Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

thority. That resolution was calculated | ships constituted the highest judicial court

to prevent the patron from duly exercising in this country, and what they decided to

his legal right. Now, those who proceeded thus could not legally call into question what had been solemnly decided by that House in their judicial capacity. He did not enter into those points as matter of argument, but merely to make the case clear to those who heard him. On a subsequent meeting, and he called the attention of his noble Friend to this fact, an intimation had been conveyed, as he understood, to the General Assembly, through a deputation which had been in communication with her Majesty's Ministers, that the Lord Advocate would introduce a measure into Parliament which would have the effect of settling the question; in which measure a clause would be introduced giving the people the power of exercising the right which they claimed, but which had been negatived by their Lordships. The Lord Commissioner, it was also understood, had sent a letter to the Moderator, stating the satisfaction of her Majesty, at the uniform loyalty of the General Assembly; and intimating that, until the bill was prepared, the Crown patronage should not be exercised without consulting the people. The General Assembly then, after considerable debate, carried a resolution by a majority of 104 to 23, prohibiting the Presbytery, in any event," from taking the rev. Mr. Young on his trials." Now, it was proper, that they should know whether the letter sent by the Lord High Commissioner, and which went to impugn the decision of that House, was written under a misapprehension; and whether the Government had given any ground which could authorize the General Assembly, proceeding on the report of the deputation, to agree to the resolution to which he had referred.

Viscount Melbourne said, that as to what had occurred with reference to the Lord High Commissioner and her Majesty, it was not in his power to offer any explanation-nor, indeed, in his opinion, would it be prudent to advert to it. He believed, that the noble and learned Lord described the circumstances of the case very accurately. With respect to what had passed between the Government and the deputation from the Assembly, there was not the slightest intention to cast the smallest censure or imputation on the decision of the Court of Session, affirmed, as it had been, by that House. Their Lord

be the law of the land ought to be received with respect and obedience. All that had been said by Government was, that this was a very intricate question, and under all the circumstances, deserved verv serious consideration; that, therefore, the Lord Advocate would be directed to confer with the Procurator-general, to see whether the matter could not be settled -not with the intention of framing a bill immediately-not with the intention of pledging the Cabinet to proceed to legis. late on the subject, but to show, that it was a question that ought to be calmly and carefully considered. As to the Crown patronage, all that was stated on that point, was, that it would be administered, as it had hitherto been, in conformity with the provision of the Veto Act, passed by the General Assembly in 1834.

Lord Brougham said, it was satisfactory to hear from his noble Friend, that there had been considerable misapprehension on the part of the Lord High Commissione". If the Government had int mated any discontent with the decision of that House, it would have been most unhappy for the peace of the Church, whose safety depended on a strict obedience to the law.

The Earl of Galloway said, nothing could be worse than the way in which the Crown patronage was administered in Scotland. The people being allowed to choose the clergy, must give rise to a kind of "preaching match" between rival parsons, who were judged of according to the sermons which they preached on probation. In one case, it was found, that a preacher who had been elected had copied the sermon, for which he was chosen, from one which had been preached by an eminent clergyman of the metropolis. Subject dropped.

POLICE OF MANCHESTER.] Viscount Duncannon, in moving the second reading of the Manchester Police Bill, observed that the case of Manchester was similar, in some respects, to the case of Birmingham, particularly as regarded the charter of corporation, the validity of which being questioned, there was no power of levying a rate for the support of a police force, until that question was decided. The corporation of Manchester had already endeavoured to raise a police force, but had not very well succeeded; he therefore hoped their Lordships would allow this bill to be read a second time.

The Duke of Wellington agreed with the noble Viscount, that the cases of Birmingham and Manchester were similar as regarded the disputed validity of the charters, but in no other respects. Although in Birmingham there was a local police, it certainly was insufficient, as had been recently shown by the necessity of sending for a large force of the metropolitan police, and of collecting in the town a large body of troops, both cavalry and infantry, yet the peace of the town, for some reason or other, was not preserved. In Manchester, as in Birmingham, it was perfectly true, that the legality of the corporation was questioned, and that the question was still undecided in a court of law. But there existed in Manchester a very large and efficient police force, entirely independent of the force attempted to be raised by the corporation. A very large and efficient force had been raised under an Act of Parliament, for the maintenance of the police of Manchester and the neighbouring districts, which had proved itself in very recent instances to be a most effective body in preserving the peace, and putting down the riots which had been there attempted. Seeing what the present state of the country was, and that bodies of men were moving about, endeavouring to disturb the working classes from their occupation, and threatening the destruction of the property of their employers, he could not but think, that all these questions of police were questions of a most important character, which ought to be fully and minutely examined in detail, before their Lordships decided upon them. It was perfectly true, as stated by the noble Viscount, that an attempt had been made by the corporation to raise a police force, and that the police force so raised was not efficient, and pro bably never would be. But there was another police force-and to this he called their Lordships' particular attention which was an exceedingly efficient force, more efficient than that to be created by the bill under their Lordships' consideration, could possibly become. The whole bill depended upon the first clause, which enabled her Majesty's Government to appoint a commissioner of police at Manchester, and to levy a rate upon what was called the borough, the limit of which rate

was to be 8d. in the pound, and the money accruing from which was to pay, not only the expenses of the police force, but the salaries of the commissioner and receiver. The total revenue to be realised by the rate, would amount to 15,000/.; after deducting from which the salaries of these two officers, a balance of 13,800l. only would be disposable for the police of this great town. He begged their Lordships to observe, that the act of 10th George 4th., by which a police force was established in the metropolis, provided, that, when that police was raised, all other descriptions of police force were done away with, together with all rates, &c., for their support; so that this 13,800l. wo ld be the total amount applicable in this case. The police under the commissioners of police at Manchester, which had been lately found so efficient in preserving the peace of the town, would be done away with when this other police force would be established. Let their Lordships see what that police force was. The commissioners of police under the local acts of Manchester were authorized to raise a rate of 1s. 6d. in the pound, for maintaining a police force, and also for the purposes of lighting, paving, &c. That rate produced 34,000l. a-year. Of that sum, the police received 14,000l., which was more than would be raised under this bill. But that was not all; they had, in addition to that sun, the sum of 4,000l. under an act of George 2nd., making the amount applicable to the police of Manchester 18,000l. He thought the noble Viscount was mistaken in supposing, that the town of Manchester could not have a police force, if the present bill did not pass into a law. It would continue to have its own police, and would have larger funds for its maintenance than those which would be provided by the measure now proposed. Under these circumstances, he earnestly entreated the House not to pass this bill. The question was one of detail. The town of Manchester could not have its present police and that now proposed to be established, at the same time; it must have either one or the other. He recommended the House to permit the people of Manchester to keep that which they had got, and with which they were satisfied. He hoped the House would agree to his amendment, which was, that the bill be read a second time that day three months.

Viscount Duncannon said, it was true

that there existed, as had been stated, a power to levy an eighteenpenny rate, but whether that part of the rate, which was applicable to the purpose of watching, could be levied, supposing the charter to be good, was a question.

Lord Brougham supported the amendment. Neither of the reasons which were given for passing the Birmingham Police Bill, applied to the present measure. There was no application for such a bill on the part of the inhabitants of the town, nor was any sum of money required to be advanced by the public. He could only agree to such a course as he had suggested with respect to the Birmingham Police Bill, which was to give the commissioner power in case it should be decided by the proper tribunal, that the corporation had not the requisite authority under its char

ter.

The Earl of Wicklow supported the bill on the same grounds as those on which he had supported the Birmingham Police Bill. He felt bound to add, that in the present disturbed state of the country, the House could not refuse to furnish the Government with the force which they sought, without taking upon itself an awful responsibility,

and one in which he could not consent to participate.

Lord Wharncliffe said, the question was not as to the establishment of a police force, but whether the police, at present existing, was sufficient for the purpose of

preserving the peace, and whether the

to be valid, the acts which had been done under its authority must have put an end to the power of the commissioners. The 84th section provided, that

"As soon as constables shall have been appointed by the watch committee for any borough, a notice signed by the mayor of such borough, specifying the day on which such constables shall begin to act, shall be fixed on the door of the town-hall, and every church, within such borough; and on the day so specified in such notice, so much of all acts named in conjunction with such borough in the schedule E to the Act, and of all Acts made before the passing of the Act, as relates to the appointment, regulation, powers, and duties, or to the assessment, or collection, of any rate to provide for the expences of any watchmen, constables, patrol, or police, for any place situate within such borough, shall cease and determine."

Now, this clause applied to the boroughs which were expressly mentioned in schedule A of the Act; but then there was the 141st clause, which provided

"That if the inhabitant householders of any town or borough in England and Wales should petition his Majesty to grant to them a charter of incorporation, it should be lawful for his Majesty, by any such charter, if he should

fit, advice Privy Council, to grant the same, to extend to the inhabitants of any such town or borough within the disstrict to be set forth in such charter, the powers and provisions in that Act contained. So that as soon as the charter was granted to any town under the 141st section, the town became sub

ject to the provisions of the 84th section."

present commissioners could still lawfully Taking the two clauses together,

exercise those functions which were necessary for maintaining the existing force. He believed that, according to the true construction of the Municipal Corporation Act, the powers of the present commissioners still continued, whether the charter granted to the town of Manchester was valid or not; and as the inhabitants were satisfied with the existing police force, he could see no necessity for the present measure, and should therefore vote for the amendment.

The Lord Chancellor had not anticipated a discussion upon the question of the continuance of the authority of the present police commissioners, supposing the charter to be valid. He had, therefore, not come prepared to give an opinion upon the question. Upon looking, however, at the words of the Municipal Corporation Act, he conceived there were strong grounds for contending, that if the charter was held

therefore, and assuming the charter to have been properly granted, it certainly appeared that the authority of the police commissioners must have ceased and determined as soon as constables had been appointed by the corporation, and the day had arrived for their beginning to act according to the notice signed by the mayor. The Legislature could never have intended two co-ordinate and conflicting authorities to be in force in the same town, which would lead to the greatest inconvenience and confusion. It was evident that there was no intention to place boroughs to which corporations should be granted under the 142nd section, upon a different footing from the boroughs in schedule A of the Act; and he thought it must be held, that in both classes of boroughs the police to be appointed under the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act was intended to be substituted for, and not to exist in addition to, the local police existing at the time when the respective charters were granted.

Lord Brougham differed from his noble and learned Friend in the construction of the 84th section. The words "so much of all Acts made before the passing of this Act as relates to the appointment, &c., of any police within such borough," referred, of course, to the last antecedentnamely, the boroughs comprised in schedule E, and not to boroughs in general, or to those in schedule A. Now, Manchester was not named in the schedule; and, therefore, if his noble and learned Friend thought that the local Acts affecting that town were repealed by the 84th section of the Municipal Corporation Act, he must hold that an Act of Parliament might be repealed by implication. No doubt, the 84th clause might easily have been framed so as to extend to this case, but because the framers of that statute had been unwary in constructing its provisions, that circumstance would never induce any court of law to depart from the ordinary rules of construction. In fact, this was a casus omissus, and the parties interested would take advantage of the omission, as they always did, and as they were entitled to do.

The Lord Chancellor said, there would have been no doubt if the 84th clause had only referred to the boroughs mentioned in schedule E; but the words were not only "all Acts named in schedule E," but also "all Acts made before the passing of the Act."

Lord Brougham: Then what is meant by "any place situate within such borough?" To what borough did that refer?

The Lord Chancellor: To the boroughs mentioned in schedule A. Lord Lyndhurst: Schedule A is not mentioned in the 84th section.

The Lord Chancellor thought that "such borough" meant the borough to which reference had been made in the previous clauses, which would be those comprehended in schedule A. Then the 141st section brought within the scope of the other clause, towns to which charters should be granted afterwards. He certainly was of opinion that the subjectmatter of the 141st clause might have been much more clearly expressed. But the question for the consideration of their Lordships was, whether it would be safe to

leave Manchester in that position in which it would have no police at all. He understood it to be the prevailing opinion in the different districts of Manchester, that the operation of their local Acts was at an end.

Lord Fitzgerald thought, that the House was placed in circumstances of great embarrassment, considering the great difference of opinion which existed between the two noble and learned Lords on this important question. Were their Lordships prepared to decide a point like this on such imperfect information? He would suggest the propriety of not pressing forward the bill until the House was more competent to judge. The noble Lord on the Woolsack admitted, that he had not directed his attention to this question be fore. Had any legal opinion at all been taken by the Government upon it? He (Lord Fitzgerald) had been assured, upon the best authority, that in the town of Manchester the prevailing opinion was, not that the operation of the local Acts had ceased, but that they would still continue in force whatever became of the charter.

