On this page
-
Text (2)
-
July 19, 1851.] ' ®fK *» . ¦« »«» «"
-
In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Bi...
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.
-
-
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.
Parliament Of The Week. The Saturday Sit...
Mr LAB 0 tJ 6 HBBB said , that the motion ought not to be called one to ask the House to restore protection to the Irish millers , but to restore the corn laws . He thought it could be proved that the corn millers had had more to do since the repeal of the corn laws than ever . And he thus stated the causes of the apparent distress . " A creat alteration in the circumstances of trade was Koingon ; those alterations he believed were in operation before any alteration had taken place in the law renulatine the importation of corn . In many instances the smaller millers had been obliged to give up their trade in consequence of the establishment of steam-mills and the introduction of machinery . He was informed that near Blackfriars-bridge an immense manufactory of this kind had been established , where they could rapidly turn out 7000 or 8000 sacks of wheat with 60 or 70 pair of stones .
They were doing an immense business , and supplanting a number of persons who had been doing business elsewhere . ( Hear , hear . ) He did not complain of any want of enterprise on the part of the millers . He thought they could compete with their foreign rivals ; but he also thought that this competition had made them look about and adopt some improvements from their neighbours which would prove to their advantage . { Hear , hear . ) The competition had operated as a stimulus to the milling interest . It had induced the millers to improve their machinery , and he was informed that the greatest improvements are taking place in milling , both here and abroad . A very ingenious plan had been introduced in the grinding operations in the dockyard at Deptford , and from experience of it hitherto , there was reason to believe that it was eminently successful , and that the result would be such as to induce them to continue it . "
He was convinced that the Free-trade system had materially improved the condition of the poor ; and he referred to a report from the " district visitors " of the metropolis which supported his statement . When Mr . Labouchere sat down , the debate took a turn , which he certainly had partly provoked . It became openly a Free-trade and Protection debate . Mr . Wilson restored it to the original question , sustaining , of course , the free importation of flour . He showed quite as strongly as Mr . Labouchere that improved machinery was making a change in the trade , and effecting a vast saving of labour . When the House divided , there
were—For the motion , 93 ; against it , 128 . Majority against , 35 . In the House of Commons on Wednesday , the new Bill on the Law of Evidence passed through committee . The main point of novelty in this measure coneists in the admission of parties in a suit to give evidence in their own favour . It was privately expected that the Attorney-General would let the bill fall through ; but , to the surprise of many , he fairly stated the evils of the present system , arising from the inability of persons to give evidence in their own cause , and very cordially defended and expounded the provisions of the bill to meet those evils .
The proceedings in the House on Thursday , after the Horfield affair was disposed of , consisted entirely of voting supplies , chiefly for diplomatic services and consular establishments . Mr . Ukquhaiit moved that the vote of £ 148 , 490 for consular establishments , should be reduced by £ 4000 . The ground upon which he based his motion was , that our consular system was a mass of irregularity , disorganization , and unfitness . A variety of large salaries were paid which ought to be . small salaries , and many posts set up where none were needed . Lord Palmehston , thinking himself better qualified to judge of the matter , asserted the contrary opinion . Ours was the " most efficient consular service in the world . " On a division , Mr . Urquhart ' s motion was negatived by Io 3 to 43 . Various other votes were agreed to , and the House adjourned .
July 19, 1851.] ' ®Fk *» . ¦« »«» «"
July 19 , 1851 . ] ' ® fK *» . ¦« »«» « "
In The House Of Lords, On Monday, The Bi...
In the House of Lords , on Monday , the Bishop of Oxfoiid brought under the consideration of the House the Harficld Kstate controversy between the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol and Mr . Horsman . The defence presented by the Bishop of Oxford was the letter of Dr . Monk , of which we last week gave u full account . He summed up the whole case thus : — " Now , what he had to state in answer to the charges was this , that the Diahop of Gloucester received that estate of Horiicld upon precisel y the name footing that lie received the other estates belonging to the see of Bristol ; that there was no understanding , direct or indirect , in reference to that estate ; that in dealing with thut t'Stiitc he . was not violating any rule of honour which l » in predecessors had acknowledged : thut he did
not do what ho said it would be a shame to perpetrate ; that he did what the Legislature intended him to do \ v \ \\ i every property of the see over which he was placed ; that he entered into a negotiation with the Ecclcaiaoticul CoininiHHioncrB of Iiih own free will , and in order that he might do a signal service to the Church ; that hit * object avuh frustrated by a legal difficulty which prevented the luw officers of the Crown from carrying out the order of council ; und that then ho had not put thin cutntc of three lives in his own power , but had taken the step which he thought best in order to enable , him to carry out the liberal intention which he first formed and still entertained , but which he would not state , lest it should team to be the result , not of an honourable intention on his part , but of the pressure to which he was now exposed . A hat wu thocaae . "
