Lord Holland observed, that when he stated his objections to a grant of the public money, under the present circumstances of the country, for the purpose of this bill, he had intimated his opinion that the funds required for carrying the bill into effect ought to be supplied by the church itself. When he stated this, he was not aware that in the present reign, and in his own time, a precedent for the practice he recommended had been established. There was, however, an act of the 37th Geo. 3rd by which the emoluments of two prebends of Lichfield were sequestered for the purpose of repairing the cathedral. Now, though the bill to which he alluded. might be regarded as a private bill, he saw no reason why the principle should not be adopted in the present measure, and applied to the benefit of the public.

ought to be expected to supply from its own bosom some of the means required to carry into effect this bill. He acknowledged the justice of the distinction pointed out by his noble friend, but there was notwithstanding still some analogy between the case he had pointed out and the object of the present bill. At any rate, the sequestration of these prebends was a complete answer to the assertion, that the whole church establishment was not more than the good of the country required. If that was the case, how could this sequestration have been agreed to in 1796 ?

On the clause, limiting the powers of the commissioners to the building of churches, so as to afford the greatest pos sible accommodation to the largest number of persons,

The Earl of Liverpool thought it must be evident, that a measure of the kind proposed by the noble lord would produce a mere mite towards the expense required for the measure now under consideration. The precedent he recommended could not be adopted to an extent which would be in any way useful, without its operating seriously to injure the interests of the church.

Lord Grenville could not admit the propriety of the precedent referred to by his noble friend. Whatever fairness there might be in the sequestration of prebends for the repair of a church, the principle did not apply to the building of new churches. It was besides objectionable on account of the great extent to which that principle must be carried to render it useful; for the object of the bill could not be accomplished without a sacrifice of a more serious nature than that which would be occasioned by the grant in this bill.

Lord Holland was aware that the precedent to which he had called their lordships attention did not exactly apply; but when the country was called upon, under the pressure of so many difficulties, to make so large a sacrifice as that required, he was of opinion that a church so richly endowed as the church of England was,

its framers. He agreed that to afford the greatest possible accommodation to the largest number of persons, ought to be a primary principle; but whilst he deprecated all useless splendor in the building of churches, he thought it of importance, that that mode should be adopted which was best calculated to inspire devotion, and which was characteristic of the established church-that there should be a decent decoration, and not that the mere unqualified principle should be acted upon, of providing room for a large assemblage of individuals.

The Earl of Liverpool entirely agreed with the noble baron in the view he had taken of this clause, and was decidedly of opinion, that though the providing the greatest possible accommodation for the largest number of persons ought to be a leading principle, and though he was wholly and completely adverse to incurring a heavy expense for mere splendor (the evil effects of which were manifested in the execution of the act of queen Anne), yet there ought to be that decent decoration which would mark the character of the established church; and should it fall to his lot to have any concern in the execution of this act, he should certainly so interpret it, that interpretation being, he had no doubt, thoroughly consistent with the intentions of the framers of the bill.

Lord Holland was far from being an enemy to ornamental architecture, and thought it might be displayed in churches as well as other public edifices; but, under

the reign of queen Anne, and in which, perhaps, the system of decoration had been carried too far, it appeared to him that one material point was forgotten, namely, that the churches then erected were not built merely to accommodate the people of London and Westminster, but were designed to remain as lasting ornaments of their cities. He was satisfied, that while their lordships paid a due attention to the accommodation of the frequenters of the Established Church, in point of room, they would not neglect an adherence to that mode of building which characterised the reformed church of England from churches where that reform was carried too far.

the particular circumstances of this bill, he should object to any superfluity which was likely to create an occasion for calling for farther sacrifices from the public. It was a principle, that acts of parliament should be interpreted by the fair construction of the words they contained, and not by any inferences of what had been the intention of those who passed them; and he confessed that, for his part, he liked the literal meaning of the words of the present clause much better than the explanation of them which the two noble fords had attempted to give. Such explanations might afford the commissioners a pretext for extravagant expenditure, on the ground that they had followed what they understood to be the intention of the legislature. Besides, their lordships stood in a particular situation with respect to a bill of this kind. How did they know but that the other House had worded the clause in the manner in which it stood, precisely for the purpose of preventing its being understood in the sense which the explanation of the noble lord would give it?

The Earl of Harrowby observed, that parliament would have the opportunity of controlling the proceedings of the commissioners, and checking either too great economy on the one hand, or too much profusion on the other. He was decidedly hostile to incurring unnecessary expense for splendor, but he never could agree, that it was intended by this bill merely to erect four walls like a barn, solely upon the principle of affording the greatest possible accommodation to the largest number of persons. He certainly thought there ought to be that decent decoration which should mark the character of the established church.

