of the Catholic Church-it enacted that a sees, in colonies. My reason, however, for Bishop might be consecrated by one instead rising is to express my full concurrence of by three Bishops; but that Bill having in what fell from the most rev. Prelate been withdrawn we have nothing to do (the Archbishop of Canterbury) and the with it now. What we have to regard is two noble Earls, when they fully acthe prospect of legislation in the future. knowledged the great importance of this The noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvou) subject, and the propriety of its being seems to think there is no real force in the considered with reference to the opinions desire expressed by the petitioners that the of the colonists themselves. We received supremacy of the Crown should be main- a general statement last Session of the tained; and he showed very lucidly how desire of the colonists to be altogether difficult it is in the totally different circum- set at liberty, as it was called-from the stances of the colonial Churches to maintain fetters by which they were bound to the the Royal supremacy in the way in which Church and State at home. It is now it is maintained at home. But I think acknowledged that there is a great diverthe noble Earl has not done sufficient jus- sity of opinion on this subject, and this is a tice to the importance of one point-very important point. I mentioned on a namely, the consecration of Bishops under former occasion that I had taken the liberty licence or mandate from the Crown. I of writing letters to many of the Bishops attach much importance to that point on and clergymen in the colonial dioceses; account of a recent decision, as your Lord- and in that manner I have obtained a ships are aware, of the Rolls' Court. full explanation of the opinions entertained Many think that by the decision to which in thirty of these dioceses. My own calI refer a great deal of light has been thrown culation is that colonial opinion on the sub. on this complicated question, while others ject is pretty equally divided between those no doubt think it has made the question who wish to be free and those who desire more obscure. But be this as it may, that to keep up the connection as pointed out in decision has been much canvassed in the the decision of the Rolls' Court. It may colonies; and, as I understand it, the re- be true that these persons scarcely undersult of the judgment of the Rolls' Court is stand the whole difficulty of the matter; that a Bishop consecrated under licence or but if the subject be brought before us in mandate from the Crown is in a different the shape of a Bill it would be of the utmost position from a Bishop consecrated without importance that the Bill should go before a that licence or mandate. The judgment Select Committee, and that evidence should lays down this-that if a Bishop be con- be taken as to the opinions and wishes of secrated by the authority of the Crown and the colonists. I hold in my hand two goes to a colony with a territory assigned petitions one from the Cape diocese, to him, within that territory he has the and the other from the diocese of Grahamssame powers as a Bishop at home, with town. These are, I believe, an expression this difference, that, whereas the latter may of the opinion of the minority in these make good his claim by appeal to his own places. It is of great importance that court and to that of the Archbishop, such a the opinion of the minorities in the seveBishop in the colonies can only make good ral dioceses as well as of the majorities his claim in a civil court, which, in conse- should be considered. The petitioners quence of his having been consecrated by say it has been laid down by the Privy mandate or licence, will maintain his power Council that in the colonies members of according to the law of the Church of Eng- the Church of England are in the same land. If that be law, it makes all the position as the members of any other body; difference whether a Bishop be consecrated but that they are not if you prevent by licence or mandate from the Crown or them from that which they consider esnot; and therefore the petitioners are not sential to their Church-namely, a condesiring anything altogether impossible or nection with the Crown of England as reuseless when they ask that the Royal su- gards the appointment of Bishops and a premacy may be maintained. What they strict adherence to the doctrines and prindesire is simply this-that matters should ciples of the Church of England. It is remain in statu quo-that the decision of true there may be a voluntary agreement the Rolls' Court, which has not been ap- to adhere to the doctrines and principles of pealed against, should remain the true ex- the Church of England; but, on the other position of the law as regards the status of hand, there may not, and persons who Bishops now in possession of sees, or quasi- are attached members of the Church of their fathers may thus be forced into a position, which on principle they repudiate. A very strong feeling exists among the colonists in favour of maintaining their connection with the Church in which they were baptized, and to which their forefathers belonged; and that feeling is not growing weaker, but has been strengthened owing to the facilities of communication which now exist between the mother country and the colonies. In fact, is it not true that many of those who formerly looked forward to the entire separation of the colonies from this country, as was the case with the ancient republics and their colonies, have now modified their opinion, in view of the opportunities which exist for colonists to visit the mother country, and of the increasing desire manifested on their part to keep up their connection with Great