He added , however , some new matter . With regard to the moral obligation pressing on Dr . Monk , to part with the estate , the Bishop of Oxford adduced the following resolution , copied from the books of the Ecclesiastical Commission : — " The bishop having been under no obligation , legal or equitable , to deal with the Horfield estate other than with any other estate of his see , and having made , with regard to it liberal offers to the board , the board are anxious to avoid all needless delay in bringing the negotiation to a close . ( Hear , hear . )" And he thus continued : —
" The remaining charge was that , on the dropping of the last life , the bishop had renewed the lea ' se in the way he had said he would never renew it . Now , how was that ? If his right reverend friend had renewed that lease by selling it to a second party , as was commonly the case , allowing him to put three lives upon it , he would have done the thing he said he would not do ; but he put in his secretary as a nominal lessee to represent himself , and he then filled up the lease with three lives in order to retain full power over it , so as to carry out the improvements which , from first to last , had been his object . He now possessed the power to determine that lease , and was able to carry out all the improvements he
desired . ( Hear . ) He had already laid out a large sum in enfranchising the copyhold . He had received nothing , but spent much , and , to avoid the reproach of grasping he gave up an estate which he held in commendam of the same amount which he received from this estate . ( Hear . ) But it was said , that his children would have the benefit of the estate to the third life , he only having given up the commendam which he held for his own life . Now , when the bishop was in negotiation with the Commissioners for selling the lease , the terms were £ 11 , 500 . So fully was it believed that the scheme would be carried into effect that the purposes of the bishop with regard to it became accidentally known , in consequence of which
an official statement was made to his clergy as to the manner in which he intended to appropriate that sum . Some years before he had laid by , out of his own private fortune , £ 5000 for a college in Bristol , which appeared to be very desirable . He had not given it , Ijecause he thought it would not be just to his children , but he advanced it on the condition that his children should receive it back again . Recent circumstances had made it very problematical whether it would ever be repaid , and he therefore arranged that , if his family did not receive back £ 5000 out of the £ 11 , 500 , £ 5000 should go to repay his family , and the £ 6500 shpuld go to endow small livings in the diocese of Bristol . ( Hear , hear . )"
And he asked whether a man who intended so to appropriate the money was likely to have used it for his own selfish advantage ? The Bishop of Gloucester had so disposed of the estate , because he thought it the best of the only three ways open to him , which were either to let it during his incumbency , or let it for twenty-one years ; and in either case he thought the property would deteriorate , and his contemplated improvements suffer : the third course he had adopted , and filled it up for three lives , not taking a fine and alienating it from , the Church , but putting in one who only represented him as trustee , and so enabling him to carry out his intentions . The Bishop further said : —
" Those who know me best will believe that the same feeling animates me now as before . But I will not at this time enter into any promises or engagements . Those who wiah to know my particular views and intentions must infer them from what I have already done . Spectemur agendo . I have surrendered an equivalent Church income . I have expended a great deal , and committed myself to expend a great deal more , in the permanent improvement of property to which the reversioners contribute nothing , and I have expressed my intention to endow the living on the first avoidance of the rent charge .
It is true I have ulterior views , should my life be spared long enough ; but I will not specify them , nor will I at the present time make the least further promise or engagement . I know the bitter and unscrupulous warfare by which I am assailed . It is impossible for me to say or do anything , however disinterested , to which a bad colour would not be given ; and were I to make a promise with regard to Horfield at the present moment , it would be attributed to the fear of him who has determined , per fas atque nefas , to destroy my character . "
Tho Bishop of Oxford moved for copies of correspondence between tho Ecclesiastical CommiBHion and the Copyhold Commissioners , touching the Horfield Estate . Tho Biuhop of London , Lord Campkki x , and Enrl IIauuowhy testified to tho character and good iutentiouH of tho Bishop of Gloucester , and the motion was agreed to . Lord Brougham seized the opportunity of tho motion for the first reading of the Court of Chancery and Judicial Committee Bill to speak a few farewell wordu for this session ut least , if o auid that he quite
approved of the bill as far us it went , but ho hoped some change would bo made in that part which related to tho Appellate Judicial Committee of the Privy Council . The quorum ought to be four , because on all great ocorifuoiiH there was a majority of three to one when a difference of opinion arose . Certainly it mi ght be objected that the committee might divide two and two ; but in an experience of eighteen years lie had only known that happen once . The other point ho wuh sure would receive attention : ' Tho propriety , not to say necessity , of giving a constant president , or presiding judge , to that judicial
committee . " He then called the attention of tho Lord Chancellor to an important omission : — " Provision was made in this bill to supply another very material defect in the appellate jurisdiction , in cases which rarely occurred , but which had occurred , and which were likely to be of more frequent occurrence—namely , cases involving spiritual questions of a highly important nature , of an exceedingly difficult nature , and which very often , with reverence be it spoken , were of an exceedingly obscure nature . They of the Judicial Committee were admirably adapted to deal with the common
