Hide Article Text (OCR)
LOlTDOir bkspatcb:ioners. In the meantime the general election of 1837 took place, and Mr. Janies then voted for Sir J. Williams, lately a member of that house. But the virar, on the contrary, was a warm partisan of the Tory candidate, and soon after the election, and sfter Mr. James’s' tenure of office had expired, Mr. James was cited to the Ecclesiastical Court by the Rev. Ebenezer Morris for absenting himself for several Sundays from church during his year of office, notwithstanding that it was usual in the parish lo choose a Dissenter, and notwithstanding the Rev. Ebenezer Morris had himself been a party to the election of Mr. James.—(Hear, hear.) The citation having been served, the suit was proceeded with, and the result was the condemnation of Mr. James, who, not choosing to pay the costs, was also committed to gaol.—(Hear, hear.) And who, did the house suppose, was the judge of the court before which Mr. James was cited to appear? That judge was the Rev. David Archibald Williams, rural dean and surrogate, and also the editor of the Tory Carmarthen Journal. —(Hear, hear.) The lion, member moved, “ that in conformity with the recommendation of the Commissioners on Ecclesiastical Courts in England and Wales, the jurisdiction of all the inferior ecclesiastical courts should be abolishedwithout delav.”*Mr. W. O. Stanley seconded the motion.Mr. Pryme could not assent to the motion.Mr. J. Jones said, that he was a personal friend of the clergyman, Mr. Ebenezer Morris, and of the other gentlemen who had acted as the judges on this occasion, but he knew nothing of Mr. James, who had been mentioned. The case of Mr. Jones was very dilferent from what hud been represented. The gravamen of the charge appeared to be, that .another churchwarden had been named with him, who had not been called on to do anv duty whatever. Mr. Rhys* * vGoring Thomas was the patron of the living held by Mr.Ebenezer Morris, and having irone down to reside in the- \parish, had been nominated as the clergyman's churchwarden. Immediately upon this, circumstances of an important nature had called him up to London, and had kept him here during the whole of last year, and indeed up to the present lime. Mr. Jones was perfectly aware of that, hut had never complained of it: and, as he (Mr. Jones) thought, was rather glad of it, as it enabled him to act without the interference of another churchwarden. That statement would, he thought, do away with all idea of anv blame attaching to Mr. Morris. —(Hear. ) \\ ith rcgaru to election matters, would the housebelieve that this man (Mi. Jones) had been called on to provide the sacramental bread and wine before William IV. was even taken ill?—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Morris was an excellent clergyman, passing rich, with about .1*200 per annum; he held the largot parish m i annarthen, preached four sermons every Sunday, two m \\ tffiffi and two in English (hear), and gave up all ne ircviwai irr.m this parish to a worthy curate, who had \ een nunii-iuvrt by the bishop.—(Hear, hear.) He held (us vc uudeirK od i two parishes adjoining to this, and Mr. Thomas had therefore aiven him this living.—v w(Hear.) Mr. David Jones was appointed churchwarden, and a rumour was spread that he had not prepared the sacramental bread and wine that had been considered recpiisite. By the 20th carton of the church he (Mr. J. Jones) found that churchwardens were required to provide against the time of the communion, with the advice of the minister, good sacramental bread ana wine, and if it were said that these cartons were not a part of the law of the land, he would say in answer thereto that by a statute of Elizabeth, and another of Charles II., thcv had been made such. Jones was at the time well aware that the arrears of church-rate then due, ami which he could have collected if he pleased, were more than sufficient to provide for the. sacramental bread and wine, but he neglected to collect them, and neglected also to provide the requisite bread and wine. Mr. Morris, 'finding that the churchwarden neglected this, and unwilling that any interruption should be made of the sacred service, provided the bread and wine himself, but sent a letter to David Jones noticing his neglect, and requesting that a similar omission might not occur. No notice having been taken of this communication, a written notice was sent requiring him to attend at a vestry (as we understood.) He did not attend, but it could be proved thaton the same dav he came to an alehouse near the*church, and there lie used stub obscene, profane, and blasphemous language, us applying to the sacred elements, as lie (the lion, member) would not pollute the ears of the house or his own lips by repeating. Mr. Morris then did what he considered his duty—lie cited him to appear in the Ecclesiastical Court, and at the same time it was intimated to him, that if he did appear and promised to behave better, no further proceedings would be taken, and he should not have any costs to pay. He did not comply withthis advice, but went on to tight the battle out in every way he could, and he was cast, lie was then called on to pay costs, and for non-payment lie was sent, to prison. So far from the costs being £80, the fact was, that thev were under .00.—(Hear, hear.) And for refusing to pay these, which he had voluntarily and unnecessarily incurred, he now called on the house for redress—that was, of course, that he should be discharged from the consequences of his contempt.Mr. W. Ellis said, that there were excellent and most conscientious men among the dissenters, who would prefer going to prison to paying anything towards church-rates, and that great allowance should be made for their conscientious scruples.Dr. Lushixgton supported the motion,and wished for the abolition of courts, which were the instruments of grievous injustice.Sir C. Burrell spoke in praise of the liberality of the clergymen of the Church of England.Mr. O’Connell supported the motion. Proceedings like those which had taken place iu this case of Mr. Jones, tended to injure the cause of religion.Mr. Da rhy moved the previous question.The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave his hearty concurrence to the motion, but proposed omitting the words •4 without delay.”* VMr. G. Knight hoped his hon. friend would not press the motion to a division.Lord G. Somerset objected to the motion, and the manner in which it had been brought forw ard. The house had not been told what was to be substituted for the courts proposed to be abolished.Mr. Easthope supported the motion.Mr. Hawes replied.Mr. Darby said, that after what had fallen from the hon.#member for Lambeth, he would not divide the house.The question was then put, and the motion as amended by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was agreed to.Upon the motion of Mr. Laxgdale, leave was then given to bring in a bill to explain and amend an act of the 1st and2d of William IV., relating to double assessments of the land-tax.Custody of Infants.—Mr. Serjeant Talfourd said, that in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill, founded on the principle of the bill which passed the House of Commons last session by a large majority, and which was thrown outaccidentally by a majority of only three in the House of Lords, he would briefly state the modifications which he proposed to introduce into that measure. These went in certain cases to take the children from a father, against whom a charge of adultery had been established, to provide for the mother having access to them in other cases.Leave was then given to bring in this bill.Sir F. Burdett’s name was then called by the Speaker, and the hon. baronet (who had a notice on the paper to call the attention of the house to the petition of Mr. Dillon) not being present,Mr. Rice said, that this was the third time that this notice had stood upon the paper in the hon. baronet’s name without being brought on. The government were charged very freely in the newspapers with having unfairly neglected an individual. He trusted that the hon. baronet would bring this matter forward for discussion [at an early period, when he would be quite prepared to meet him.—Adjourned.HOUSE OF LORDS.—Friday, April 26.Several petitions were presented.Newfoundland.—The Earl of Aberdeen rose to presenta petition from Newfoundland, which he said was of very great importance, as Newfoundland had long been considered the nursery of our seamen. The petition prayed for the abolition of the Colonial Legislature of that country. This he admitted to be rather a startling proposition, and one w hich he was not prepared at once to support; but he thought that ground euough had boen stated in the petition for parliamentary enquiry. The petition was founded on the conduct of the House of Assembly, complaining of its tyrannical and corrupt measures. The Assembly was formed of persons by no means well qu tlified for legislative functions. One of them was a hired servant of £10 a year, receiving for his attendance in the House of Assembly a guinea per day.—(Hear, hear.) Was not that a burlesque on the representation of the people ?The Marquis of Normanby said he did not think it would be possible to justify all the Acts of the House of Assembly. —(A laugh.) At the same time he knew there were two tales, and the allegations of the petition were in great part denied by the Assembly.The Earl of Durham said he had been entrusted with a petition directly impugning the statements of the Noble Earl opposite. He had received the petition from the Speaker of the House of Assembly, and it was signed by upwards of 2000. It represented that there was no truth in the statements which affirmed the colony was disorganised or disturbed, and prayed for a Parliamentary enquiry.The Earl of Ripon presented a petition from the inhabitants of Liverpool, to the same effect as that presented by his noble friend (Earl of Aberdeen.)Lord Brougham thought the Government should imme-diately apply itself to the subject. He certainly considered a full inquiry necessary.—(Hear.)The Earl of Aberdeen briefly replied.The petition was received.Deanery of Exp:ter Bill.—Lord Melbourne postponed this bill in consequence of a request from the Chapter * ot Exeter, that the bill should not pass till after the meeting of the Chapter, which was to be held next week.—Ad o irnei #HOUSE OF COMMONS—Friday, April 26.The London Bridge Approaches Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he committed.Petitions on the usual subjects were presented.Sir G. Sinclair brought up a report (which was read by the clerk) from the committee on the Manchester and Leeds Railway Bill, stating that the committee had been regularly appointed in accordance with the standing orders ^f the House, that they had assembled at twelve o’clock, and waited one hour, at which time two members only were present, and as three were required for the election of a chairman, they had no power to proceed to business, but had determined to select a temporary chairman to report this circumstance to the house. He moved that the report be laid on the table.A conversation of some length occurred, which terminated in the passing of a resolution that the committee should have leave to sit on Monday.Lord John Russell postponed the second reading of the Beer Bill to Monday next.Turkey and Egypt.—Mr. Hume was desirous of asking whether the news which had arrived of the commencement ofhostilities between Mehemet A1 i and the Porte was correct, and if so, how fur our Government had interfered betweenthe parties ?Lord J. Russell said that no intelligence had been received of the commencement of hostilities between the Porte and Mehemet Ali, that the policy of the Government was to maintain both parties in the position in which they were placed by the last Treaty.Imprisonment for Debt Bill.—Mr. Baines wished to ask his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General, whether he was aware that notwithstanding the passing of the act of last session abolishing imprisonment for debt, that therewere at present in the different gaols of the kingdom, hundreds, he might say thousands, of poor debtors kept in confinement, owing to the necessity which existed, from the construction put upon this act, for their sureties appearing personally to justify their hail in open co\irt in London ? And whether he had any objection to introduce into his bill now before the house for amending the act referrred to, a clause empowering the Insolvent Debtors’s Court to appoint proper persons in the country as commissioner-', to take the recognizances of the sureties under such circumstances as would render the personal appearance of the bail in Londonunnecessary.The Attorney-General said he had received from nil quarters the most gratifying intelligence respecting the operation of the Act for the Abolition of Imprisonmentfor Debt.Jamaica.—Lord J. Russell said, that in moving the house at its rising do adjourn till Monday—understanding the right hon. baronet (Sir R. Peel) meant to oppose the Jamaica Bill altogether—stated it to be the intention of the government to press the measure. The only material point on which they had any doubt was as to the term of years the bill should continue inexistence. If it could be shown that a continuance for a lesser term of the extraordinary powers of the bill would secure efficient legislation for Jamaica, upon that point her Majesty’s government thought there might be some change. The West India Islands Bill he would not bring in till Monday, and the Bill respecting Canada on Monday se’nnight. *Sir R. Peel thought Parliament bound to maintain the Jamaica Prisons Bill; but from the inconveniences which would attend raising taxes iu the way proposed by the Jamaica Bill, he must oppose it.Mr. Hume would do all in his power to oppose the suspension of the Assembly of Jamaica, and he was perfectly certain that such a propositinn would never pass that house.Election Petition Trials Bill.—The order of the day having been read for going into committee on this Bill,Colonel Davies rose to move that the Bill be referred to a select committee. The gallant colonel, in consequence of the noise in the house, and his own very indistinct articulation, was throughout his speech inaudible in the gallery.A long but not very interesting debate ensued, in which Sir G. Strickland, Sir H. Hardinge, Mr. C. Wynn, Sir R. Peel, Mr. Kelly, and the Attorney-general participated. Mr. Buller moved, that it be an instruction to the committee to provide for the appointment of permanent assessors to election committee, and for the establishment of a court of Appeal for the revising barristers, composed of those assessors. A further discussion took place, in which the speakers wereMr. Greene, Mr. Childers, Sir R. Peel, Mr. Rich, Mr. War-burton, Lord J. Russell, Sir J. Graham, Mr. S. O Brien, Mr. O’Connell, Sir W. James, Sir G. Strickland, Mr. Pyrnne, Mr. Seijeant Wilde, Mr. Langdale, Lord Mahon, and Mr. R. Palmer.The bill was then committed.Clauses up to 22 were agreed to after some modifications.The Chairman then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Monday.Supply.—The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved that the Speaker leave the chair, and that the House go into a Committee of supply.Col. Sibthorp would oppose any grant that the right hon. gentleman might move for, until he had laid before the House the returns respecting the distinctive expenses of the mission of the Earl of Durham to Canada, wffiich he had moved for on the 21st of February, and which had been promised. He believed the Government were afraid to present them.— (A laugh.)The Chancellor of the Exchequer said these returns were already on the table.—(Laughter.)Colonel Sibthorp complained that the returns were notprinted.The Speaker then left the chair.The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved that £60,000 be voted on account of contingencies.Agreed to.Ways and Means.—The house having resumed, the Speaker again left the chair, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved a vote of £13,000,000 Exchequer Bills.Agreed to.The house then resumed, the orders of the day were gone through, and the house adjourned at one o’clock.THE VOICE FROM THE GALLERY.The proceedings of the week have been generally devoid of interest. The sittings have been short and the attendance exceedingly thin. As violent excitement affects thebody, and brings on an exertionless langour, so the stimulus of last week proving too severe, has been attended with anatural re-action, and public business has been neglected. The Irish debate therefore has caused a loss to the country not of one week’s business, but almost of two. On Monday April 22nd, the chief business, the second reading of the Deanery of Exeter Appointment Bill, was the chief point of interest, and then merely because the Deanery of Exeter had been improperly bestowed on one of the Russell family, and had been afterwards withdrawn, when an outcry was raised against the appointment. It appears from the remarks of the Bishop of Exeter on the next evenintr, that an Irish Roman Catholic viscount recommended a Protestant clergyman to till the vacant dignity. This is cried up by the tory papers as a state of things nearly akin to treason and revolution, for my part I rejoice to see any such manifestation of liberality and good feeling towards a different religion In thecommons, Mr. Harvey called the attention of the House tothe lax manner in which the standing orders of the House were carried out, one of those orders was, that in all Enclosure Bills, a portion of ground should be set apart for the recreation of the people. This was rarely attended to, and if a number of bills of this nature were examined, it would he found that neither population, number of acres to be set apart, nor mode of preserving the people’s amusement ground would ever be found ; thus it is ever wffien the people are the suffering party. A complaint may be made, but where is the redrCvSs of the grievance ? Never will it be found until the people are fairly represented. The Jamaica Government Bill was brought up for second reading this night, and after some remarks of Sir R. Peel, of a most tory character, on the necessity of upholding the dignity of the House, and of discovering some fit means of dealing with the House of Assembly, should it prove refractory, coimsel were heard at the bar in favour of certain petitioners from Jamaica. The matter was at last postponed, at 12 o’clock, until next day. I may remark that Mr. Burge, the counsel, spoke in a heavy unimpassioned manner, and produced but iittle effect. Ifis speech read better than I expected. On Tuesday the 23d, the Deanery of Exeter Appointment Bill passed through committee, and after the Bishop of Exeter and lord Melbourne each had a speech on the right of the Chapter of Exeter to appoint their dean, the House adjourned. In theCommons, Mr. Harvey moved a resolution, declaring that in future a suitable space should be set apart for the poor to enjoy themselves in, wherever an enclosure was made. The motion was agreed to, for the house were afraid to oppose the hon. member. Whether any standing order is complied with or not, henceforward an enclosure bill cannot pass, unless the committee on the bill shall have taken cure to appoint a proper place for the recreation and exercise of the neighbouring population. Sir E. Codrington moved a resolution to the effect, that all ships of war should have the same complement of men in peace as in war: the motion was negatived by a majority of 90 to 27, and I think justly. There are plenty of men at present, hut they are injudiciously distributed ; let the number of ships be reduced one-third, and then there will be enough and to spare of men for the other vessels. The Jamaica Government Bill was again before the House, and another counsel was heard in as heavy a strain as his leader. When he had concluded, the committee on the hill was fixed for Monday, when we may expect a grand debate, very long, very prosy, and every thing-toryish, for there is no doubt that Sir R. Peel and Lord J. Russell will pull together in the matter. On Wednesday the 24th, the Lords did not sit,and the Commons, after going through some uuinterestingbusiness adjourned at an early hour. On Thursday the 24th,the onlv business of interest was an assurance from lord*Melbourne that the government were anxious to preserve peace between Turkey and Egypt. Our ambassador will do all in his power to keep the eastern bull-dogs from tearingach other.—In the Commons, the chief business was the shameful treatment of a poor Dissenter, named David Jones, who was imprisoned by the Ecclesiastical Court, for not, when churchwarden, furnishing bread and wine for the sacrament at his own expense, after the vestry had refused a rate. He remains at present in prison, for costs amounting to a large sum, and which he can never pay from his own resources. The man who acted this cruel part towards him, is the Rev. E. Morris, rector of Carmarthan, and the holder of a second living. The matter was now brought before the house by Mr. Hawes, and the result is, that the smaller Ecclesiastical Courts are to be abolished as soon “ as conveniently may be,” which in my mind means not at all. It was the Chancellor of the Exchequer w ho moved the amendment, for Mr. Hawes’s motion, said “at once.” My word for it, that this time twelvemonth will see them still in full vigour, imprisoning and fining dissenters or churchmen, no matter wffiich, their gorge being comprehensive enough for all. Sir R. Peel announced his intention of opposing Ministers on the Jamaica question on Monday night. On Friday, 26th, in the Lords, a petition was presented from Newfoundland by Lord Aberdeen, praying to have the House of Assembly abolished. Lord Durham presented one praising that body generally, and altogether the opposite of the other. The matter is to be considered ! Alas, for the petitions to the Commons! Lord John Russell postponed the Jamaica Bill to Friday, in consequence of Sir R. Peel’s opposition. Why this should cause the delay, it is almost impossible to tell. Perhaps he thinks something may turn up in the meantime. He brings in the Canada Bill on Monday week. The rest of the evening was spent in a long discussion in Committee Election Petitions’ Trial Bill—an interesting subject to theVoice from the Gallery.An astonishing Account.—To the Editor of the London Dispatch. Sir,—If my very extraordinary case should induce you to give it a place in the columns of your paper, you will certainly confer an eternal obligation on many who may be made acquainted with it. Two years ago, I was attacked with Paralysis, which deprived me of the use of my left side, from the crown of my head to the sole of my left foot, in this state I expected to remain a cripple, I consulted, I believe, almost every eminent medical man, but it was all of no use. I have tried what is termed a Quack remedy, “ Holloway’s Ointment.” I took the contents of a 4s. 6d., box, and dissolved it in half a pint of the best spirits of turpentine, I got into a hot bath every day at home, and then went to bed. My wife immediately commenced rubbing it into every part of my paralysed body, and in such a way, as one would rub on salt to cure a side of bacon; this operation required about an hour every day. It is now about three months since I used it, I have completely regained the use of my side, but find it weakly, which, however, is gaining strength daily. I feel convinced that those who may have lost the use of their limbs, either from colds, paralysis, paralytic stroke, or other causes, may shortly be restored by using this most extraordinary ointment, in the same way that I did. I suppose that most of your readers know that Mr. Holloway’s Establishment, is at 13, Broad-street Buildings, City. I dare say it may be had of any chemist, in Town or country. I also send you ray address, which you are at liberty to show to any of your correspondents. Your obedient servant, James Cornisa Bassett. London, April 24th, 1839.“It is with great pleasure that we add our testimony to that of so many of our contemporaries, with reference to Mr. Wray’s Chalybeate German Sexdlitz Powders, which are decidedly the best ever produced in this country. Their tonic and aperient qualities are brought to an infallible state of perfection; and all people about to undertake lengthened journeys or voyages, should provide themselves with a supply of these admirable compounds. We perceived, on a visit to Mr. Wray’s shop, pn Holbom-hill, a few days ago, that he has also an extensive assortment of all kinds of lineaments and select patent articles of the same species on sale, at very reduced prices.”—The Monthly, September, 1838.
Newspaper Details
London Dispatch
London, Middlesex, GB
Sun, Apr 28, 1839
Page 3
Full Page
Clipped by
Jack B.
USA 05 Jan 2022
Other Publications Near London, Middlesex
Bingleys Journal
Arminian Magazine
London Daily Mail
London Stars and Stripes
London Daily Universal Register
