Page images

ments were not for their benefit, compelling the emancipation of the and preferred the voluntary prin- West Indian Blacks, and on other ciple-if that was their deliberate occasions. conclusion—they must follow their The amendment was supported own will. Self-government in local by Lord St. Leonards, with a long concerns was the only principle technical examen of the effect of upon which we could retain Ca- previous compacts and statutes. nada; and if our legislation was The Bill was supported by Lord founded upon generous principles, Lyttelton and the Bishop of Northe connection would continue and wich, on the ground of the pracbe a source of prosperity to both tical necessity of leaving such matcountries.

ters to the conscientious responsi. Upon a division, the third read. bility of the colonists themselves. ing was carried by 288 to 208, and The Earl of Derby put the conthe Bill passed.

test on a new footing. If he had In the House of Lords, on the been minister, no consideration on 22nd of April, the Duke of New- earth-not even the chance of the castle moved the second reading of severance of Canada from this the Bill, giving a masterly and country-could have induced him close exposition of the history and to disturb the settlement of 1840. arguments that justify the final sur But he could not shut his eyes to render of the clergy reserves to the the altered state of the question, colonial Legislature. He showed from the promises of two succesfrom the example of the episcopal sive Governments, and the sanction endowments, which the state of of the Commons in passing this New York has maintained in violate Bill. He was therefore anxious to to the present time, and from the escape from the necessity of giving happy consequence of placing re the Bill a distinct negative; and liance on Canadian loyalty, that the would content himself with moving only policy which can promise hope, in Committee certain propositions, either for church or union, is that granting more extensive power to of trusting to the colonists out- the Legislature of Canada than right.

the Act of 1791 conveyed, but The Bishop of Exeter moved maintaining inviolate and for ever " That the Bill be not read for six all the appropriations for the Church months." He sustained this amend- of Scotland or for the Church of ment with the old arguments, that England. the Bill could only pass if Parlia Earl Grey eloquently warned ment would reserve a guarantee the House against the wicked atthat the clergy reserves should not tempt to govern Canada in spite of be secularised, and an extensive her Parliament and the wishes of but peculiar array of precedents. her people,-provoking a quarrel He quoted Wilberforce, Romilly, without a chance of success, withEarl Bathurst, Sir Fowell Buxton, out a retreat of honour; precipiLord John Russell, Mr. Stanley tating the severance of which the (of Alderley), and Mr. Gladstone, late Colonial Secretary admitted to support the principle that the the risk. In the course of his Imperial Parliament has power to able speech, Lord Grey utterly decontrol the Colonial Parliaments; nied the right of any Parliament and that, in fact, it has done so, in or of any one generation to bind

succeeding Parliaments or succeed- by the said last-recited Act; that ing generations.

is to say, the share allotted and On the understanding of Lord appropriated to the Church of EngDerby's intention, the Bishop of land shall be paid to such persons Exeter said he would not trouble as shall be from time to time aptheir Lordships to divide, and the pointed to receive the same by the Bill was then read a second time. Society for the Propagation of the

On the 25th of April, the Earl Gospel in Foreign Parts, and the of Derby, in accordance with the share allotted to the Church of intention announced by him, on Scotland to such person as shall the House going into Committee be from time to time appointed by upon the Bill, moved the following the Board of Commissioners electamendment to the first clause : ed, or to be elected, under the pro“ Provided always, that nothing visions of the said Act.” herein contained shall be construed He described this amendment to affect the interest and dividends as based on a principle so sacred accruing upon the investment of that their Lordships would agree the proceeds of clergy reserves to it if they entered upon its dissold or to be sold, or the interest cussion free from party prejudice. to accrue upon sales on credit of It would place unappropriated lands clergy reserves under the authority absolutely at the disposal of the of an Act passed in the 8th year Canadian Legislature: as respects of the reign of King George IV., existing appropriations, he held entitled An Act to authorise the the old compact to be still binding, sale of a part of the Clergy Re. though he would not go the length serves in the provinces of Upper of saying that it was possible for and Lower Canada,' nor any rents any man to bind successive Parliaarising from clergy reserves that ments. But the appropriations may have been or may be demised have been rendered the inalienfor any term of years under the able property of the churches of authority of the said Act, nor the England and Scotland; and the interest or dividends accruing upon compact of 1840 maintained the the investment of such portions of distinction between prospective and the proceeds of any sales of such retrospective power set up by the clergy reserves effected before the Act of 1791. If the House affirmed passing of this Act, under the au- the Bill as it stood, it would affirm thority of an Act passed in the Lord Grey's corollary from it, that fourth year of her present Majesty, the Church is dependent on the entitled • An Act to provide for the State, and its revenues are at the sale of the Clergy Reserves in the disposal of the State ; and that province of Canada, and for the rule might be applied to the Church distribution of the proceeds thereof,' in England, or still more to the as are by the said Act appropriated Church in Ireland. He defended respectively to the churches of himself against the charge of England and Scotland, in Canada; having diminished the number of but that all and every the proceeds bishops in Ireland, by the effect of of such investments, and all such that measure in rendering the prointerest and rents as aforesaid, shall perty of the Church inviolate. He continue to be appropriated and criticised the vacillating conduct paid in such manner as is directed of ministers in withdrawing the

