Carlife.

The Earl of Carlisle declared, that after the defects of the The Earl of bill had been so ably ftated by his noble friends near him, (Lord Stormont and Lord Loughborough). it would be impertinent in him to attempt faying much more. He could not, however, avoid expreffing his concern, that the prefent Adminiftration fhould be fo unworthily inclined to diminish the rights of the People. It was a matter which ought to alarm their Lordships, and excite their vigilance, fince they might reft affured that nothing could be taken from the Public which would not adhere elsewhere, and, if put into a political crucible, there would, he doubted not, be found certain minifterial chymifts who would make it undergo a chemical procefs, which would leave the white flowers in the retort, and every thing fublimated from the public body, would doubtless afcend and mix with that mass, already too much fwelled. To speak without a metaphor, and in plain English, he thought that he faw a fettled fyftem in the prefent Miniftry, to destroy the rights of the Public one by one, a fyftem which had manifefted itself in respect to trial by Jury in particular; and he was confident, indeed, that whatsoever the People might be deprived of, would be thrown, with unconftitutional profufion, into the scale of the Crown.

Lord Oberne (Marquis of Carmarthen) faid, that as the Lord Of noble Earl had thought proper to intimate, that the prefent borne. Administration had fettled a fyftem for the deftruction of Juries, he could not fit ftill under an imputation which he felt to be fo injurious and fo abhorrent to his nature. Moft fervently did he hope, that whoever, whether in or out of Adminiftration, fhould afford reafon for fufpicion that he had any fuch unconstitutional purpofe in view, would meet with a firm refiftance from their Lordships, and the other Houfe of Parliament. His oppofition they should undoubtedly receive. The noble Earl had opened the debate with many arguments against the bill of great weight, allowing that they were juft and applicable. To them he had offered no objection, thinking it more becoming both to the noble Earl and to the Houfe to leave it to their judgement to decide whether the bill was defective in the particulars which the noble Earl had defcribed, and whether what he had ftated made it, in their opinion, neceffary to adopt the amendment propofed; but, confcious as he was, that nothing could be farther from the intentions of Administration than any thing like a fettled defign to attack trial by Jury, or to take away that valuable right in any cafe whatever, but where the peculiar circumftances made it indifpenfably neceffary, he muft take the liberty of declaring that fuch imputations as the noble Earl had thought proper to fuggeft without offering

The Earl of
Carlisle.

any thing like proof that they were in the smallest degree merited, were highly unjustifiable. The bill then under confideration was a bill for the inftitution of a new Court of Judicature for the trial of offenders of a peculiar class, and of the crimes of peculation and corruption of an extraordinary nature. From the fort of cavil and objection which had been urged against it upon that day, it fhould feem as if it were a bill for the inftitution of a tribunal to try ordinary offences of a paltry and fubordinate degree, and fuch as were likely to be committed every day, and were capable of the cognizance of every Juftice in every country village. Let the House recollect that the cafe was far different; the fort of offences, for the trial of which the new tribunal was to be provided, was diftinct and different from any other, they were fuch as but feldom occurred, and a fairer or more equitable tribunal could not, he conceived, have been inftituted for the purpose. After the cry which had gone forth, and the clamours which had prevailed two years ago on the fubject of the enormities carried on in India by the servants of the Company, had His Majefty's Minifters fat ftill, and produced no meafure for their check and control, he was perfuaded that they should then have heard enough of complaint, and that Adminiftration would either have been charged with indolence, or, what was worse, with a wil ful inattention to their duty.

The Earl of Carlisle anfwered, that the fort of measures lately propofed by Administration, juftified him in declaring that he thought he faw fomething like a fyftematic and baleful propenfity to deftroy the rights of the People, and particularly the right of trial by Jury. In juftification of this affertion, he should beg leave to mention the bill for fubjecting brevet officers to the martial law, the wine excife bill, (as an addition to which, a claufe, giving an option of a trial by Jury, had been propofed and rejected) the bill then under difcuffion, and feveral others. Whenever Ministry had fuch a defign, and dared to avow it, he fhould hold himfelf authorised not only to oppofe it as far as he could, but to rouze and excite the indignation of the Public against it. The noble Marquis, he was glad to hear, would never join in fuch a purpose. He was fatisfied he would not, (as he declared he would not); and therefore he fhould depend on the noble Marquis's affiftance in endeavouring tor epeal it, should fuch a fyftem be acknowledged.

The Committee divided on the amendment. Contents (that the printed words ftand part of the claufe) 39. Not

contents 9.

The Committee then went through the amendments.
On the motion for giving a fecond reading to the bill for

preventing

preventing frivolous and vexatious fuits in the Ecclefiaftical Court, and for the more eafy recovery of finall tithes,

The Bishop of Bangor obferved, that the objects of this bill Bishop of were principally two. Firft, to correct the practice of the Bangor. Ecclefiaftical Court in certain cafes; and, fecondly, to render the recovery of fmall tithes more eafy: but both these points were fo managed in the bill, that the practice of the Ecclefiaftical Court was altered where it wanted no amendment; and the mode prefcribed for the recovery of small tithes was rendered more difficult than it was before. His Lordship then entered into the examination of the material claufes of the bill, and fhewed, that the limitation propofed by it for fuits of defamation being only three months, would make it almoft impoffible for the injured perfon to have an opportunity of vindicating himself, and reftoring his good name among his neighbours, as he is often the laft perfon who comes to the knowledge of the afperfions thrown on his character. The old as well as the prefent practice of the Ecclefiaftical Courts was never to receive fuits for defamation, unless they were commenced within a year after fuch defamation had been uttered. The Courts in Weftminster Hall were permitted by act of Parliament to receive fuits of this kind at any time within two years. It was abfurd to fuffer a Court to exift with a jurifdiction in certain cafes, and then to restrain and cramp it in fuch a manner, that it could not once in fifty times exercife its jurifdiction. As to that part of the bill, which limits fuits to eight months for adultery, folicitation of chaflity, and ftriking or brawling in a church, &c. &c. it was abfurd to fix the fame limitation to crimes fo very different in their degree of guilt. This limitation was too fhort in fuits for correction on account of adultery; for, as adultery was committed in fecret, fo it was the intereft of the offending parties to keep it fecret, by which means it would often happen, that the perfon injured would not hear of it till it was too late to maintain a fuit, if the limitation propofed by this act were to take place. There was no occafion to infert the words "folicitation of chafti"ty," as there was no inftance of a fuit of that kind having been brought in modern times into the Ecclefiaftical Court; and, were a fuit of that fort attempted to be inflituted there, it would be rejected, as those matters are more properly left to the temporal Courts, where they are tried under the defcription of actions for feduction. Notwithstanding that he would always oppofe every wanton and improper attack on the Ecclefiaftical Court, yet he did not defire to fee an extenfion of its jurifdiction; and therefore were this bill to come to a Committee, he would move for leaving out those words" folicitation of chastity," as he did not apprehend VOL. XX.