Britain? The right rev. Prelate then presented the petitions he had referred to. lonial Churches. If he saw any danger of a loss of that uniformity, he should be ready to entertain the question; but he thought the apprehension expressed on the subject argued a lack of faith-evinced a want of faith in the truth and position of the Anglican Communion, which was highly derogatory to it. There was not the slightest danger to be apprehended on that point. All the evidence showed that if there had been any danger of that kind, it would have been realized in the Episcopal Church of America. The United States obtained their independence under circumstances ill calculated to foster any affection towards the secular or ecclesiastical institutions of the mother country; yet the Episcopalian body in that country, instead of deviating from the doctrines of the parent Church, came and sought ordination for their bishops in this country. The American Church, indeed, rendered great service in promoting friendly relations between the United States and this country, and this had been recently shown in a very interesting way. When the Civil War broke out, the Northern and Southern Churches naturally separated, in the expectation that they would belong to different commonwealths, but when the contest came to an end overtures for reunion were promptly made. There was some difficulty as to a bishop of either section preaching the opening sermon at the triennial convocation, and it was settled by the choice of the Bishop of Montreal, who went over to Philadelphia and took part in the consecration of some bishops, great satisfaction being expressed at his presence and fellowship with them; and it was a remarkable fact that he was the first bishop connected with the colony who assisted at the consecration of the American bishops. The Americans had always shown the strongest affection for the Church of this country. thought there was at present no need of legislation to secure uniformity of doctrine in the colonial Churches. He hoped that in any legislation that might be adopted that nothing might be done or thought of upon that particular point. Some colonies might desire a connection with the mother Church in one form, others in another : and he did not see why the colonies LORD REDESDALE said, he condemned should not be permitted to adopt their the practice of discussing this question own views with regard to their connection on the assumption of a departure from with the Church in this country, or even unity of doctrine on the part of the co-to separate from it if they thought it best. VOL. CLXXXVI. [THIRD SERIES.] 0 LORD MONCK trusted that in any measure that might be framed upon this subject we should not throw overboard in matters of an ecclesiastical nature the principle which had been adopted with such eminent success in civil matters-namely, that of leaving the colonists the most perfect liberty to manage their own affairs. That was the object of the Bill of last year, and such he knew was the intention of his noble Friend (the Earl of Carnarvon) to have carried out, had he remained in office as Secretary to the Colonies. He was satisfied that the connection between the Church of England and the Church in the colonies could not be maintained by any attempt on the part of Parliament to coerce them into uniformity; but by trusting to the identity of religious sentiment-to that good feeling towards this country and its institutions generally which he was happy to say prevailed in all our colonies. He could speak from his recent connection with our great colony of Canada, to the vitality, growth, and vigour which the Church had obtained in that colony from the complete freedom of government which it enjoyed; and he was sure, both with regard to the feelings of the country and the best interests of the colonies, they would do well to base any measure which the Government might be about to introduce on the principles which had been enunciated by his noble Friend. He Their great object must be to sweep away | to the House and the country to know that that which had created the difficulty, and an intention existed at the Colonial Office to do all that was encouraging, and that to put an end to the state of uncertainty would give the greatest amount of liberty. in which those connected with the colonial And if they proceeded in that spirit he did Church were placed, so far as legislation not see the necessity of a long inquiry as could do so. to what their legislation should be. LORD TAUNTON said, he had so recently expressed his opinion on this subject that he should not on the present occasion trouble the House with many observations. He had ever approached this subject with great distrust. Nothing could be more unfortunate than that schisms should arise in the colonial Churches-one party constituting itself a Free Church and the other continuing a sort of quasi-Establishment. It was fervently to be desired that the members of the colonial Church should guard against internal dissensions. The noble Lord (Lord Monck) had testified to the energy and self-reliance displayed by the Canadian Church after it had obtained the power of self-government; and the American Church, though it had had an independent existence of nearly a hundred years, had not, he believed, deviated in any material point of doctrine from the English Church, though it had made a few alterations in the Prayer Book, some of which were regarded as advantageous by many persons in this country. He trusted the Government would not permit the matter to rest, but would speedily introduce a Bill with a view to having the question settled. The Colonial Office had excellent legal assistance and the best information to enable it to prepare a satisfactory meaHe