clause repealing the guarantee; The noble Earl was a great tacconduct which showed that they tician as well as a great orator; had not matured their measure, whether or not such tactics as he and that they could not refuse to had used were appropriate in disrecognise the guarantee of 1840. cussing a Bill of this kind, in order After the declaration of the Duke to obtain a chance majority on a of Newcastle, that the effect of that measure which he did not venture omission would be to continue the to divide against on the second guarantee, Lord Derby heard with reading. They were told the Bill astonishment that the law-officers was sacrilege, and a gross infracof the Crown were of opinion the tion of the rights of property; and guarantee would not be worth any- yet the “ Conservative party" were thing whatever. It was subver so conservative of the rights of the sive of all confidence in the state. Church of Eugland that they would ments of public men, first to tell not divide against the second readthe colonists that the measure left ing of a measure so described. the guarantee unimpaired, and Lord Derby was not only a great then that by some legal construc- tactician, but a great artist; for he tion the provisions of the Bill fell had concealed the vicious principle to the ground the moment the Ca- of the amendment, which was lianadian Legisiature should exercise ble to the same objections as those the power given to them. He de- he had urged against the Bill. He, fied the Government to vindicate the Conservative” leader, the that transaction. It was their im- leader of the landed aristocracy of perative duty to see the guarantee England, came before them that maintained in its integrity, and not night, and called on the House to by shuffling evasions to enable give that respect and stability to themselves to frustrate the guaran- money revenue which he denied to tee. He maintained that the pro- land. It was a novel doctrine from vision for existing interests is in- any one, and more especially from consistent with the argument that a Conservative leader, to say that it is their duty to give uncontrolled he wished, if the Bill should pass, power to the Colonial Legislature. the reservation of existing interests He would rather the Bill passed should be omitted. But had they without any reservation, because, no precedent for the course purhy it they sanction the principle sued by Government? When Lord laid down by the Legislature that Derby abolished ten Irish bishopthe rights belonged to “indivi- rics, he saved the rights of the then duals” and not to the body of existing bishops. As to the guacommunicants or churchmen," and rantee, that would stand on the that, provided existing interests same ground after the Bill had were maintained, they might deal passed as it does at the present with any property whatever.

It was said the amendThe Duke of Newcastle said he ment was just and moderate; and would not follow the example of it was so in the sense of "splitting Lord Derby, who, in a speech an the difference”-saying, “We will hour and a half long, which ought give over to you one-half of that to have been delivered on Friday which you claim for your right, and last, had dwelt on the principle retain for ourselves the other half." of the Bill now in Committee. Lord Derby thought the Govern


ment had shown great vacillation Leonards had intended to illustrate and infirmity of purpose; but what exactly this, that their Lordships was the

purpose of the noble Earl ? are going to be parties with the He stated he was willing to forego Canadian Legislature in pillaging the principle of the Bill on condi a third party; and because they tion that their Lordships assented only take half of the purse, they to an amendment by which one- absolve themselves from the guilt? half of the Bill was conceded and That was a difficulty altogether inthe other balf rejected. It would evitable in the position taken up by have been far better that the Bill Lord Derby. The bishop denied should have been rejected on the that the reserves stand upon the second reading. But Lord Derby same footing as the property of the would never take warning. Why Church of England and Ireland. did the Act of 1840 fail? Was it The reserves were granted by Parbecause the arrangement it sanc liament to be administered for the tioned was unjust?-No; but be- province of Canada. The property cause it was made by the Imperial of the Church of England was Parliament without the consent of granted to specific parishes, for the the Parliament of Canada.