P

that

that that Court claimed any cognizance of that fort of crime. His Lordthip obferved likewite, that there was no occafion to have faid any thing in the bill about antinuptial fornication, as no fuits of that fort had been brought into the Courts at Doctors Commons in the memory of the oldeft practitioner; and that he had been inftructed to fay, upon good authority, that if the practice were otherwife in the country courts, the parties would be relieved on an application to the Court of Arches. He expreffed his furprife that a fuit fhould ever have been allowed for antinuptial fornication, and acknowledged that he believed that fome irregula rities were committed in the inferior jurifdiction; but he did not believe that there were any grounds for the loud com plaints which had been made; and apprehended, that as an appeal would lie in all cafes to the Court of Arches, or fome other fuperior Court, that appeared to him to be a good anfwer to every objection. The Bifhop then proceeded to examine the other part of the bill refpecting the inore eafy recovery of finall tithes. And here he firft obferved, that the plaintiff's being obliged to give a month's notice to the de fendant before the commencement of the fuit, would be a conftant ground for difpute and altercation, as the defendant would always contend, that the notice was not conformabl to the law; and if it happened to deviate in the most minut circumftance, the plaintiff would be nonfuited, and woul be obliged to go through the whole again at a great expence In a cafe of this fort notice was abfolutely neceffary, as every occupier of land knew, that he was obliged by law to fer out the tithes, and to inform the tithe owner of it; and if he did not do this, but fubtracted the tithes, he knew that a de mand would be made on him in fome fhape or other, and therefore a lawfuit would never come unawares and uneypectedly on a man in this fituation. He farther remarked that the liberty which the defendant had of making a tender for the tithes by him fubtracted, would place all other tithe owners in a moft difagreeable fituation, as the confequence would be, that the tithe owner muit accept of the tender, whether it was equal or not to his demand; for, as the tithes had been fubtracted, he could not tell whether the money o fered was a compenfation; and as it would always be in the power of the occupier to prove that the fum propofed was the full amount of the tithes of his crop, the tithe owner would be afraid to commence a fuit under this uncertainty, left he should lose his caufe, and be faddled with full cofts, as the act directed; and it would therefore frequently happen, that the tithe owner would be obliged to take less than the real value of his tithes. He had confidered this claufe with the greatest attention, and, on a fuppofition of the tithes being

3

fubtracted,

fubtracted, he could not devife any method by which the owner of the tithes would arrive at a certain knowledge of the value of them, and yet he was to accept of the leader, or commence a lawfuit under the greatest difadvantages; and he left it to the candour of their Lordships to determine, whether it was reasonable that the property of any man in this kingdom fhould be put into fuch a fituation. He then entered into an examination of the ftatutes for the payment of tithes, and obferved that they were principally three, two of which paffed in the reign of Henry the Eighth, and the third in the reign of Edward the Sixth. On this occafion, he muit beg leave moft earnestly to recommend it to the Houfe to confider whether this bill would not work feine alteration in thole ftatutes, which were the Magna Charta of tithe He then added, that this was a fubject in wi.ich the laity as well as the clergy were concerned, as he apprehended that the former had as great, perhaps a greater property in tithes than the clergy; and what induced him to lay this, was, that when he made a calculation, and found that if the tithes of the kingdom were to be divided into four equal parts, then three of thofe parts would nearly belong to the laity as freehold and beneficial leafes.

owners.

With refpect to the extenfion of the act of King William for the recovery of finall tithes from forty fhillings to ten pounds, he remarked that there was no occafion for this extenfion, as the act, as it now food, anfwered the purpofes for which it was made extremely well; and he did not underftand that any perfons, who were concerned in the receipt of tithes, defired to have any alteration. Under all thefe circumftances he felt himself justified in moving for the rejection of the bill.

The Archbishop of Canterbury contended, that moft un- The Archreafonable advantages were given throughout this bill to the bishop of defendant, by which means many crimes, which deferved cor- Canterbury rection, would go unpunished: and as to the fecond part of the bill, which related to tithes, the poor vicar, who always found much difficulty in the recovery of his tithes, would become more egibarraffed than he was before, if this bill fhould pafs into law. His Grace obferved, that he had no doubt but that irregularities were committed in the Ecclefiaftical Courts by needy proctors; and what Court was free from fuch irregularities? But he did not think that a fufficient reafon to pafs fuch a law as this, which acknowledged the jurifdiction of the Ecclefiaftical Court, and yet put it under fuch reftraints, that it could fcarcely exercife its jurifdiction for the correction even of fuch crimes as were allowed to belong to its cognizance. His Grace fhewed this in feveral cafes, and particularly in thofe of defamation and adultery; and here