Members were kept for months in suspense | parish, should not be interfered with. He as to their position, and Petitions against hoped the Committee would adopt the words them were got up on the slightest possible "ten or more inhabitants," of whom a grounds. Such practices affected the ho- certain number were householders. nour and dignity of the House, and ought to be considered at the earliest possible period with a view to their prevention. Main Question put, and agreed to. Ordered, That the Petition of William John Knox and Moses Bullick, complaining of an undue Election and Return for the Borough of Lisburn, do stand referred to the General Committee of Elections, the Document withdrawing such Petition not having constituted a withdrawal thereof, under the Elections Petitions Act, 1848. ENGLISH CHURCH SERVICES IN WALES BILL-[BILL 81.]-COMMITTEE. Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) Clause 1 (Bishop of Welsh Dioceses may licence Chapel for Performance of Divine Service in English, and nominate minister thereto). MR. HUNT said, he would move an Amendment to the effect that of ten or more English residents, on whose application the bishop might licence services in the English language, three should be householders. MR. WALPOLE said, he feared that the Amendment would diminish the efficiency of the measure. MR. H. A. BRUCE said, he objected to the introduction of the term "householders" in conjunction with "English residents," as likely to prove too restrictive. MR. PULLER suggested that the word "inhabitants" should be inserted instead of English residents." SIR JOHN HANMER said, he could not agree to that alteration, because casual visitors might not be included under the term "inhabitants." He trusted the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University would keep the Bill as it stood, so that the bishop might control the whole MR. E. P. BOUVERIE said, the Act of Uniformity required that in Wales the Church services should be celebrated in the Welsh language. Now, many residents in Wales could not speak the language of the country, and surely nothing could be more reasonable than to allow them to hear the services in their own tongue. The condition contained in a subsequent clause of the Bill, that the persons anxious to have the English services celebrated should be liable to build a place of worship, and to provide a minister, appeared amply sufficient for all practical purposes. Amendment agreed to. MR. HUNT said, he would then move the insertion, after "inhabitants," of the words of whom three shall be householders." Amendment proposed, in page 1, line 15, after the word "inhabitants," to insert the words of whom three shall be householders. MR. AYRTON said, he objected to the Amendment. A man who was a lodger surely had as much right to religious ministrations as a householder. The practice of associating the Church and its offices. with property and position was most injurious. Question put, "That those words be there inserted." The Committee divided:-Ayes 31; Noes 45: Majority 14. MR. H. A. BRUCE said, that the incumbent was to appoint a spiritual person to officiate, and after the persons requiring his services had guaranteed the payment of the expenses the incumbent might appoint a person that was distasteful to them. He therefore, to prevent such an occurrence, proposed the omission of certain words. Should the incumbent appoint an unfit person there would be no guarantee, if the Amendment were adopted, to pay the expenses. Amendment agreed to. MR. LYGON said, he would propose, in line 17. after Wales,' to insert " in which the ordinary parochial services are in the Welsh tongue." THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER suggested that the word "ordi nary" in the Amendment should be left out, and the word "only" added. The Bill, he understood, was intended to remedy a very extreme case, without running the risk of disturbing the parochial system generally, and the position of those incumbents who were in the most exemplary manner labouring to do everything they could for the spiritual provision of their parishes. MR. WALPOLE said, he thought the word "ordinary" should be retained in the Amendment. MR. NEWDEGATE said, he could not see what claim a set of casual visitors to a Welsh watering-place had to more than one English service a day. COLONEL PENNANT said, there was a large and increasing number of English residents in Wales, and it was thought that they ought not to be at the mercy of the incumbent, but that there should be an appeal to the bishop in case of need. MR. C. W. WYNN said, the only thing that was asked was that buildings should be licensed in which ministers paid by those who required their services should officiate. It was not intended that the incumbent of a parish in which such building should be licensed should be at all responsible, either legally or morally, for the provision of such services, and neither was it intended in any way to interfere with his parochial authority. The clauses of the Bill were all framed so as to recognise and maintain unimpaired that authority, and all the incumbents with whom he had been in communication approved the Bill. served, that the service was in Welsh only where the Welsh language was commonly used. He found nothing in the Act of Uniformity to make the use of the English language illegal. MR. WALPOLE said, that the words as proposed to be inserted by the hon. Member (Mr. Lygon) were not the same as appeared on the paper, and, if adopted, would defeat the whole object of the Bill. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, he wished to point out that the Amendment might more properly be dealt with in another part of the clause. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. COLONEL PENNANT said, he would move to insert in Clause 1, line 12, after the word "licence," the following words:— "On the nomination by the incumbent of the said parish, district, or place, of a fit and proper person as minister to such chapel." Amendment proposed, In page 2, line 12, after the word "licence," to insert the words "on the nomination by the incumbent of the said parish, district, or place of a fit and proper person as minister to such chapel." Question put That those words be there inserted.' The Committee divided :-Ayes 32; Noes 31: Majority 1. MR. II. H. VIVIAN said, the effect of the Amendment which had been just carried, would be to make the Bill inoperative. He should therefore move to report progress. House resumed. Committee report Progress; to sit again on Wednesday 10th June. ELECTION PETITIONS BILL. On Motion of Mr. HUNT, Bill to amend the Law relating to Election Petitions, ordered to be brought in by Mr. IlUNT and Mr. SERJEANT PIGOTT. Bill presented, and read 1o. [Bill 124.] COSTS SECURITY BILL. On Motion of Mr. Burr, Bill to amend the Law relating to the giving of Security for Costs by Plaintiff's residing out of the jurisdiction of the Courts, ordered to be brought in by Mr. BUTT and Mr. MURRAY. Bill presented, and read 1o. [Bill 126.] MR. E. P. BOUVERIE said, he objected to the Amendment as it was originally proposed. The Act of Uniformity required that in districts such as those referred to, the service should be in the Welsh tongue. Resolved, That the Chairman be directed to THE SOLICITOR GENERAL ob- move the House, That Leave be given to bring in PORT ERIN HARBOUR (ISLE OF MAN) BILL. Port Erin Harbour (Isle of Man)-considered in Committee: (In the Committee.) Resolution reported. Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. MILNER GIBSON and Mr. HUTT. Bill presented, and read 1o. [Bill 123.] EXECUTION OF DECREES BILL. a Bill to authorize the taking of Harbour Dues at uninterrupted. But if the Bill referred to Port Erin, in the Isle of Man, in order to provide passed, this fine view would be destroyed a fund for the Improvement of the Harbour; and by a barbarous and unsightly railway vinfor other purposes. duct. No doubt, there was a proposal to make the structure ornamental; but the petitioners were of opinion that the very attempt to make it so would be all the more likely to destroy the beauty of the cathedral. The petitioners were most anxious that the whole subject should be thoroughly considered, and that their Lordships would not allow the great injury now threatened to the City of London and the metropolitan cathedral to be completed by either the railway company, to whom the powers for constructing the work were originally given, or any other company in On Motion of Mr. BUTT, Bill to make better provision for the enforcement throughout England and Ireland of the Decrees and Orders of the Courts of Chancery, Probate, and Divorce, ordered to be brought in by Mr. BUTT, Mr. LONGFIELD, and Mr. MURRAY. Bill presented, and read 1o. [Bill 125.] House adjourned at half HOUSE OF LORDS, Friday, May 15, 1863. MINUTES. PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading * LUDGATE STATION AND JUNCTION RAILWAYS BILL [H.L.]— THE PROPOSED VIADUCT ACROSS LUDGATE HILL. PETITIONS. THE BISHOP OF LONDON presented a Petition from sixty-seven of the clergy of the City of London and suburbs, signed, among others, by the Dean of St. Paul's and two Canons in residence, praying their Lordships to withheld their sanction from a Bill before Parliament, which, among other powers, authorized the construction of a railway viaduct across Ludgate Hill. The petitioners expressed their conviction that the inconvenience now felt of passing along that crowded thoroughfare would be greatly increased by such an erection, while the beauty of the western approach to the Cathedral of St. Paul's would be materially injured. He would remind their Lordships that the exterior view of St. Paul's was generally considered to be more beautiful than that of St. Peter's, for the reason that the view of St. Peter's was intercepted by the Portico, whereas the whole view of the front of St. Paul's was their stead. LORD CHELMSFORD presented a Petition from 1,200 Bankers, Merchants, Tradesmen, and Residents of the City of London to the same effect, and suggesting the practicability of substituting a tunnel under Ludgate Hill in lieu of a viaduct over it. There were two Bills before the House which had relation to this subjectone to incorporate a Company for making a central station between Earl Street and Skinner Street, with junctions to connect it with the London, Chatham, and Dover line, on the one