The Express. — London, England, 1851-05-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—SIONDAT, MAY 20. Ilbe LORD CWAilleaLl.On teak hi, vent at live o'clock. OFFICE OF TIIE BLACK ROD. Toe Duke of RICHMOND a report of the iota enter to inquire into the office of the Black Rod; and moved the int reading .1 a bill to aboliih the offue of inalerager to the great seal. which al, at the preatut 11 , 1•011 , a sine:are, with a .51517 of a year. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, If the Mace was that which he supposed it to he. the penes who held it was cm. hyt.l alinost every hour of the day. Ile would inquire Into it. AFFAIRS OF INDIA. ..... ...—.... The Earl of ELLItIIIIOROCOII moved for the pro duction of certain papers having reference to the distnlan- Don of prise money and °Weer. batta doling sad all o the campaign in the Punjaub. Ho begged to draw the attention of the noble atarquie oppo aii.• to what had taken plate on this sobjeA two 'years ago, im•it:diately after tho treaty which was concluded be tween the Governor-Oeneral and the Maharajah of Lahore. He lashed at that time whether it was competent for the OlTtrillr-General to dispose of the property of the Maha rajah, which he considered belonged to the crown. • soli° m aqui% then said that the question would IX sab mitt el to till law nave. of the crown. A few daye alter he was informant that the directors of the East India Company had eonwated to give sin months batta to the troop , . Ile was very mouth satisfied at that fact, and thought at would thavr b en fairly distributed amongst them. About two swaths ago he celled the attention of the head of the Mitzi of Control to this subject, when he found that the question had not then been put to the law offi:arri of the crown ; and at hi• request the noble liwoo had laid a can: before them on the subject and had communicated to him their opinion, which was that the arrautein , ,,t made between tho Maharajah and the Grover teor-D: a old could not be impugned. It appear. dto him that the opinion uas quite wide of the real question—it was Ilk • the noisome of tho Delphine oruele, it would tell both ways oat onull not satiely any one who looked into the uotlier. lle wished to hue the ease and opinion laid piste, that hoose, as he thought that the most importaut flu scion could not have been submitted to the law office:l of th • crown at all. The Court of Directors had granted ten ale amoatlei batta on the uoder.tanding that any booty cap tured in this tampnign should Ire made over to them, and that tti :re should be deducted a sum eqnivuleut to the Latta. Ile took the strangest objection to this iroodition; it we, most ungracious to the army, and injurious to the Court of Director.. It was say ing we give you so much from our own treasury, but we will, a. UT LS it lien in oar povr••r, take measures for pre ',Whig your deri.ing any benefit wh never from any act of blew/day on the part of the crown. The most recent pre- met lit was the botta granted in (Windt., and to which no coalition whatever was attached lle contended that the court had so power to deduct a angle rupee from the booty—it was the gift of the crown, and they had no right to inter": and say we will take this ourselves—this which lb: a rown has granted to you, the army. Ile objected to the I: est India Company, without law, disposing of the prop nye the crown ; bat if the o roan were to Kraut this bony l.• the Plea, Indio Company, it was important that its • due should be ascertained. and for that purpose he in geot...4 to more for the r e aucns of which ho had given anode.. It was an mdmitte.l prim ipl.• of law that the was, that the crown reser parted with any par ti▪ oa of the power entrust-4 to it by publie policy and vie tom, vide. there we. a speritir grant fur thaterpme; an lin 17$ the crown gialit..el to the least India urnpany, lr al raw. io .Lich their troops alone should be employed, o at os ey token in war; but in the same royal WM it the crown specially cm...poet from that grant all booty takes in conjoint operation. r 'toeing to ists.lf the power of disposing of thot in se. h manner as It might think prove. There was another principle to , which he wished to eall attention. A large pirt'..n of the prop rty seised at Lahore was on the llth of Selo tenth r, 1544, before the comananeement hootilitics; but the d etarataten of war was n•tweactive on all property taken hefore the commencement of the war. That being au, who thn Governor-Qs-nerd and the Maharajah stn. "most th t ems, in March. Plf9. th. y agreed to dispose of that which did not betas; to them, tur the property hail pawed her M ,lesty loud pitorriitroN said of the matters to which the • eal