especially desired that the measure which he hoped soon to see would not be referred to a Select Committee, but that the whole responsibility would be thrown upon the House at large; and he trusted their Lordships would deal with the whole subject impartially and comprehensively. sure. EARL STANHOPE joined in the desire that the subject might be taken up by the Colonial Office; and he also hoped that the noble Duke now at the head of that Department (the Duke of Buckingham) might adopt the views of his predecessor in office in framing a measure to settle this difficult question. In asking him, however, his intentions with respect to this question, he did not press for hasty or precipitate legislation, for he felt that there would be difficulty in dealing with this question when there were matters of the utmost urgency pressing upon the attention of the House of Commons; but it would be satisfactory THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM said, he thought it would not be advantageous, hav ing regard to future discussions upon the subject, if he were to enter at all upon the merits of the measures which had been suggested or to make any remarks upon the discussion which had taken place. He would, however, say that he participated very largely in the opinion expressed by his predecessor in office when he said it was advisable that the question should be submitted at no very distant day to the consideration of Parliament; and he also agreed with the remark that it was desir able when the question was submitted that it should assume the shape of a Bill introduced on the responsibility of the Government. Although some little delay might have arisen from official changes, he believed that in the course of a few days he would be able to submit to his Colleagues a measure which he hoped they would approve, and authorize him to intro duce to their Lordships. THE EARL OF HARROWBY, in reply, expressed his concurrence in the opinion that nothing of a coercive measure ought to be attempted. All that the colonists desired was that security should be taken in some form or another for the continued connection of the colonial with the mother Church. Petitions ordered to lie on the table. METROPOLITAN POOR BILL—(No. 45.) (The Earl of Devon.) COMMITTEE. House in Committee (according to Order.) THE EARL OF CARNARVON expressed his satisfaction at finding the Bill before their Lordships' House. The position of the metropolitan work houses last year was absolutely discreditable and disgraceful; but he now hoped in twelve months' time to see a radical change, and the entire re moval of those evils which at present existed. He congratulated his right hon. Friend the President of the Poor Law Board upon the ability he had shown in dealing with this question; and he thought their best thanks were due to those inde pendent gentlemen who last year used their best endeavours to bring the condition of the London workhouses to light; and to show the necessity for some radical change in their management. They no doubt felt great satisfaction at the result of their labours. About this time last year he urged upon the right hon. Gentleman who was then the President of the Poor Law Board (Mr. Villiers) the adoption of certain rules as the proper basis of a measure on this subject, those rules having been recommended by the highest medical and surgical authorities in the metropolis. The right hon. Gentleman frankly admitted the necessity of them; and he was glad to find that they had, without exception, been embodied in this Bill by his successor. There were two other matters of an administrative character which he pointed out at the same time-namely, that the whole of the sick poor should be placed upon the common fund; and that a central representative Board should be created in London for the administration of the Poor Law. In those respects the right hon. Gentleman had not quite carried out the principles which he had recommended. Under the Bill, one-third of the indoor poor and the whole of the outdoor poor, with respect to the dispensation of medicines, would be made a common charge. This was a valuable step in the direction he desired, and he understood that his right hon. Friend contemplated further alterations in the administrative system, and possibly looked forward to a Central Board armed with still larger powers than those given in the Bill. He cordially approved the measure, and rejoiced to find that it had now passed through nearly all its stages. THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY said, he also wished to state that he looked upon the measure as most beneficial, and he believed he might say that it had been so received by the country. It was read the other night paragraph by paragraph at a large meeting of working men, and every paragraph was received with the utmost satisfaction. There were, however, one or two points to which he thought it necessary to direct attention. The Bill proposed to deal with the insane hitherto confined in workhouses on an entirely new footing. It was intended to erect large edifices of the nature of branch workhouses for the reception of the sick and insane poor, some of those buildings being capable of accommodating as many as 500 patients. It was necessary, therefore, to consider what was the state of the law as to placing and detention of lunatic paupers in such places. It had been decided that there was no power under the statute law to detain any one in a workhouse against his will, and difficulties sometimes arose from such inmates wishing to leave, and the masters endeavouring to detain them. Now that this transfer was to be made to large asylums it was absolutely necessary that a law should be defined-first, as to what persons were to be confined in