Mr. Ferguson faid a few words in favour of the amendment 00sving

A long converfation was carried on between the Attorney General, Mr. Calcraft, Mr. Plummer, &c. on the fubject of the improvement of farms on leafe, which improvements it was propofed to tax according to their value. Mr. Plummer at length notified his intention to move, in a future ftage of the bill, an amendment, as he confidered the prefent claufe as a moft feriqus difcouragement to farmers, and confequently as being likely to injure the interefts of agriculture. bed be Mr. Calcraft, Dr. Laurence, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Sturges, Sir H. St. St. John Mildmay, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Attorney General, Mr. Vanfittart, Mr. Giles, the Lord Mayor, and feveral Members, fhared in a long and defultory difcuffion on fome claufes, and propofed amendments. In the courfe of which, fpeaking on the head of eftates principally productive by fines, Mr. Pitt obferved, that fuch fines did not fall properly under the denomination of capital, but andid certainly constitute a part of income, as they formed the o means of fubfiftence, upon which, undoubtedly, an average could easily be made out. Such, for instance, he faid, were the lands of the Church, of the Deans and Chapters, of the Bishops, of public fchools, and of that refpectable body b whom he had the honour to reprefent in that Houfe.

Y

thefe different defcriptions of property muft neceffarily be liable to the operation of the tax upon income, according to -the average afcertained. A general approbation of the right to honourable Member's opinion was expreffed.]

bluds The Committee then went through various other claufes, by after which, on the fuggeftion of Mr. W. Smith, the question bwas put, that the chairman report progrefs, and afk leave to fit again," which being agreed to, the Speaker refumed the a) chair, and after difpofing of a few other orders of the day, the Houfe adjourned.sv

to 15% to pabarst aidu site de RHEYDOU HOUSE

1.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

SİL FRIDAY, JULY 15..

... SCOTCH APPEAL. LOTHIAN V, HENDERSON.

The Lord Chancellor pronounced the judgment in this caufe, by which the Interlocutor in the Court of Seffion is affirmed.

It may not be amifs to obferve, that the original action in this caufe was on a policy of infurance on an American veffel condemned in the Courts of France, on account of not having the muster-roll on board. In this café a fpecial agreement had taken place between the infurers and the aflured, that the cargo fhould be paid for in bills of a certain date, notwithstanding a capture, if the cargo thould be proved to have been actually American property; and therefore, that there was no contravention of the warranty on the part affured. Our commercial readers will of course take notice, that this decifion takes the prefent action entirely out of the clats of the decifions which have invariably taken place in the Courts in England for half a century, in cafes where neutral veffels intured in this country have been condemned in Courts in France; this cafe ftanding on its own bottom. Several bills, were, brought up from the Commons and read a firft time..

BILL TO AMEND THE ACT OF QUEEN ANNE, FOR THE L: BETTER PROVISION OF THE CLERGY. > bi.

The order of the day for reading this bill a third time. having been moved, the Lord Chancellor read the Bill, when 10 bis

The Earl of Suffolk rofe and faid, he had fome few observa tions to make; but he would endeavour to avoid the repetition of what he had formerly faid upon the fubject, as much as poffible. His Lordfhip then faid, the great objection he felt 40 this bill was, because it was unconftitutional, inafmuch as it trenched upon a ftatute of the most effential importance; viz. the Statute of Mortmain. That ftatute his Lordship faid, had paffed nearly feventy years ago, 1736, and was regarded by all he writers on the Jab ect as one of the wifeft acts of Parliament that ever was paffed, He could not, therefore, but strongly object to the proceed ing to repeal that act, as the prefent bill did. He reafoned upon this point for fome time, and then faid, he had on a former day stated a real provision for the poorer clergy, and

which would produce forty times as much as the whole amount of the income arifing from Queen Anne's bounty, which was no more than fifteen thousand pounds. Let the dignitaries of the church contribute two real first fruits, and two real tenths. His Lordship ftated the arguments that he had more than once ufed with regard to the beneficed clergy, in poffeffion of livings of more than Icol. a year, all of whom he would have contribute to aflift their poorer brethren of the cloth, and alfo the dignified clergy of every defcription. In addition to this, if it should be found neceffary, he would propose the measure recommended by the Bishop of Llandaff in his celebrated letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to deduct a third of the profits of all Prebendaries, Deanerics, and other livings under Chapters, fuch as Bath and Wells, &c. and if a further fum fhould ftill be neceffary, he (Lord Suffolk) would propofe a tax of 2 per cent. on all livings above 300l. per annum to 8col.; and after the latter, fum, of 4 and 5 per cent. according to their value. The firft fruits and tenth swere given to our Kings before the reformaton, a practice which prevailed up to the reign of Queen Anne, who with great generofity gave them leave to eftablish a corporation, who were to diftribute the produce among the inferior clergy. If the Pope had continued his former fupremacy over the religion of this country, little doubt, could be entertained but he would have infifted on a real firit-fruits and tenth, and the Crown being now placed in the fituation of the Pope, had an undoubted right to exact the fame, which would produce 150,000l. which he thought would be perfectly adequate to the purpofe. His Lordship, Speaking of the Statute of Morimain, faid it was was of the utmost utility, for that many inftances of the greatest abufes had prevailed antecedent to it, through the influence of the clergy. He would ftate one which happened not many years fince at Naples, which was a Roman Catholic country, and confequently the priests had there more influence over the minds of men under circumstances of weaknefs and enthufiafm, commonly felt by perfons in a dying state, than in a Proteftant country. A prieft was fent for to adminifter fpiritual comfort to the mind of a man upon his death-bed, The Prince de Cereell, he believed, was the dying man, and poffeffed immenfe riches; the priest perfuaded him to leave his whole for une exchifively to him, to the great prejudice of his own family and relations. Nor was the prieft, contented with his wealth only, but he would have the bed from