bad relerred they w• re both cognisaut. Ato r the eprrek of the noble owl on the 301 July, teller noble lords, oa this eobjeet, he had felt it to he ills duty to low no tome in inquiring ill:. the objections the n gel • by the wild • earl, and to do what apprar...l to hum hi. day to it., Ile r. grett. d that the noble earl bid bron,,ht the eubj.rt forwar.l a wound time, for he must he wrh ise taunted with the perianis tiositi.so in which it roust rho, t•• • (lovereoraleneral of In ha, or any moo rirnmand• lag lice Majesty's sutneets and troops at • great distaace bun our *on inuntry- ear. hear) -he must know that throwiiig out this acensatiini of injustice to the army of Doha was to say the kn.: of at, extremely perilous. (Hear, hear.) Ice d•oned altogethw that injustice Ic,d been done In lb • army of Innis. The ..41114 of looney which had h.. n greatest is the form of hatta, or extra allowance, to the troy of the Porljnoh was. at lead, as Knelt Withal of south, r torapejta, and he must soy, that before and rito.• 161.9 no complaint had been smile to the alitherities tither by civilian or soldier; and he had never hi aril an ad vers. wool us the euliject except from the noble earl. (Mar, hear.) And knowing how dear !obi, the interest,. of India and of the army were. hr could not understand on what haiend he had brought this etdqeet torsvorl. The noble earl ad claimed justice for the soldiers of the Indian army,and bed amoraied, fur his porpoe, that if they hail had tli.or !there of the booty instead of the butts. tl•ty woohl have received more. Ile (Lord Hroughtori) alt I not, however, ksow that this could have hero the rear. Th •coranioniter•in-ehief. Lori tiouth, had shot eomplaintil. woe had there- s-en say complaint Inen n single individual en opt the noble earl Ile (Lord Broughton) would wit weary their lordships with detail.. The question turned on rt• gality and propriety of the agre•ment b tween the gloveroor•Qest.oal and the Maharajah. A case wasp...era:A for the opinion of the Queen's Advocate no., the Atturoil sot nolicitow-Generate, and it was no drawn as to state all Cm &sections of the noble end. (Hear.) His own speech on the subject was, in fact, act out, and a pivate letter which the noble earl had done him the honour of w, iGng ; so that, at least. the, legal gentlemen had the advantage of seeing the way in which the noble earl put it The question which was put was.-- Wl.e. thee the arrangement of the 29th of Horeb, M.P. • ieluglod by the Earl of Dalhousie and the Misho t ,jah, Otrobab Minh, could be impugned on any legal grounds ?" And this was the opinion given •—•• We re' of opinion that the arrangement of Manl 29th, Itss9, tasted.' and ratified iu this ea.., cannot be impugned." I'. a is signed by the Queen's Advocate, Sir John Dodson ; I,j Sig: A. Cockburn. the Attorney•tieneral ; b Sir W. I' .the Solicitor - General ; by Sir F. Kel ly; by Mr. ledles Wigram. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, having served under Obi llos.. East India Company, and having some knowltthp of transactions of this description, be must say Igi had formed a very different apiunn irons his experience of the at ,ion of the Governor-General from that which had been essreued by his noble friend behind him (the Earl 01 ti.mborough). The Governor-General in council was the r.iires.isitative of all the British authorities in the East India, and he ezereised the authority of all. He (the of Wellington) had served in armies to whish toe ((mentor-General had grant,sl booty on the part of the crown. The (lovernorGenerat hail taken on himself —he bad, if the noble earl pleased, usurped the nitliority of the crown—and he (the Duke of Wel- Inaton) bail himself partaken of boot/ thus granted. (Lighter) Ile (the Governor-General was appointed ihy Die Court of Directors of the 'mg India Conk ttrittyhe i l n aw os o e f Enthinnilitte and d ercivied cyr t y . himself the power of the crown to grant ' booty in possession of the crown. That awomption of authority must he con firmed—he had never heard of any instance in which it was not confirmed ; hut this he would insist upon, that the Goveruou(leneral in council in the East Indic* did con cise every power and every discretion on the part if this C./ .ntry, and if there were any difference afterwards it had to he settled between the illuvernor-lieneral and the East India Company. Dirtying this he was giving the result of his own experience. The LORD CHANCELLOIt said the property was i,isod at Lahore, merely for the purpose of protection. and the documents showed that up to the time of ouch seizure ;there had been no hostilities. ruder these cgreliontances the property seised could not 11 , ..