the new buildings, as also the same protection against the detention of sane persons which was provided in the case of county asylums. The clause described those who were to be shut up in those asylums in the general term "insane," but cases of insanity were very variable, and he thought that some attention should be paid to that point. Again, the mixing up under the old system of insane with sane paupers gave the protection to the former, in case of wrong or injury done to them, of the testimony of reliable witnesses, whereas this proposal would deprive them of that security. He remembered a prosecution for ill-using a lunatic in which, though the testimony of his companions was very clear and decided, it was naturally received with caution, and the accused was consequently acquitted. He knew that the Poor Law Board were empowered to make stringent regulations; but he feared that unless the law respecting the admission of these patients were clearly laid down, the protection and treatment of lunatics might be unfavourably affected. THE EARL OF DEVON was gratified to find that the Bill, as a whole, had the approval of the noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury), whose zeal and interest in the well-being of the poor were so well known. With regard to the clauses relating to lunatics, he wished to point out, without expressing an opinion upon the special points to which the noble Earl referred, that the object of the Bill, so far as it went, was to ameliorate the condition of the insane poor. He thought that the condition of the insane poor would be greatly improved by their being placed in a separate asylum. The noble Earl had referred to the want of protection of the insane poor in these asylums; but he would see that the 30th clause authorized the Lunacy Commissioners to appoint one of their officers a mem ber of the board of management, and by Treasury over public expenditure. Since that means they would be fully cognizant he had held office at the Treasury they had of the state of the poor in the asylum. had applications from almost every branch of The observations of his noble Friend the Civil Service for an increase of salary; would receive the careful consideration of and if every such application was to be folthe Department. lowed up in that House by the putting of Questions like the present, it would be exBill reported, without Amendment; ceedingly difficult for any person in his and to be read 3a on Monday next. position to retain a proper control over the public expenditure. House adjourned at Seven HOUSE OF COMMONS, Friday, March 22, 1867. MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-Ordered-Bridges (Ireland); Metropolitan Water Supply; Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act (1851) Amend ment.* First Reading-Ecclesiastical Titles Act Repeal * [84]; Policies of Insurance [85]; Bridges (Ireland) [86]; Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act (1851) Amendment * [87]; Metropolitan Water Supply* [88]. MR. J. M. HALL AND THE ROYAL BOUNTY SIR JOHN SIMEON said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether a grant has been made from the Royal Bounty Fund to Mr. J. M. Hall, of Fisher Street, Carlisle; on what ground and at whose recommendation such grant was made; whether he is aware of the character and antecedents of Mr. Hall; and, whether the money so granted has been actually paid? MR. HUNT said, in reply, that an ap plication was made by the person named by the hon. Gentleman to the First Lord of the Treasury for a grant from the Royal Bounty Fund, representing himself to be a literary person in distressed circumstances. Lord Derby believed the Report-Consolidated Fund (£7,924,000); In-statement, and was about to direct that Second Reading-Factory Acts Extension [62]; closure * [72]. CLERKS OF CONVICT PRISONS. MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, If the Lords of the Treasury in December 1865 received a Petition from the Clerks of the Convict Prisons, praying that their salaries might be increased, the same being recommended by the Governor Colonel Henderson; and if in December 1866 their Lordships received a further Petition from the same parties with the same prayer, and whether any decision has yet been come to regarding it, and if there is any hope that their expectations may be realized? MR. HUNT, in reply, said, the present Question was nearly identical in its terms with one which the hon. Member put to him three weeks ago, and which he then answered. The petition sent in at the end of 1866 was received and the matter referred to another Department, and it was still under consideration. But he wished to point out to the hon. Gentleman that every question of that nature was, more or less, a remonstrance against the control exercised by the the issue should be made to him from that Fund; but it came to his knowledge that he was not a deserving person, and therefore the intention was revoked, and the grant not made. IRELAND-TYRONE MAGISTRATES. QUESTION. SIR JOHN GRAY said, that as he wished to make a statement on the subject of the Question he had upon the Paper, to call the attention of the Government to the observations reported to have been made by Mr. Justice Keogh, one of Her Majesty's Justices of the Queen's Bench in Ireland, at the Assize Court of the county of Tyrone on Friday last, with reference to the conduct of certain Justices of the Peace for that county, and the alleged consequent failure of justice; and to ask whether any and what steps have been taken by the Irish Executive or the Lord Chancellor for Ireland to institute a full inquiry into the facts of the case and the conduct of the Magistrates referred to, he would postpone his Question till the Motion for going into Supply. |