtole maintained that the settlement of

    1829 should not be disturbed , except upon graver causes than had beon shown in favour of the present measure . —Colonel Dioicson moved the adjournment of the debate . — Lord Palmekston hoped that the House would bo allowed to come to a division on a measure respecting which he observed that jniany members seemed already to have made up their minds . The question was a very simple one . Tho office ^) f Irish Chancellor was in all its essential characteristics entirely judicial and civil , and as such there was no reason why Catholic barristers should be barred from access to the highest . prize in their profession . —Mr . Disra ' ism observed that he was surprised at tho tone taken by Lord Palmorston . He did nbt ' fliink tho question quite so clear as Lord Palmerstoii supposod ; on the contrary , it was ono

    been so strongly pronounced in its favour . They were , he believed , more likely to maintain the efficiency of the church and to preserve its hold on the affections of the community by abrogalingrather than by perpetuating . the compulsory impost hitherto levied for its support . The house then divided . For the second reading , 263 ; for the amendment , 193—70 . The bill was then read a second time . The house adjourned at half-past five . Thursday , July 14 .

    In the House of Lords , Lord Stratford de Redcliffe , observing that the armistice between France and Austria had ripened into a peace , withdrew the notice respecting the Italian question which he had postponed on Friday last , but which still remained on the paper . Hudson ' s bat territory . The Duke of . Newcastle , in answer to a question from Lord Carnarvon ^ explained the steps which the Government proposed to take during the present session in reference to the North-American territories , over which the Hudson ' s Bay Company have held an exclusive license of trade with the Indians .

    The measures which were contemplated by the Government at the present moment were the introduction of a bill for the appointment of magistrates , and to lay down rules for the regulation of trade with the Indians . It was not , however , the intention of the Government to extend the charter of the Hudson ' s Bay Company , nor was it proposed by the Colonial-office to assist emigrants . He agreed with Lord Carnarvon that it was highly necessary to establish communications between Canada on the one side ; and "Vancouver's Island on the other ; .. at the same time , although-he ' recognised the value of railways , it was not intended to assist them by means of subsidies .

    ARMING OF COMMERCIAL STEAMSHIPS . Lord Air . lie . asked her Majesty ' s Government whether they had considered , the . expediency of malting arrangements with owners of steam vessels for the " purpose of rendering them fit to carry armaments of heavy guns if required . — -The Duke of Somerset said it had been decided by a committee of naval ar id military officers , appointed in 1852 * that it was inexpedient to render commercial steam vessels fit for war , as it made them / bad ships for war and worse for trade . The use of these ships would be to carry troops and stores , and not to act on the offensive . In certain cases , however , the

    tionBilJ ;—Mr . Dtr Cane moved to defer the second reading for six months . He was prepared , he said , to stand by the existing law , with all its imperfections , rather than give his assent to a measure which he believed to be one of simple spoliation and the first step towards the destruction of the establishment .- —The amendment was seconded by Lord R . Montagu , who observed that this was not merely a question of Church-rate , the ulterior object being to sever Church and State , upon the plea that the State had nothing to do with religion , —a doctrine against which he argued upon both theory and authorities . —Mr . Baines , as a dissenter , disclaimed all hostility to the establishment , but contended that

    every : church ought to depend exclusively upon the support of its own members . —Mr . Adderl ey argued in favour of maintaining the church rate , upon the ground that the impost constituted a common law obligation on the parishioners . The present bill , he observed , by absolutely extinguishing the church rate , deprived those parishes , where the rate had always been voluntarily granted , of their rightful liberties . —Mr . Mellor believed that the churches would be more carefully attended to if they were entirely maintained and repaired by voluntary contributions . —Mr . Packe opposed the bill . —Mr . Hen-NESSY , as a Roman Catholic , supported the amendment . statistical

    —The Home Secretary referred to returns , which showed that the amount actually required for the repair of the church fabrics barely amounted to a rate of one penny in the pound per annum on the mass of assessable property . The objection to the rate , therefore , could : not be on account of the severity of the burden ; it was mainly ' a conscientious objection , founded upon principle . But there were objections which had operated upon members of the Established Church , as where , residing in districts ^ they were called iipon to contribute both to the mother church and the district church ; and where the unpopularity of the minister was made the ground of refusing

    committee had decided that some : few of these vessels in ease of war might be fitted out at an expense of 3 , 0007 . or 4 , 0001 . for the defence of harboursand the mouths of rivers .. He explained that the present Board had sent officers to inquire how far steam-tugs might be available for the defence of the mouth of the river , but he did riot suspect a very favourable report on the subject ; The question which had been put by Lord Airlie had met with due consideration from the Government , but it was not their present intention to reopen tlie matter . — Lord HAitDwicicE agreed with the First Lord . Their lordships adjourned at half-past seven . In the House of Commons , Sir , T . Suelley gave notice , that in the event of the City of London Corporation Bill reaching the stage of committee heshould move clauses providing that the votes taken under that measure should be recorded by ballot . The Home Seorbtaky , in answer to a subsequent question , stated that , contrary to his expectation , some considerable opposition was threatened against the bill , and promised to fix an early day for the second reading .

