Imatges de pÓgina
PDF
EPUB

University would be extended and not di- | a liberal aristocracy in the place of it. It minished by this Bill. was a measure, in fact, for enlarging and enfranchising the constituency.

MR. NEWDEGATE said, that the effect of the Amendment would be to deprive the University-that great constituency which had returned the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself to that House of the power of petitioning that House, or of expressing an opinion and praying the concurrence of Parliament in its views. It would give such a power to the Congregation that Convocation would be able to do absolutely nothing without its consent. For a Government which professed to be Liberal, and for a representative of the University thus to endeavour to stifle the expression of opinion by the most enlightened constituency in the kingdom, was a circumstance that filled him with astonishment.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that the indignant remarks of the hon. Member were founded upon two assumptions, both of which were unfounded. For, in the first place, Convocation never had the power of petitioning except through the medium of the Hebdomadal Board; and, in the second place, the present Bill would not increase the control which was now exercised over the proceedings of Convocation, but would simply vest in the hands of the Hebdomadal Council and the Congregation, instead of in those of the Hebdomadal Council alone.

MR. HENLEY said, that he must repeat his objection to this Amendment, because it would have the effect of putting a fresh check upon the exercise of a political franchise; for the right of petitioning, which members of Convocation now enjoyed, must be regarded in that light. They might just as well say that the aldermen and liverymen of the City of London should prevent that great constituency from petitioning, as that an oli garchy of some 300 members should stop the expression of its opinion upon political subjects on the part of the whole University.

SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTE said, that while the hon. and learned Solicitor General had stated that the words which he had proposed would not vary the meaning of the word "Statute, "his right hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) thought that they would do so in a way which he (Sir W. Heathcote) did not intend. As in the one case, then, the alteration would be useless, and in the other it would be noxious, or would effect what he did not desire to effect, probably the best thing for him to do would be to withdraw the words.

Amendment withdrawn.

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

The Committee divided:-Ayes 131; Noes 155: Majority 24.

SIR WILLIAM HEATHCOTE said, he would move to add at the end of the clause the words," And if accepted by Congre gation shall be afterwards submitted to Convocation for final adoption or rejection as a Statute, act, or ordinance of the University," with the view of rendering the meaning more clear.

Amendment agreed to.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he wished for some further explanation as to how the functions of Convocation would be affected by this clause.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL could only say that the Bill directed the Congregation should elect certain members of the Hebdomadal Council. The members of Convocation were all pointed out and specified in the clause, and he thought it would be loss of time to discuss principles already adopted.

MR. ROBERT PHILLIMORE said, that no man could have so little interest in stifling the opinions of the constituency of Oxford as his right hon. Friend the MR. EWART said, that instead of Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had making any innovation, they were return. thrice been returned by it by large majori-ing, by the enactments of the present Bill, ties. He did not see how this clause could to the original foundation of the academic be regarded as narrowing the powers of constitution. He must deny that there the University. At present the Univer- was any innovation in the powers consity of Oxford was governed by an oli- veyed by this clause, and considered that garchy, and the proposal was to substitute the governing power could not be more

{MAY 11, 1854} properly lodged than in the teachers of the University.

MR. NEWDEGATE trusted his right hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington) would press the question to a division, for all they asked was not to fetter the University, when it had done nothing to prove itself unworthy of the freedom it had enjoyed these 400 years.

MR. HENLEY said, he considered that the question involved in this clause was, whether, when the Hebdomadal Council had determined to originate any measure, the Congregation should be enabled to put a direct veto upon such measure, for as the clause stood such a power would be left in the hands of Congregation. In his opinion the best plan would be to omit the clause altogether.

SO

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY said, he thought the clause, by establishing a debating society in the University, was not likely to promote peace and harmony among its members. He would suggest that, as the Hebdomadal Council was to consist of twenty-two individuals, if there should be an equal division upon any question, and eleven were found on each side, the business of the University would be brought to a dead lock. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that the governing body of the University had hitherto consisted of twenty-six members, but there never had been an equal division of thirteen against thirteen. He considered that there could not be the least doubt that it was right to give legislative functions to the Congregation. Looking at the composition of the University of Oxford, which included many able and working men, he thought it impossible that any system could be satisfactory which placed the whole legislative power in the hands of a small body consisting of twenty-two members. If they wished the University to work satisfactorily, they must make provision for the real discussion of measures which proceeded from the initiative board. If such vision was not made, the whole power of the University would be concentrated in one-third part of the heads, one-fourth part of the professors, and one-thirtieth part of the residents of the University. This power must be given to Congregation or to Convocation, and he thought that Congregation, as representing the working part of the University, and including men of great knowledge and experience, was the body to which it could most properly be committed.

pro

Question put, "That the Clause, as
amended, stand part of the Bill.”
The Committee divided:-Ayes 215;
Nocs 68: Majority 147.

List of the AYES.

Acland, Sir T. D.
Anderson, Sir J.
Aunesley, Earl of
Atherton, W.
Baines, rt. hon. M. T.
Ball, J.
Bass, M. T.
Beamish, F. B.
Beckett, W.
Bell, J.
Berkeley, C. L. G.
Bethell, Sir R.
Blackett, J. F. B.
Boldero, Col.
Bonham-Carter, J.
Boyle, hon. Col.
Bramston, T. W.
Brand, hon. II.
Brocklehurst, J.
Brotherton, J.
Bruce, Lord E.
Buckley, Gen.
Butt, G. M.
Byng, hon. G. II. C.
Campbell, Sir A. I.
Cardwell, rt. hon. E.
Carnac, Sir J. R.
Cavendish, hon. C. C.
Cavendish, hon. G.
Cheetham, J.
Chelsea, Viset.
Cholmondeley, Lord II.
Christy, S.
Clinton, Lord C. P.
Cockburn, Sir A. J. E.
Colvile, C. R.

Compton, II. C.
Cowan, C.
Cowper, hon. W. F.
Crossley, F.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Dalrymple, Viset.
Davie, Sir II. R. F.
Davies, D. A. S.
Denison, E.
Dod, J. W.

Duff, J.
Duncan, G.
Dunlop, A. M.
Dunne, Col.
East, Sir J. B.
Egerton, W. T.
Egerton, E. C.
Elcho, Lord
Emlyn, Viset.
Euston, Earl of
Evelyn, W. J.
Ewart, W.
Fagan, W.
Feilden, M. J.
Ferguson, Sir R.
Filmer, Sir E.
Fitzroy, hon. II.
Fitzgerald, W. R. S.
Floyer, J.
Forster, C.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Strutt, rt. hon. E.
Stuart, Lord D.
Talbot, C. R. M.
Tancred, II. W.
Thicknesse, R. A.
Thompson, G.
Thornely, T.
Thornhill, W. P.
Tomline, G.
Tudway, R. C.
Vansittart, G. II.
Vivian, J. II.
Vivian, H. H.
Walcott, Adm.
Walmsley, Sir J.
Warner, E.
Watkins, Col. L.

Ponsonby, hon. A. G. J. Whitbread, S.

Pritchard, J.
Ricardo, O.
Rice, E. R.
Richardson, J. J.
Robertson, P. F.
Russell, Lord J.
Sawle, C. B. G.

Adderley, C. B.

Alexander, J.

Bailey, C.

Ball, E.

Baldock, E. H.

Wilkinson, W. A.
Williams, W.
Wilson, J.
Winnington, Sir T. E.
Wyn lham, W.
Wynne, W. W. E.
Young, rt. hon. Sir J.

TELLERS.

Hayter, rt. hon. W. G.
Mulgrave, Earl of

List of the NOES.

Bankes, rt. hon. G.
Barrow, W. H.
Bateson, T.

Beach, Sir M. II. II.

Bective, Earl of

[blocks in formation]

Grogan, E.
Gwyn, H.

House resumed. Committee report pro

gress.

CHURCH BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT
BILL.

Order for Committee read.

Motion made and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

MR. HADFIELD said, he should move that the Committee be postponed until that day six months.