• considered booty of war. It seemed to him t s lie important ta show that there was no ground rot coma plibuiog of injustice to the army—that this property did we belong to the crown—or if it belonged to it, in such a way that the arm y had no right to it. The Ravin ELLENBOROU(1111 said that he rut this army in the beck around. What he objected b, both Dow and in 1419 was that the pitiperty was taken from the cman. All that the noble and learned lord lie.d said re f -reed to the property wired at Lahore. But theft wt. r"i , r property seised at Mooltan as well as at Lthore, and to that the noble and learned lord made no reference. Lord intotimurom wished to know from the noble earl whether it was not a fart that the East India Company were not trustees for the crown? They were so dec6rid to be in the an of parliament. If that were M. he would ask whole servant the (Museum-General was ? He was the servant of the East India Company ; but they being taw to ‘• under the crown, the Uoventor-General was the rept a:nudism of the crown. The E irl of ELLENBOROUGH—The noble bed is the representative of the crown; hut let him tzde me leave to advise his, in the situation he holds• not b, touch on that dangerous ground, that the company represented the crown. After a few words front Lord LoNtaostornitr, the 'notion agreed to, in reference to a portion of the nitwits foe. EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR ESTATES BILL. On the ntouon of the Nati of CASLISLY, the ssktt cow amities coo An bill was named. SALMON FISIIISIMIS (13COTL.ANDI BILL. The Duke of ARGYLL moved the second readier et this bill. At the present time the period for taking minion in Scotland eatendod from the Ist of February to the 1 Ith of September. Thu object of the pretest bill was >imply to tut off the fourteen days, and to stop the period for taking •,Imaa at thr lot of :tepteutber instead of the 17th. as at p...sent. Another pro•iwot of the bill wa•. to extend the duration of what in Scotland wu known ea the Sabbath 'Liar from same* on Saturday to sunrise on Monday, to the period comprised between Ii o'clock on Saturday after noon to 6 o'clock on Monday moraine. which wood girt oho gial a little 11011 t time to nut up the over. After • brief conversation, the bill wag nod a second WWI Mild Mori:lordships adjourned ata iiu.atcr to b o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—HONDIY, MAT 26. The 5,2 taus took the chair whortiy beta* t &cloak. PRIVATE BUSINESS. _ Bills read a third time and passed Blackburn, Clitherise, and West Yorkshire Railway; Brinkley Roads Consolidation ; Great Western Railway (runways to con nect the Birmingliant and Oxfard Junction Railway with the London and North Wt.:teed Railway at Birmingham, 2c.); Hayling Bridge and Causeway ; Manchester and Salford Extension Railway; North Shields Quays and Im provement,; Sunderland Improvement; Warrington and Altrincharn Junction Railway; Weston-suFr-Mare Im provement and Market. ' Lords' ametidnienti consider. :d and agreed to ,—Hales worth, Beetles. and Haddiseoe Railway , : London and Blackwall Railway (extension of time for the widenkg, ite.): North British Railway; Regent's Canal Company; Scottish Central Railway; and Whitby Waterworks Bill.. Repot-tem, bills considered mud agreed to :—Great Mal. Yuen Improvement. Police, Sewers. Waterworks, Oils, and Markets : and Price's Patent Candle Company. METROPOLITAN WATER BILLS. . . ..... Mr G. GREY, in reply to Mr. W. PATTEN. intimated that it Wl. intended to tale the second reading of the Metro politan Water Bill to-morrow week—certainly befor,.. Whit suntide; and he thought it better that, until the opinion of the boom was expressed on that measure. it would be better to dr ter the reference to a select committee of the other water companies bills now pending. PUBLIC BUSINESS. PETITIONS ERNE.T JONr...—lty Lord D. STUAI:•f, from Ernest Jones, a barrkter-at-law, complaining of the severity of his treatment while coolined for a political misdemesaour in Tothill.tields prison, and praying thr inquiry. The peti tioner state.' that, iirivolgst other acts of oppression, he had been refuwi•t pcirmis.ion to write to the jud a r: who had sen tenced him, or to petition the Rome of Common•. The nohle lord gave notice that he would to-morrow this day) ROTC that the petition be printed. CASE OF LIEUT. WYBORN. Mr. DISItAELI said be had a petition to present from two ladies, sisters of Lieut. \\•yborn, an officer in the ser vice of the East India Company, who, in 1834, had been despatched by the Britiah Envoy to Yerda to Khiva, on an important and perilou. diplomatic mission. The petitioners stated that in 11511 some information was reeeiv..al by them of their brother's existence, but it appeared that he never reached Blurs, hut had been taken prisoner on his road by the Am et of Bokhara. The petitioners had made re presentation, to the East India Company and to the government, that they had reason to believe their Nrothir was still alive and in captivit)•, but they had not taken any steps in his behalf. In ISIS farther information havin;.: ben received that this ttentle : man was still in vi deuce at Bukhara. another application was mail. to the government, and the Ewd India Company, and then tile Court of Directors, for the first time, commu nicated with the petitioners, referring to a statement made to the British resident at l'eshawur by the Khau of K otes that Lieutenant Wyhom hal escaped. This an,wer tha petits men did not consider aati.factory; and, haviu/ ap pealed ins on to dr government, and to the East India Company, they appealed to the House of Commons. The hon. member gave notice that 011 Tuesday he should put a question to the ministers, :.nd to the deputy-chairman of the East India Company, on the sub.ject of this petition. The petition was then nrdered to be on the table. NEW MEMBER. Mr. M. OTtum tiftookthTesdfrund his seat on hie election fur Longford. in the MOIR of Major Blaegall. IMANCEItIi REFORM.. Mr. sTr.mr gave notice that on this day west( lw would submit to the house a resolution respecting the delay which Sr.. in the ordinary business of the Court of Chan cery, in 0/11111.11Uf !WC of the additional jurisdiction imposed upon it by recent le•tidatbw in regard to the affairs of rail way. and other joint stock company.. LAND CLAUSEN coNsomuTioN (IRELAND) - . Mr. LA1101:1711 ERB gan• notire that on Fri.lay next ho would mutt. (or hart to king iu a bill to alter and :unclad Um" Act. ST. DAVID'S COLLEGE, LAMPBTER. Sir 13. IMLI. moved for a copy of • Truuaury minu'e dated on or about 21. t June, 41 relation to St. David's Colleg... Limpet, r. Aho eopie. of all certificate. given hr the hishim or 't. and the principal. of St. Ihivi•l'a Coilege, mpeter, v. reganla the elpenditure of the col. kite and the mean. at the diviewl of the college. with the date, thereof. Also a return of all sums authorised by pm liament to he rmid under the Treasury minute, or under the heal of miwelLineous charge. or othersei.e. the the quit. port of St. David'. College, Lampeter, from th.. 21vt June, 1826, aiosen to VI,. prtsent period. Agreed to. LIFE BOATS. Sir 3. Y. 111 . 1,LER inquired whether it was int 'tilled to grunt any sot to the 'loyal Shipwrecked Fishermen's Society in estahlkhing life boats round the coast ? sir P. BARING rvidsed, if the question related ton grant of money fur the purpme, it Mal one that lie could not an swer. but which should lac addressed to the treasury. Ile might, however, "bet rve that there were two societies. both having the same object in view, and he could not under stand how a grant could be made to one without the other. What had been don. was this.—At any port where the in habitant. or a nwiety built a life-heat, the coast guard were nonmetal to take t harm: of and preserve it ready for use ; and til‘lll4h th. y , not hood t.. man it, they had in numeroas cam. • so, and rendered gallant and • c specie, A noble duke connected with the navy had also given a prize for the hest model of a life-boat and the Ad miralty had endeavoured, as far as possible, to facilitate the object in view, by giving directions to Mr. Laing to build a boat an the model approved of in the government prtl. Beyond this, he was not aware of any intention on the part of the government to give any aid to tho INt.:0113 TAX COMMITTEE. Mr. 13 ;xiwtso4 a bop that o:oeent ment would gig: ilia a day for proposing the appointment of the in coma Tao Committee. ..... 1.... rd J. Itt7SELL would endeftvour :o to3'.te some ar rangement to Lidlit.ite the hon. Gentleman'. objett. SECI*RITY FOR ADVANCES (IRELAND) BILL. In repl to Mr. SAnttia. Sir G. GREY Slid it was the intention of his ri;ht hon. fritud the Hater of the Rolle to proceed with thiA bill a 4 won u pomilde. ECCLESIASTICAL. TITLES BILL. The house hash's resolved itself into committee on this bill, Mr. 111PCULLAOli rose to propose an amendment to lease mit the words which enacted that the rescript of Sep tember hut was unlawful, and thereby to render athei sm, who nti,iht conscientiously consider that parliament was overstepping it, legitimate province of legislation, and who continued to look upon that document as of full elect, and either adopted the titles conferred by it. or counte sane, tithe adoption of vitas title*, guilty of a misdemeanor, and liable to punishment. The SOLICITOItd3ENERAL opposed the amendment. To omit that clause would be indirectly to