The Archbishop of Canterbury said, that although he was very far from wishing that money should be expended in any way that might appear to be unnecessary, he trusted their lordships would not forget the object of the present bill. Even the humble spire of the village church in dicated the purposes to which it was dedicated. If edifices were erected which departed so far from the style of ecclesiasti. cal architecture that they might be mistaken for places devoted to another use, he conceived that one object of the present bill would be entirely lost sight of. As little was he disposed to recommend a superfluous expenditure; but when allusion was made to the churches erected in (VOL. XXXVIII.)

The Bill then went through the Committee.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Wednesday, May 20.

CONTAGIOUS FEVER IN LONDON COMMITTEE.] Mr. Bennet in presenting a Report from the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the state of Contagious Fever in the Metropolis, said, he wished to call the attention of the House to this important subject. It appeared, that during last year, the cases of fever had increased to nearly seven times their former number. There was only one establishment in the metropolis for the reception of fever patients solely. It was instituted in 1802, and from very small beginnings, had grown to be a considerable establishment. It was however by no means equal to the wants of the metropolis. The House would learn with some surprise, that it was the practice in all the hospitals of the metropolis to mix contagious fever patients with ordinary fever patients. The consequence was, that fever was generated in the hospitals, and that persons affected with ordinary fevers frequently caught these contagious fevers. It appeared, that in these hospitals, not only had the contagion been caught by patients, but that nurses, attendants, students, and even physicians had also caught it. The species of medical police, as it was called, applicable to fever hospitals, was very different from that of ordinary hospitals. It was a melancholy truth, that the hospitals in the metropolis were by no means equal to the wants of the population. There was not an hospital in the metropolis which did not every week turn from its doors a great many applicants. (3 H)

clare all acts not repealed to be still in force; for decisions founded on the desuetude of several acts would, in that case, be unsettled. But inquiry was necessary, and some suitable remedy was much called for. In England, the old law of appeal of murder had lately occupied much of the public attention. The judges had declared, that the trial by battle was the law of the land. There was no one who heard him who did not regret that this was the law; but no one would therefore say, that the judges had the power of annulling the law. The great city of Aberdeen had been disfranchised, and Edinburgh, the capital of Scotland, was likely to be disfranchised, and to be without representatives in parliament, owing to the desuetude of acts of parliament, and the doctrine that longcontinued abuses constituted a right.

Lord Binning said, that one part of the motion was unnecessary, and that the return to the other was impossible. The judges were called on to say, what laws had been decided to be in desuetude. To this a cumbrous return must be made, which. would be altogether unnecessary, as the facts could be ascertained by any other persons. But they were also directed to say what laws they would consider to be in desuetude. Now this it was impossible for the judges to anticipate, without the hearing of counsel and evidence. He should therefore object to the motion, as a declaratory law might be brought in.

Mr. J. P. Grant said, that the doctrine of desuetude was established by all the writers on the law of Scotland, as well as by the decisions of the courts. This, however, inferred no legislative authority in the court of session. It was indeed extremely inconsistent with the English administration of justice, and with the vigilance that was now exercised over courts of law. But it was borrowed from the law of Rome, when Rome was in the highest splendor of its liberty. It was a principle in the Roman law, that all laws derived their authority from the people; the popular consent was either tacit or expressed: as tacit consent constituted law, so tacit consent was held to abrogate law. It was, however, a state of the law deserving attention, Some legislative measure should be applied to this subject in the present day, when so much attention was bestowed upon the administration of law, and the state of courts of justice. The motion of his right hon. friend, whose

able and unwearied attention to matters of this kind did himself so much honour, and his country so much service, went only to obtain the state of the fact, in order to lay a proper foundation for their future deliberations. The expression in the motion, " or consider," he objected to, and recommended to be left out. The only other objection that could be started was, that the motion would give much trouble to the learned judges; but this was not to be put in competition with the public service.

Mr. Boswell thought that some remedy was immediately called for, if the law was, as it had been said to be, a trap, and not a guide for the people. If the judges could not tell what laws were in desuetude, till counsel were heard as to each particular law, how could the people know what the law of the land was? It was from want of attention to the progress of society, that laws came to be in such a situation. Some of the laws were, at the same time, most abominably tyrannical. Lord Thurlow had decided, in the case of the church livings in Scotland, that long usage, which implied the consent of the people, had set aside the statute law. He congratulated the people of Scotland on the inquiry now originated. He hoped it would lead to the appointment of a commission, and that the result would be an act of parliament, taking away from the court of session the power of declaring any act in desuetude.

Mr. Wynn approved of the motion. He thought it quite as much a matter of course that the House should, in some way or other, inquire into the laws of Scotland which had fallen into desuetude, as into the expired and expiring laws of this country.

Lord Castlereagh said, there were many ways open of obtaining this information. It could be had either by a committee of the House, or by a commission appointed by the Crown. The worst possible way was, to call on the judges, and require from them opinions in their chamber, which they afterwards, on hearing counsel and witnesses, might depart from in their judicial capacity. The proceeding, either by a committee or commission, would certainly be inoperative at this late period of the session: he thought, therefore, that the subject ought to be postponed.

Sir S. Romilly said, that to that part of the motion which required an account of the laws which had been decided to have