purpose of providing the inhabitThe amendment was supported ants with religious instruction; by the Earl of Wicklow and the and it stands on the footing of priEarl of Desart, and opposed by vate property. See what a differthe Duke of Argyll.

ence there is in these cases ! The Bishop of London said it Equity dictates that the Canadians was contended that the colonial should manage their own affairs ; Legislature have an inherent right and it amounts to atheism to reto discuss and decide on all mat- present equity and religion as opters relating to their internal af posed to each other." fairs; but if they have that power, The Committee divided, when where is the necessity for this the second reading was carried by Bill? If they have not that power, 117 to 77. The clauses of the the House should hesitate to grant Bill were then agreed to. it.

No opposition was offered to the Earl Grey argumentatively third reading on the 28th of April. showed, that if it is “sacrilege'

“sacrilege" In reply to a question from the to sacrifice one part of the reserves, Earl of Wicklow, the Duke of it is equally sacrilegious to sacri- Newcastle repeated what he had fice the rest.

previously said, that the guarantee Lord St. Leonards followed, and clause will continue on its present argued in favour of the Earl of footing Should the fund from Derby's compromise.

which the existing incumbents are The Bishop of Oxford pointed paid prove deficient, the guarantee out the obvious inconsistency be will be valid to that extent, but tween the speech of Lord St. Leo should the fund be secularised, nards and the one he delivered on then, according to the Crown lawFriday last; and proceeded with a yers, the guarantee would fall of grave argument in a bantering itself to the ground, the condition form.

on which it was given being re· Was not tbe position Lord St. moved.


Lord J. Russell moves for a Committee of the whole House to consider the

Jewish Disabilities - It is opposed by Sir R. Inglis, Sir R. Peel, Mr. Napier and Mr. Wigram, and supported by Lord Monck, Mr. W. D. Seymour, Mr. O'Connell, and Lord Drumlanrig-Upon a division the Mo. tion is carried, and a Bill ordered to be brought in-The Bill is debated on the Second and Third Reading, but no neu arguments are adduced The principal speakers against it are Sir F. Thesiger, Lord Graham, Mr. H. Drummond, Lord Adolphus Vane, Mr. Henley, Mr. Neudegate, Mr. Cumming Bruce, Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Goulburn, and Mr. Walpole-In its favour are Mr. B. Osborne, Mr. J. Herbert, Lord J. Russell, Serjeant Murphy, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Bright, and Mr. FitzroyThe Bill passes the CommonsIn the House of Lords the Second Reading is proposed by the Earl of Aberdeen--The Earl of Shaftesbury moves that the Bill be read a second time that day six months-, debate ensues, in which the Bill is supported by the Earl of Albemarle, the Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishop of St. David's, and Lord Brougham, and opposed by the Earl of Darnley, the Bishop of Salisbury, the Earls of Winchilsea and Harrowby, and is lost upon a Division by 164 to 115—On the 7th of April the Earl of Aberdeen announces to the House of Lords the Birth of a Prince, and their Lordships vote a congratulatory Address to her MajestyThe same vote is passed in the House of Commons on the Motion of Lord John Russell, seconded by Mr. Disraeli. National EDUCATIONLord John Russell states at great length the views and intentions of the Government upon this subject Remarks of Mr. Ewart, Mr. Hume, Mr. W. J. Fox, Sir R. Inglis

, Mr. Phinn, Mr. Wigram, Mr. Blackett, Lord J. Manners, and Mr. Gladstone. FINANCIAL AFFAIRS - The Chancellor of the Exchequer introduces his resolutions on the subject of the National Debt-After a number of observations and criticisms by various members, they are agreed to. THE BUDGET-The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a most lucid and able address of five hours, lays before the House of Commons his Financial Scheme-Leading topics of his Speech-Alterations in the Income Tax-Irish Consolidated Annuities-Legacy Duties-Spirit Duties- Licences - Assessed Taxes -Tea Duties and Remission of the Soap DutiesHis statement is received with great applause.

[ocr errors]

N the 24th of February, Lord abilities affecting the Jews. He

Commons moved for a Committee the edifice of civil and religious of the whole House, to take into liberty, as to admit the Jews to consideration certain civil dis: the same rights and privileges as VOL. XCV.


« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »