On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
lars from all the chief towns and some of the agricultural districts . The carpenters , for example , are making good their claims wher § f 0 | those claims are urged with sufficient conc ^ jt and firm * ness . The building trades are particularly successful , and whereas we have lately hg {| to note a rise of mason ' s wages from 3 s . to 4 s . in $ ruro , and to 5 s . 6 d . in Bradford , th $ jate now ftpkeel by the masons in Manchester is 5 s . Qd . or 6 s . The
shipwrights of Sunderland have got a rise of 5 s . ; the shipwrights of Maryport have suspended a strike because their masters tell them they cannot afford to raise wages until trade be better . Seamen are getting a fair allowance . Still there are some places and some trades which do not altogether profit so much as they might by the improved times . In Somersetshire , and even in some parts of Cornwall , labourers are still living upon a pittance , notwithstanding the rise which we have noticed in several purely agricultural counties . In Cumberland , which is
very quiet , the wages of labourers range from 10 s . to 12 s ., and even 14 s ., sometimes with a garden and house-rent free . Suffolk , which not long since might be called a pauperized county , is now undergoing a steady rise . Here and there labourers are getting 8 s . a week , but more often 9 s . Thus , even out of the highway of trade , in the most purely agricultural parts , we see , by our own advices from various quarters , how "the working classes are alive to the reasons why they should seek a fair share of the prosperity which now blesses the trade of the country .
The dangers of trade are principally in the direction of baseless or uncertain speculations—Peruvian railways , Spanish railways , Spanish " canalization" of rivers ; French railways , and heaven knows what besides . The Spanish Government promise * to guarantee a dividend on one of its railways : it would be better if it would guarantee , or rather pay , some of its old bonds ; and
people would believe it better , if its Government were not constantly under a threat of a coup d'etat . Spain , in the agonies of a Ministerial crisis , with some of its military chiefs publicly offering to draw the sword in the defence of the constitution , is not in so good a condition to guarantee any shareholders as the usurping Government of France .
The Pope is raising his head once more . His subjects having been subdued for him , he has done much to subdue Austria ' s subjects for her , and now he is doing the same for France . At the instance of a " religious" newspaper editor , M . Veuillot , of the Univers , the Pope has rebuked Archbishop Sibour , who had opposed the prohibition of the classics in public schools , and has told the clergy of France that they must teach absolute obedience to the decrees of Rome .
A scene in Belgium is a hopeful contrast to the spirit of vulgar despotism or craven submission which the general Continent presents . The Duke of Brabant , heir to King Leopold , has just come of age , and has been made a Senator . In administering the oath , the President of the Senate hailed the young Prince as son of a man who liad faithfully kept his oaths . Surely this affords a
casus belli to Louis Napoleon , —it is so manifest an affront ! The King , however , speaks courageously , —If the Belgians will but hold together , he says , they can defy nil their enemies . Any nation inight adopt that averment;—it is the spirit of craven submission which is the true traitor to national independence .
Untitled Article
THE WERE IN PARLIAMENT . MnrjSTEKS have thin weok been exposed to more tliau usual vicisitudes—two defeats , it damaging exposurebarely compensated for l > y two victories . PASSING OF THE CANADA BILL . The week opened with n debute of some interest , ami a Ministerial victory oft he lirnt mngniiudc . The Canada Clergy Reserves Hill was pressed forward , carried successfully to a division on the third reading , and finally pawed tlie Commons on Monday , th « Jlfch of Aprij , tkui mrly ttopfrfng of WW « f * ty « NWt conjttfqrabj *
measures of the seg | pn . . The . debate was remarkable for the absence of U ^ elt y which characterized its progress , the langrjigp b $ the opening , and the compart }* flvgjy dramaffe nnja ^ a species of dingle combat bejswisen Sir John Fa&ngton an 4 Lord John Russell Tb , eae two fjsaiesmeo , indeed , may be said to have , op ^ njpd and cfcsed the cllscussion , which occupied nearly tfeft © atire evening . Replying to hfcj questions , Ji&tfd Jolw startled the
late Colonial Secretary at the outset , by stating that the law officers were of opinion , that in the event of the clergy reserves being secularized , the gurantee would have no effect , and that Government did not intend to introduce any provision to give effect to the guarantee . Some other interrogatories of an unimportant kind were interposed , and the debate was begun by Mr . Waxpole , who severely criticised the Government for the inconsistencies of their conduct while the Bill had been
before the House . It was said that the Bill was only to give the Canadian Government power to deal with local matters ; but really the Bill gave them power over the funds invested in this country . He insisted that the endowments accorded to Protestants could be taken away simply by the Canadian , while Roman Catholics would be secure in their endowments , except from the Imperial Parliament . Then it was said that existing interests were guaranteed ; but no Minister had been able to point out in what the guarantee of existing interests differed from the guarantee of the whole reserves which they were asked to abrogate .