Lord Lyndhurst would not at present give any opinion on the legal question, not having considered the clause. But he found parties to be generally very astute in the consideration of questions in which their own interests were involved; and it was worthy of remark, that a rate had been made in July last, against which not one single appeal had been made.

The Duke of Wellington suggested to the noble Viscount (Duncannon), either to postpone the second reading of the bill until to-morrow; or read it a second time, with the understanding that the discussion on the principle of the bill should be taken on the next day.

On this understanding, bill read a second time.

SUPPRESSION OF THE SLAVE-TRADE.] The Slave-Trade Suppression Bill was read a third time.

On the question that the bill do pass. The Duke of Wellington said, that he had precisely the same objection to the bill in its present shape, which he had expressed upon its second reading. He was altogether opposed to the principle of the bill. He could not help thinking, that before the bill was brought to its

present stage, their Lordships ought to have received some intimation of her Majesty's intentions with reference to this subject; that they should have received something more than the small amount of information which had been given by the noble Earl opposite, who was the individual to whom the exercise of the authority given under this bill would be intrusted. In pursuance of the long established usage, their Lordships ought to have received by way of message, a communication of her Majesty's intentions, before they were called on to take this very serious step; and it had been his impression, that such would be the case. He must say, that he did not think the bill was in the least improved, or that any of the objections to it were removed. The measure still retained its criminal character-it was a breach of the law of nations-a breach of treaties entered into between England and other countries. The vessels of other countries were made liable by the bill to be detained, boarded, searched, and their papers examined by cruisers and other vessels commanded by persons in her Majesty's service. He contended, that such deten tion, boarding, and searching, which was absolutely necessary in order to ascertain whether the vessel was a slaver or not, was contrary to the treaties which had heen entered into between her Majesty's Government and nearly all the powers of Europe; and that such measures must lead to discussions of the most disagreeable nature. In his opinion the measure would tend more to prevent the accomplishment of the very object proposed, than to promote it. He would put a case, which he was convinced that no noble Lord would say might not probably occur. He would suppose a French vessel sailing in fifteen degrees of north latitude, and thirty degrees of longitude, calculated from the meridian of Paris. He would suppose that this vessel was detained, boarded, and searched, by one of her Majesty's cruisers, or by one of those other vessels which were under the command of persons employed in her Majesty's service. He asked their Lordships whether this would or would not be a breach of the treaty between this coun-ing back to the probability of the exercise

whom he had alluded as being in her Majesty's service, and intrusted with the command of these vessels, were a very large, and, he believed, a very respectable class; but they were not commissioned officers in her Majesty's service. Nothing could be more delicate than the execution of orders of this description; and it might happen, that French merchant vessels might be searched, under the authority of this Act of Parliament, in a way to involve a breach of the treaty made with the king of the French, for the very purpose of putting down this traffic in slaves; yet their Lordships were called on to pass an Act which would give occasion to this very breach of treaty. No doubt, they must indemnify the parties engaged in these captures, and prevent them froni the liability of being punished in a court of justice. What he contended for was, that these men ought not to be put in a situation which would render them liable to commit such mistakes. The Government of the country must eventually suffer from the irritation which this attempt must necessarily produce, in the ports of other countries with which we were now in alliance. There was a municipal law in Portugal, which the subjects of that Crown violated when they engaged in the slave traffic, as well as the treaty with Great Britain. Really, he (the Duke of Wellington) could not consent to a bill of this description. In his opinion, the foundation of the political power of this country was its moderation and its justice; and, in his opinion, also, if moderation and justice were banished from the diplomacy and acts of all the councils in the world, they ought even with respect to vessels engaged in an improper species of commerce, to find an asylum in the councils of the British Government; and, instead of passing this bill to put down a traffic, which most certainly was infamous, if the Government had taken the more manly course of declaring that they would go to war with those powers who refused or neglected to perform their treaties with this country, there could be no doubt but that by return of post they would learn that they had effected the object which noble Lords opposite had in view. Look

try and the king of the French; and whether, in the case of a Spanish vessel, it would not be a breach of our treaty with her Catholic Majesty? The persons to

of the right of search being extended to many powers with whom this country had no treaties whatever, and remembering that the greatest judge who had ever pre

« ElőzőTovább »