    a rate . The result was , that while in a vast rriajdrity : of the exclusively rural parishes Churchrates encountered little or no objection , in a large number of towns they were withheld : Hence , owing to this difference , every attempt to levy one uniform rate in all parishes , rural and town , would break down . After examining various plans which had been proposed for dealing with the practical difficulties since the decision of the House of Lords , and the objections they had provoked , he observed , that he saw no reasonable prospect of the Government being able to prevail upon the House to agree to a compromise ; and , although he did not deny that there were valid objections to the general and total abolition of a cornpulsory rate , he was prepared to give his vote in favour of the

    second" reading of this Bill . In the event of the Legislature passing the measure he thought it might be possible to establish an organised parochial system , which would facilitate the receipt , custody , and administration of a voluntary rate for the maintenance of church fabrics . —Lord J . Manners eulogised the bill brought forward by Mr . Walpole , and regarded it , as a liberal compromise . —Lord Fermoy controverted the assertion that the present measure was calculated to weaken or injure the established church . — Mr . II . Dru . mmond insisted that the primary object of the bill was to undermine the establishment . None but hypocrites , he declared , could deny that fact for a moment . —Lord Palmerston acknowledged that he had never voted for bills of similar tenour to that before the House . He

    acknowledged also that his private opinion upon the subject of chuTch rates had undergone no change . But public opinion had . beeu expressed so often and so strongly in favour . of the bill both in and out of Parliament that ho felt compelled to surrender his individual prepossessions , arid was accordingly willing to vote for tho second reading . He trusted that when the measure came before the committee some means would l » o devised to insure a provision for tho due maintenance of the church fabrics which were thus denuded ai their legally-provided funds . - —Mr . DienA-BLX ironically complimented Lord Palmorston upon his frank avowal of a change of opinion , but tho question was , ho remarked , whether having changed his opinion he had indicated any course that would justify tho House in recognising

    INDIAN ARMY . In the House of Commons , qn the order for going into a Committee of Supply , Mr . H . Baillib called attention to the report of the commissioners appointed to inquire into the organisation of tho Indian nnny . An opinion was expressed in the report , that henceforth an army of not less than 80 , 000 European troops should be permanently retained in our Indian empire . Now , there would , bo much difficulty , in ni » opinion , in maintaining such an army i » Jn < lIft m time of war . The force now in that country was about 85 , 000 men : but tho consequonco had been liad not been

    that , in epito of all our efforts , wo able to raiso in this country the number of menvoted by Parliament , last year by ^ f ' " ™ t ad been obliged to anil out 25 , 000 militia to do the ucy of regular troops ; bo that the nnny was deficient 85 , 000 mon . Tho question was , could we , with voluntary enlistment , raiso nnd maintain no Ia . geanar . nya 8 to alloir of a permanent force of 80 , 000 mon being kopt i « I"din , with duo regard to the wants of our numerous colonies nnd the exigenoios of tho mother country in the event of war ? He inquired whether the Secretary of btftto for India intended to bring this question before tlie House . —

    him as one competent to recommend a policy so different from that lie had hitherto followed . Was the course which tlie Government were taking a safe course ? They changed their opinion because a ' charge was necessary , but shrunk from the responsibility * of proposing a measure to moot the necessities of tUo case . Ho admitted that tho present state of this question was highly unsatisfactory , but it was tho duty of tho Government either to support the present law , or at once to accept the policy recommended by Sir J . Trolawny , and tell the House fulrly that while they accepted that policy they were not prepared to offer a substitute for it . — Lord J . Wusswtx signified lite adherence to the bill entirely on the ground tUnt public opinion had

    Sir O . Wood replied that tho present Crovernrnent had not had time to consider a , subject of so much difficulty and importance . —General Peex took th

    of very considerable difficulty as to the functions exercised by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland . Ho did not say that a great settlement should not bo disturbed , if tho change were justly required ; but this ought to bo shown . Ho should like tho question to be referred to a sulcct committee ,--The Hoaiifl SBcuETAitY supported the bill , but was willing to consent to tho proposition for referring it , after the second reading , to a select' committee . The House divided on tho question that tho debate should be adjourned . Thore appeared- — Ayes , 142 ; noos , 210 —68 . Tho discussion , which hud become very confused , was renewed and pursued for some time . At last the motion for adjourning the debate waa renewed and agreed to , and the further progress of the bill stands posponed until Tuesday next . The House then adjourned at two o ' clock . Wednesday , July 13 . CHUROU KATUS . At the mid-day sitting of tho Housrc of Commons , Mr . Dxllwtn , in tho absence of Sir J . Trelawny , moved the second reading of the Church-rates Aboli-

    Untitled Article

    No . 486 . Jui-y 16 , 1859-3 THE LEADER . 833

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), July 16, 1859, page 833, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2303/page/5/