Parliament , he said , was a trustee , and could not delegate its duties unlpss sure that the persons to whom it delegated power would act as well as itself . His argument was , that a pledge had been given that these endowments should be permanent , and the honour of the Crown waB involved in the maintenance , of that pledge . He described the Act of 1840 as solemnly ratified and accepted by both parties , and asked how they dared to break it . Winding up a long , dull speech , he prophecied the most disastrous con ? sequences—a church destroyed , religious strife , war of races , and the loss of the colonies .
Mr . H 1 jmb was diametrically opposed to all these views . In his opinion , the evil consequences described would result if the Bill were not passed . He dissented entirely from the doctrine that Parliament could not resume what it had given . Suppose , said he , that there were a majority of Quakers in the House of Commons , and that they resolved to abolish Church establishments . Would they not reserve the property no longer required for purposes to which ifc had been heretofore appropriated ? The argument- that a breach of faith had been committed was untenable . Land was granted to the clergy in New South Wales in 1825 , but resumed in 1835 , because the grant excited odium .
Mr . Drtxmmond was , as usual , caustic and amusing . He described the principles of the Government , not as Lord Aberdeen had said , " Conservative progress , " but as '' consistent Radicalism . " He then continued—But there was another extraordinary thing connected with this bill—that when a certain bishop thought it but right and fair to stand up for the property of his absent brethren , one of her Majesty ' s Ministers forthwith charged him with being " the pest of his diocess . " ( Hear , hear . ) Now , that a gentleman should bogin to abuse an adversary
whom ho cannot answer secundum art em , waa perhaps all very fair : but that he should accuse him in a matter which was not before him did seem very like " consistent Radicalism , " but not much like " Conservative progress . " ( Hear , hear . ) But there was another extraordinary matter . Another bishop had strongly recommended and justified this proposed plunder of the church in Canada . Ho ( Mr . Drummond ) thought that this was a matter well worthy of consideration , because , no doubt , lion , members would remember tho anecdote of Kins James and Bishops
Andrews and Noylo ( the Bishops ot Winchester ami Durham ) . Tho King having asked them whethor they would not part with some portion of their temporalities to assist him in some pressing emergency , Bishop Neylo replied , " Your Majesty is the light of our eyes and tho breath of our nostrils ; do witli us aa you please . " Bishop Andrews , however , was silent , but on being pressed by the King to answer , he said , " I certainly think your Majesty may take the property of tho seo of my brother of Durham . " ( Laughter . ) Now Mr . Prummond thought that tho name view was well worthy of the consideration of the Chancellor of tho Exchequer , who ho hoped would be disposed to say that tho Houso had certainly a right to tako tho temporalities of tho see of Oxford . ( Continued laughter- ) The right lion . gentleman the Chancellor of tho Kxeliequer had nod to
said , that tho object of tho present measure was secularize tho clergy reserves , but merel y to allow tho Canadians to deal with the mutter . The riieouwiion of this question had furnished a curious instance of the way in which gouMemon would admit a wrong to be done , provided the parties doing it did not mako ubo of harsh lunguiigo . Among the gentlemen who Hat upon tho Ministerial benches were many soi-disant friends of the church ; and nuch phrases as " sacrilege , " and " eeeloniuHtic : il plunder , " or any expression of that kind , sounded , of course , very harsh in their earn ; but , if matters were bo managed ac to avoid those ugly words , and my that they would not hear of such a thing in Canada , and that the object of the bill was merely to allow the Canadiuus to deul with ohurch nrouortv . they had no objection to offer to the measure . tins
Ho believed that the gentlemen who supported measure from behind had too much sens © to quarrol about word * . ( ChQora fi * w tho Opposition . ) Tho argument , <> t % » Q ¥ « M 3 « ltor tf **• *« h »< l < W wpuld b » just a * strong if
the word "^ I ^ n 4 ** wqre substituted for " Canada . " It was not the feraest suppprters of the bill he was now condemning , it was th * Sumbugs . ( Laughter . ) He ^ escribed ! tgtajL separation of the colonies from us — " a good tbing ^ -r-rra ? a necessary consequence of Freetrade in Cotton and Corn . Mr . J £ er Seyicbh , speaking from the Opposition aide , made same striking statements . In his view Mr . J ) rummond was the Radical , for he foresaw the loss of our colonial empire .