law , with questions of colonial law , with cases of the Consistorial Court , and embracing the learning of the civil law . It was a tribunal well adapted to deal with questions of evidence , whether that which was deserving of the name , the evidence taken at common law , or that which passed under the name , which was taken , or which appeared to be taken , in courts of another description . But with regard to those other matters which were spiri . tually difficult questions , the Judicial Committee had a confused authority , and his brethren had authorized him to confess that with those subjects they felt themselves wholly unfitted to deal . "
Thoughhe thought the measure astep . it was not along step , by no means a stride , in the right direction . He then told the following story , as illustrative of the state of the things in all the courts and in all the branches of the courts at Westminster Hall . " A noble lord present had tried to recover a debt of £ 500 . There being fraud connected with the case , he had to go into Chancery , and £ 1200 costs were expended in obtaining that £ 500 . ( Hear , hear . ) The noble lord succeeded , and perhaps on tolerably cheap terms , considering what the Court of Chancery was—( a laugh )—certainly he had heard of cases where the rate of cost was far higher . But the noble lord would have been better off by £ 700 , had he put up with the loss of the
dG 500 , and declared that he would not , in order to recover it from the fraud-monger , resort to the law-monger , who had thus turned out far the worse of the two , taking £ 700 , which the other had been content to leave . ( Hear , and a laugh . ) In another case , £ 38 , 000 h . id to be distributed—merely distributed . There was not a single debt , and there was no dispute ; and nineteen out of twenty of the claimants would have been alarmed at the very idea of going into Chancery . It was requisite * to take an account ; ' and they said , ' let it be taken by a common accountant , and on no account to go into Chancery . ' But , unhappily , one of the number became bankrupt , and his assignees insisted upon carrying the case into Chancery . It lasted eleven years , from 1840 till 1851 ,
and the costs were £ 2827 ! ( Hear , hear . ) 1 he system was not confined to great cases—it was equally oppressive in the smallest . An infant was entitled to an income of £ 155 a-year . Four years were consumed in Chancery without any opposition or contest , simply in the infant obtaining the income which was his own ; and in getting paid out to him those four years * income , £ 68 a-year , on an average , was expended in the costs of ' common orders and motions of course . ' ( Hear , hear . ) Altogether £ 270 had been expended in costs in a case in which there was no contest , in order to get £ G 20 . ( Hear , hear . ) In another case £ 10 , 000 were claimed . It went into ' Chancery in 1835 . In 1840 , after it had been there five years , a respectable solicitor found it in the Rolls ,
' set down to be heard' in some way , at some stage or other . It had actually in five years , by the ' forcing process' of the Court of Chancery—( a laugh )—ripened bo prematurely—( laughter )—that it was * set down for a hearing' in 1841 ; and the solicitor gave evidence of the case in that year , before the committee of Lord Cottenham . Well , their lordships would scarcely credit it , that same solicitor was , last Tuesday , examined before the committee , over which he ( Lord Brougham ) presided , about that same suit ; and stated that it was ' in the Rolls '—( laughter )—juat set down again for a hearing — ( laughter )—another hearing of some other sort ! And it would take at least five years more before it was ' ripe ' for fiual settlement . ( Hear , hear . ) Why , just conceive
the claimant to have been a young man wanting the money to start in life—unable to obtain it—obliged to start without it ; suppose for India . In 1840 , let it bo supposed , the man starts for India , having learnt that the cause , after five years , has iuat been ' Bet down for hearing in the Holla . ' ( Laughter . ) Eleven or twelve years elapse , the man comes home , and inquires about his £ 1000 and the cause . 'Oh , it is just set down for hearing in the Rolls' ! ' In the Rolla' ! he might exclaim : ' why , I left it there twelve years ago ! ' ( Laughter . ) ' Well , at all events , I hope , it is ripe for final decision now ? ' ' Not at all ; it will take at least five years further to settle it ! ' * Oh , I may as well go back to Inditt again ! ' might the poor claimant exclaim . ( Hear , hear ,
and laughter . ) And nearly £ 2000 had already been expended in recovering that £ 1000—about 200 per cent . ! ( Hear , hear . ) Why , well might the man exclaim , ' Let me go back to India ! They have cobra de capcllo there , they have boa constrictors , the } ' have tigers andjunglo fevers , ami all sorts of horrid reptiles , but , at all cventu , they have not this dreadful place which , as he dared not name , should be nameleaa . ( Laughter . ) In another instance , nurratcd by one of the taxing-matters , Mr . Follctt , brother to the late loved and . lamented ISir William Follett , there had been £ 90 costs incurred about a question whether £ 10 should be expended in repairing part of a house—a certain necessary place which he would no more name than lie would the court
to which he referred . ( Laughter . ) In there had been a reference to the Master for impertinence , « . e ., for the insertion of matter unnecessary m the proceedings , which , of course , increased llie cipeiine . It wa » a gross and glaring cuse , and the Mauter allowed £ 20 to the party comi » lai « ii « K , «» o ™ er to compenaate him for the ousts . The other party appealed to tho Vice Chancellor ; the order w * a alHrmed . lue appellant carried hi » appeal to the Chancellor > the decrc « vraa
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), July 19, 1851, page 3, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_19071851/page/3/
-