46

Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words ⚫ this House will, upon this day six months, resolve itself into the said Committee," instead thereof.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, he was not sure, if the hon. Member who had made that Motion knew the real object and meaning of the Bill, he would not have thought of impeding its progress. The circumstances which rendered the Bill necessary were these:-A contract had been entered into for the purpose of erecting a church in Lambeth. A part of the site of that church was originally comprised in one lease, the holder of which lease had granted a great number of under-leases. A contract had been entered into for a portion of the land for a site for the church, and the only delay in building the church arose from the circumstance that the original lessor had been advised not to lease that part of the land, lest he should thereby impair or endanger his title to the rest. The Bill had been framed to enable the contract to be at once carried into effect, and to prevent the possibility of difficulties of that nature arising hereafter. The Bill had been suggested by a very eminent conveyancer; the propriety of such an alteration in the law had received the general sanction of gentlemen who were eminently Pakington, rt. hn. Sir J. versed in the practice of conveyancing;

Hamilton, G. A.
Henley, rt. hon. J. W.
Hudson, G.
Jones, Capt.
Jones, D.
Kendall, N.
Knightley, R.
Knox, hon. W. S.
Laffan, R. M.
Langton, H. G.
Lennox, Lord A. F.
Macartney, G.
Mandeville, Visct.
Masterman, J.
Naas, Lord
Napier, rt. hon. J.
North, Col.
Packe, C. W.

Palk, L
Parker, R. T.
Sandars, G.
Somerset, Capt.
Spooner, R.
Stafford, A.
Stanhope, J. B.

and he earnestly trusted his hon. Friend would not oppose any difficulty in the way of proceeding with the Bill. A measure more necessary for the particular purpose, or more useful for general purposes, it was not very easy to conceive.

MR. W. WILLIAMS asked from what source the money was to come for building a church?

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, he was sorry he could not answer that question. Ile supposed the money would be raised in the ordinary way.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question," put, and agreed to.

Main Question put, and agreed to.

had reason to believe that the measure was regarded by the Navy generally as obtrusive, and was neither requisite nor desirable. The officers of the Navy had never, that he was aware of, expressed any dissatisfaction with the conduct of the Navy agents, and he could not see either the utility or expediency of substituting regimental agents in their place.

SIR JAMES GRAHAM said, that the Bill was framed for the express purpose

Bill considered in Committee, and re- of obviating the abuses which were proved ported as amended.

MANNING THE NAVY BILL. Order for Second Reading read. CAPTAIN SCOBELL said, he was not going to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but some of the clauses would require looking into, and he would reserve any objections he had to make until it went into Committee. It was called "A Bill for the more effectual Manning of the Navy," whereas, in point of fact, it related almost exclusively to the distribution of prizemoney. He regretted some further stimulus had not been applied, which would have the effect of manning our ships more effectually.

SIR GEORGE PECHELL said, he was also of opinion that some of the provisions of this Bill required considerable discussion. There was not a word of manning the Navy in it, and he gave notice that when it went into Committee he should enter fully into the subject.

ŠIR JAMES GRAHAM said, that when the Bill was introduced into the House, he fully explained the course which the Government intended to take, and the objects which they wished to accomplish. It was only a temporary enactment, a surrender ou the part of the Crown, subject to the distribution which Parliament should provide, of that which was the prerogative of the Crown, namely, all prizes taken during the war. He hoped, therefore, that no unnecessary delay would be brought to bear against the measure.

Motion agreed to; Bill read 2°.

NAVY PAY, ETC., BILL. Order for Second Reading read. MR. OTWAY said, he considered that the right hon. Baronet should have explained more fully this measure to the House than he had done. The whole scope of the Bill seemed merely to revert to the plan that was adopted in 1739, and

to exist during the last war. Failures on the part of Navy agents were common during that war, and he had a list before him which showed that from 200,000l. to 300,000l. was lost through the failure and misconduct of those persons. The proceeds of the sales of prizes being paid into the hands of Navy agents, they had a deep interest in delaying the division of the proceeds, they having, until the proceeds were divided, the whole benefit of the use of the money of the captor. The object of the Bill was to ensure the prompt sale of the prize by a Government officer. From the moment the sale should be effected the proceeds of it would be paid to a public account, in England, opened at the Bank of England abroad, either with the Commissariat or a Navy agent, and the public would be liable for the full amount of the proceeds. There would, therefore, be prompt payment and ample security, and, as related to the interest of the captor, power was given to the captor to nominate his own agent. He was quite ready to meet hon. Members in Committee on the question, and he felt assured that if the measure were fairly and dispassionately viewed, it would be found that, in every respect, the interest of the service had been studiously consulted.