under

under the dying man. At that moment the phyfician of the Prince came into the room, and finding what was doing, faid to the priest," No, you shall not have the bed, it is my perquifite, and I'll have it." This altercation got abroad, and the will was in confequence fet afide, His Lordship then adverted to what he had before faid relative to tithes being a heavy burthen on the improvements in agriculture; and alluding to what had on that occafion been advanced by the Bishop of St. Afaph, that where tithes are taken in kind, it was univerfally found they were the beft cultivated lands in the kingdom," his Lordship obferved, that it was certainly true; but fo far from its being an argument, that tithes were favourable to agriculture, it only proved this inconteftible fact, that where lands had been highly improved, the Clergy had uniformly infifted on receiving tithes in kind." His Lordship faid he could not attend to another bill upon this fubject, in the other houfe, as he wanted to go into the country to encourage his tenants and neighbours to act with energy and vigour against the enemy, if he effected a landing, His Lordship reminded the Houfe of what the confequencé had been in France, owing, he really believed, to the clergy of France joining the Tiers Etats; to that circumstance, he in a great measure attributed the revolution. Having touched upon various different matters, fome of which his Lordship admitted were not immediately connected with the prefent bill, he at length brought his fpeech to a conclufion.

་

The Bishop of St. Asaph rofe to fay, that notwithflanding the apprehensions of the noble Earl, that this bill was about to repeal the Mortmain A&t, as it was erroneously termed, the bill was not calculated to do any fuch thing. It folely went to add a fingle exemption to thofe which already ap peared in what was called the Mortmain A&t, viz. the governors and trustees of Queen Anne's bounty. This fingle limited exemption was all that the bill did.

The Lord Chancellor left the Woolfack to explain to the noble Earl, that he had not been the perfon to say what the noble Earl had imputed to him refpecting tithes. His Lordfhip faid, the benefice of every clergyman, with all its atten dant advantages, was as much his property as his freehold was his property. He contended, that there was always a great outcry about tithes, but he never heard any perfon pretend to affect lay property. He contended, that no part of the ecclefiaftical fyftem, as it now ftood, could be broke in upon, without running the risk of utterly deftroying every

part

part of the clerical character. Clergymen must not be converted into farmers, and hold lands, unless it were meant to undermine the whole church establishment. But tithes were a favourite topic to hold out to alarm the populace, and in all the feditious publications, from the year 1793 10 1796, it was selected and held forth as a fit means of degrading the Government, and putting the fubjects out of humour with it. His Lordship then went into an ample explanation of the grounds of the prefent bill. He faid, what was falfely termed the Mortmain Act contained certain exemptions, and for many years it was held that these exemptions included the truft for the diftribution of Queen Anne's bounty. But in the late Lord Camden's time, a caufe came before him on the queftion, whether the exemptions did include that trust or not. Lord Camden held that it did not, and the new doctrine had prevailed ever fince. It was, therefore, neceffary to correct the accidental inadvertency of the Legislature, and fet the Legiflature right where it was wrong. This was the object of the bill, and nothing more; but with respect to the Mortmain acts, when they came to be examined, they would not be found to merit the high commendations which men, who did not correctly underftand them, were pleafed to beftow upon them.

The Earl of Suffolk rose to explain, and faid, he certainly fhould have no objection to exchange lay impropriations for adequate compenfations, as it would be an advantage to him, his whole eftate confifting chiefly of lay impropriations. Having stated this, his Lordship was again entering into a difquifition on the conduct of the clergy of France previous to the revolution, when he was called to order by

The Bishop of St. Ajaph, who faid, he would not fit patiently and hear the clergy of the Church of England compared with the clergy of France, between whom there was no parellel whatever. Befides, what had the conduct of the clergy of France to do with the prefent bill?

Lord Suffolk refumed, but was foon again called to order. by the Bithop, for continuing to talk of the clergy of France, and alfo for fpeaking a fecond time..

The Lord Chancellor faid, he thought the noble Earl had rifen to notice and explain about fomething which had fallen from him, but certainly he had not faid one word about the clergy of France.

Lord Suffolk faid a few explanatory words, and then the bill was read a third time, and paffed. 2 X

VOL. IV. 1802-3.

WOOLLEN