hand, and with the Metropolitan Railway on the other, and to transfer to the new Company certain powers already granted to the London, Chatham, and Dover Company, which included the formation of a viaduct across Ludgate Hill; the other Bill to extend the time within which the latter company were authorized to complete their works. The two Bills were reported on by the Board of Trade, and the President of the Council agreed with him that it would be desirable that both Bills should go into Committee, with the view of facilitating some arrangement by which the line might be carried, not over, but under Ludgate Hill. The compulsory powers of the London, Chatham, and Dover Company would expire on the 1st of August. The Bill for the central station had been withdrawn, and the only Bill now before Parliament was to extend the period within which the London, Chatham, and Dover Company should complete the works. The petitioners prayed that the Bill might not be allowed to pass, and that no further powers might be granted to any Company, until proper restrictions were imposed with respect to the means of crossing Ludgate Hill; and that their Lordships would consider in the Committee on the Bill the pos sibility and the expediency of substituting a tunnel instead of a viaduct; and that if their Lordships should be of opinion that a tunnel would accomodate the traffic, the promoters should be compelled to apply for the necessary powers, or that the Bill should be rejected. sion of the line further northwards taken up by another company. The Select Committee would probably find it difficult to do anything unless they had Instruction from the House as to what it desired to have done under the circumstances. They would, however, have the power of taking evidence, and they might then consider whether it was not necessary to apply to the House for some instructions in the matter. Considered in connection with the power already granted, this matter was one of serious importance; and it could not be disposed of in a conversation like the present. When the Committee had the parties before it, it would, perhaps, be better able to judge as to what could be done, and it might then be desirous of receiving some power or instruction from their Lordships. It might be expedient that the Bill should be adjourned. Certainly, the subject required very serious consideration from those who took an interest in it. Petitions read, and Ordered to lie on the table. LORD HARRIS desired to remind their Lordships that the original Bill had passed both Houses of Parliament. He was informed that Members of the Committee of the House of Commons to which the Bill was referred, and two Members of the Committee of their Lordships' House, had gone to the spot to assure themselves that no obstruction to traffic or unsightly interference with the view of the Cathedral would be occasioned by the erection of the proposed viaduct. He wished to call the attention of their Lordships to the fact, that upon the faith of that Act of Parliament four millions of money had been already expended upon works upon the other side of the river, and that the funds for the metropolitan extension had been raised and the whole of the works arranged on the understanding that the line would be con- DUCHY nected with the northern railways. This was a matter of the highest importance for the convenience of the public. LORD REDESDALE said, that the Bill for carrying out the scheme had been referred to a Select Committee which was to meet on Monday, and he did not see of what use it would be to take up their Lord ships' time by discussing the subject at present. LORD WODEHOUSE said, that having been appointed Chairman of the Select Committee, before the subject dropped he should like to know in what position the Committee would stand when it met on Monday. Of course, it would be highly irregular to express any opinion upon the merits of a Bill which was going before a Select Committee; but then the Committee ought to understand whether it was to enter upon its inquiry with its hands perfectly free, or whether it was to be fettered by any expression of opinion on the part of the House. LORD REDESDALE said, the promoters of the Bill sought to raise a large sum of money to make a new line. He imagined, from a statement made with reference to the Bill that had been withdrawn, that the Company did not intend to go on beyond Earl Street with their line, because they had not the funds for that purpose, and that they would be glad to have the exten OF CORNWALL MANAGEMENT SECOND READING. THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE moved the second reading of the Bill (according to Order); and said that if that Motion were adopted, he would propose that on Monday the Bill be committed pro formâ, in order that it might afterwards be printed with Amendments. THE EARL OF DERBY said, he did not reading of the Bill; but he would suggest mean to oppose the Motion for the second that before it was committed, the noble Duke should state the Amendments which he meant to introduce into it. In the state in which it stood it would require very attentive consideration. LORD VIVIAN hoped that some such Bill as this would be passed, because he was convinced it would be very beneficial. He would also like to see certain of its provisions made retrospective. Bill read 2, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next. HOLSTEIN AND SCHLESWIG THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH, rose. pursuant to notice, to ask, Whether the Government are prepared to produce any further Correspondence upon the Questions of Holstein and Schleswig; and especially both, and they were, I believe, deeply gratewhether they can communicate any Repre-ful. To the noble Earl and his Colleague sentations which may have been made to was mainly due the acknowledgment on the Danish Government by those of Austria and Prussia, relative to the Proclamation of the King of Denmark, dated the 31st of March 1863, and said: My Lords, it is now rather more than two years since I called your attention to the danger which then seemed to be imminent over the State of Denmark. At that time some concession was made by Denmark which was held to obviate the necessity for an immediate execution which had been ordered by the Germanic Confederation. I now desire to call your attention to a danger which is not, perhaps, so immediate, but which seems to be even greater than that which I brought under your notice two years ago. It is not so immediate, because the minds of men are so occupied by the state of affairs in Poland, and it is believed to be so necessary to hold the forces of some of the German Powers disposable for eventualties in that unhappy country, that I do not think an execution will be ordered against Denmark under existing circumstances. But it is nevertheless expedient that your Lordships should look at the dangers which are approaching, and should endeavour to avert them, rather than that you should leave them to a time at which it may be more difficult to deal with them. The period which has elapsed since February 1861 has been occupied in what is termed in ternational negotiation, which, I regret to say, has produced nothing in the way of an approximation between the parties, but, on the contrary, increased exasperation. But to us the most remarkable circumstance connected with that negotiation is, that in September last the noble Earl at the head of the Foreign Office made a proposal with respect to the future relations of Schleswig with Denmark, which was diametrically opposed to one which, after consultation with his Colleagues, he had made in April 1861. That change of opinion on the part of the noble Lord produced a profound impression throughout the whole of Denmark. It struck the people with the greatest surprise and disappointment. I will not say it filled them with dismay, for they are a bold people, determined to look their diffi culties in the face, and to stand by their rights; but they were deeply disappointed and discouraged. They had looked upon the noble Earl and Lord Palmerston as among the very best friends of Denmark. They had received great services from them the part of Europe of the present succession to the Danish Crown. It was also mainly owing to them that the great Powers, and many of the smaller Powers, of Europe had joined in declaring that the integrity of the Danish States was an object of European concern-a declaration which has been held by Prince Gortschakoff as tantamount to a guarantee of the whole of the Danish dominions. During the war which took place between Denmark on one hand and Prussia and other German States on the other, many very considerable services were, no doubt, performed by the Government of this country to Denmark, in obtaining the two armistices, and ultimately in bringing about the peace; and therefore it was with great pain, as well as great disappointment, that the Danes heard of the change which had occurred in the opinion of the noble Earl. Under these circumstances, deserted as they appeared to be by the noble Earl and his Colleagues, the Danes took their own course. They did that which they thought at once right and expedient. They conceded to Germany, as I understand it, all that the noble Earl had asked, and they retained that possession of Schleswig, in connection with the kingdom of Denmark, which the noble Earl had proposed they should retain in April 1861. The noble Earl, therefore, if he adheres to his own betterconsidered opinions, shared by his Colleagues, ought to rejoice at the step which Denmark has now taken, for it is in accordance with what he lately desired, and it is in accordance likewise with what he proposed in 1861. For my own part, my Lords, I have always felt a great sympathy for the Danish people. I am, unfortunately, old enough to recollect the attack upon Copenhagen, in 1807, when the Government of this country, driven to that measure, perhaps, by the extreme necessities and difficulties of their position, in a time of peace with Denmark, sent an army and a fleet against the Danish capital. I recollect also the dissolution of the union which had existed for so many years between Denmark and Norway, when Norway was taken from Denmark, to be used as a bribe for Bernadotte, to induce him to join the allies against Napoleon. These were hard measures. They may have been required by necessity, but they were harsh and well |