He knew no greater proof of the progress of public opinion than the present state of the clergy reserves question . He recollected hearing the President of the Board of Works , Sir W . Molesworth , speak with great abilitythough he was sorry to say not with much effect—on the question of colonial right and self-government . He recollected also hearing the noble lord who was now the leader of that House , Lord J . Russell , speak rather slightingly of the proceedings of a society of which Mr . Seymer was a member—he meant the Society for the Reform of Colonial Government—a society which had suspended its proceedings because its principles had been fully adopted by the Government .
The ground on which he would vote was that the colony had a right to manage its own affairs . And as to the finality of her settlement in 1840 , it was , no more final than a treaty of peace which was also made , to last for ever . He raight , perhaps , be allowed to address a few words to honourable gentlemen on his own [ the Opposition ] side of the House . There were , many honourable members , straight-running men , in whom whippers ^ in delighted , to
whom he might say that this straight-runningprinciple was a very dangerous one to apply to colonial affairs . If they , as an Opposition , opposed any measure on which the people of England had set their hearts , they would be sure to hear of it when they met their constituents at the bustings ; but they had no such means of squaring accounts with their colonial fellow-subjects , for , if they met them , it must be on the field of battle . He would give his cordial support to the measure proposed by Her Majesty ' s Government .
Passing over the four next speakers , who alternately attacked and supported the bill , with the ordinary arguments , Mr . Lidpell , Sir Edwabd Debi » o , Mr . Child , and Mr . Peel , we come to Mr- Napieb . He , following Mr . Walpole ' s lead , insisted that the Bill put the Protestants on a lower level than the Roman Catholics ; and that the settlement of 1840 was for all time . He entered into refinements about the value of a Parliamentary title if this of the clergy to the
reserves were set aside ; and he tried to show that where the Crown conquered a country , and granted lands to a church there , those lands should not be surrendered simply because the people had got representative government . The Bill was one of spoliation—a confiscation of vested rights and interests . The Solicitor Genekal , in a brief speech , laid it down that Parliament was only bound to provide for existing interests , and this the Bill did provide j after that he contended they were free to enter on the path of public
policy . Sir John Pakington seemed overcome by his emo « tions . He was afraid that the proceedings of that evening- would throw a stain on the character of British statesmen . ( Laughter . ) He had heard wtth grief and astonishment the replies given to his questions that evening by Lord John Russell . The noble lord was bound either to withdraw the Bill or provide for the full effect of tho guarantee . In his opinion it was a sad d : iy for England—( laughter )—when men of high personal honour were led by party feeling to deviate in their public dealings from the hi g h principles on which fired
they acted in their " private capacity . " Having ott" these remarks , he attempted to show that the settler , ment of 1840 was final ; because Lord John JRusaeU said it wus proposed to innko tho guarantee perpetual , and Sir Robert Peel spoke of it as being "in perpetuity , " Here is a specimen of his style of argument . Another argument used by tho advopatos of this Bill was founded , to his surprise , upon an expression used in one of his own despatches with regard to the possihlo re-distribution of this property . Because ho had admitted the possibility of re-distribution , tho right hon . gentleman tho Chancellor of tho Exchequer thought that justified him in spoliation . ( Cheers . ) Now , ho could not understand the
logic of thin argument . It wan cheered , bo noticed , by tho member for the University of Cambridge ( Mr . Goulburn ) , who wua an ecclesiastical commissioner , and wa % therefore , busily engaged in tho ro-diatribution of Church property . Sir J . Pakington was one of those who had always thought that tho late Sir R . Peel , when ho established tjie Ecoleaiasticul Commission for the purpose of ro-diatributing Church property , proved himself a truo friend to tho Church of England , and had done ono of tho wisest acts which marked his career . But Mr . Goulburn would not bo rwuly to admit that , becaum ) ho wan occupied in redistributing Church property for strictly ecclesiastical , purposes , — howuH engaged in tho spoliation or tho confiscation of Church property .
lie wits prepared to do justice and tako tho cohboquoncuH . ilo perorated in predictions Ho hud uiwayM believed that when , tho union of top *« O provinces waa signed , from that moment tho soparatipnof Canada from England became only w question of time . XLm
Untitled Article
362 THB L . ^ PER . [ Saturday ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), April 16, 1853, page 362, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1982/page/2/
-