Motion agreed to; Bill read 2°. The House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

[ocr errors][merged small]

which gave universal dissatisfaction. IIe he had a petition to present from the Mili

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that with regard to the first question put by his noble Friend, namely, whether it was competent for the Charitable Commissioners to decide on the complaints of the Knights of Windsor of an alleged misappropriation of funds on the part of the Dean and Chapter, he had no doubt whatever that it was not within their competence to do so, bccause their jurisdiction was, by express provision, not to extend to the funds of any collegiate church. He did not think the other section would at all interfere with them, for that section applied to the cases of persons claiming property adverse to the charity; but the claim here was merely adverse to the Dean and Chapter, and that would not prevent the Commissioners from considering it. He wished to say that he might have led the parties into error, for, having come to him, not judicially, but privately, and asked him his opinion, he had suggested that they should go to the Charitable Commissioners, not knowing that there were those objections to their jurisdiction. With regard to the other question, as to whether the Court of Chancery had jurisdiction, he should decline giving any opinion, but he considered it would be a strange thing if, there being a misapplication of charitable funds, the Court of Chancery could not interfere. Petition ordered to lie on the table.

tary Knights of Windsor, complaining of ther the Court of Chancery would have the appropriation of the revenues of the jurisdiction in that case? charity, and praying for redress, and in so doing he would put a question to the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack with respect to the object the petitioners had in view. The petition he was then presenting was, with some verbal alterations, adapted to the forms of the House, and also, with some very slight additions, the identical petition that was presented from the Military Knights of Windsor to George II., in 1735, by the Earl of Albemarle of that day. The petition stated that Queen Elizabeth had granted, by indenture, certain lands and tenements, of the yearly value of 6007., amounting now to 14,000l., and above that sum, to the Deans and Canons of Windsor and their successors, with the intent and purpose that the yearly rents and profits of same should be bestowed for the maintenance of thirteen poor knights; and the petition also stated that the Dean and Chapter had applied those yearly revenues, rents, and profits to and amongst themselves for their own uses and purposes. It was recorded that in another place an humble Address to the Crown was agreed to to petition Her Majesty to institute an inquiry into the claims of those knights; and the consequence was, as he was given to understand, that the Home Secretary laid the case before the Commissioners of the Charitable Trusts Act. If these Commissioners had the same extensive powers as a Committee of their Lordships would have to summon witnesses and compel the production of evidence, then he would say that those Military Knights who claimed redress would have all the redress they were at present entitled to; but there were clauses of the Act to which he wished to called the attention of his noble and learned Friend, and to ask whether they did not exclude the jurisdiction of the Board in this case? By the 15th clause of the Act the Commissioners could not interfere where any person was claiming property adverse to the charity, and he doubted whether that was not in itself a sufficient disqualification in that case; but there was another ground on which to question the jurisdiction of the Board, arising from the supposition that the church of St. George, Windsor, is exempt under the 62nd clause, which says that the Act shall not extend to the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, or London, or to any cathedral, or cathedral church. He also begged to inquire wheThe Earl of Malmesbury

THE WAR WITH RUSSIA-QUESTION—
THE "ANDES STEAM TRANSPORT.

[ocr errors]

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE begged to call the attention of the noble Duke the Secretary of the War Department to a statement of great importance which appeared in a newspaper of that day, and hoped he might be able to give them information respecting it. If information could not at present be given respecting it, it was a matter that required the immediate attention of Her Majesty's Government. There appeared in a letter, which was stated to have been received from an officer on board the Andes, which was employed in the conveyance of troops, the following statement

"I write these few hasty lines to inform you of our safe arrival at Malta, which is now about ten miles distant. We have had, altogether, a very fine passage. From Plymouth to Gibraltar it was splendid, having left Plymouth on Friday, at half past seven P.M., and passed Gibraltar on

« AnteriorContinua »