recognise that the reerript was legal. The declaration in this clause did not alter the existing law in any way. It was not the enact- went of a penalty, but merely a solemn declaration or re enactment of a law that had been in existence fur centuries, which bad fallen into abeyance. Mr. GRATTAN observed that however unlawful the re script of the Pepe was here, it was not so in Ireland. No one could deny that whatever issued from the lope on ecclesi sauteed matters had full force in Inland, whether rescript, letter, or bull. (hear.) Was it the iuteutiou of the govern ment to put down the Roman catholic religion in Ireland altogether by this bill, end that while they croleseed to leave the Emancipation Act of IND intact? He could not understand such tricks as tikuse of repealing the act of Ittl9, either by open means or surreptitiously. Ile hod not been brought up to them though lie had been twenty years in that house. (A laugh.) Ile was anxious to show in every possible way that he was not n party to a miserable, deceitful measure like this, which slid not satisfy anybody; and, notwithstanding the introduction of such a bill, he still entertained hopes that England and Ireland would continue to be unit.td, not Its swans of penal laws, but by the laws of equality mil justice. Mr. CONOLLY supported the bill• which would not pro hibit the Roman catholic from the enjoyment of his reli pun, nor would it interfere with the spiritual functions of the Roman catholic bishops; and yet upon both these points some very unsundid tentarks had fallen fr al several of the Irish members. It was denied, not by the noble lord at the head of the government atom., but Moo by . the law slicersof the crown, that the bill aimed at the spiritualities of the !Loutish church, and, if that were so. the argioneidem ad miarrecoriliwn of the Irish members fell altogether to the ground. The fact was. the Pope had appointed bishops with territorial titles in this realm of England, and the noble lord had acted wisely and properly in proposing to prohibit the assumption of these territorial title*. (Heer.) Mr. E. I'EEI. confessed that his mind was in such a state of uncertainty with respect to the probable range of the operation of this clause that he felt disposed to support the amendment before the house, or indeed he might say any .unenclusent which would have the effect of weakening the clause. (Hear, hear.) Ile really thought that the committee would expose itself to the imputation of some in cons.stency of conduct if. after having deliberately con sented to reject two clauses which stood in the bill. as 0(i. Finally introduced by her Majesty's government, they now, upon the recommendation of the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State fur the Home Department, agreed to the aduptiou of this clause, unmodified io any respect—this clause, too, being only borrowed by the goverunitut from 4msng the amendments suggested by the hou. and learned gen* man the member for Midhurst. (H ear. h ear. ) It might be said that this clause referred to a par ticular brief; that it only concerned England; and that therefore Ireland, where alone the Be quests Act operated, would not be affected. But this clause was a declaratory clause. It re-enacted the existing law, in terms that might only apply to one peen cater brief; but substantially and in elect it declared that every brief• rescript, ite., issued by, and every titl e de rived from the Pope, shall be treated as illegal and void. It might also be said that this clause was a very innocuous one, because it only re-enacted the existiug law. But to re-enact laws already in forte showed that those old laws hare been allowed to fall into desuetude if not into disgrace. (Hear, hear) He therefore hoped that some motioications in the clause would by agreed to. (Hear, hen ) The house than divided— -- IFortisearteadment 43 Against The amendment we. l•rlLleqUeptly lost. The CHAIRMAN then again put the question, " That this dame lanai part of the bill." Mr. REYNOLDS rose and *sled Lori John Russell, wht the, he intended to persevere with this clause. He THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 27, 1851. asked the question because of the important ditfereneee of opinion with resr.ust to the bearings of the clause which had been exexppressed la the Ant place between the hon. sail learnedps the 'member for Midhunt, and the law oldecta of the crown, and in the second place between the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General. Lord J. RUSSELL had not himself perceived the ' , limed differences between the opinions, in point oflaw, as regarded this clause, of the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-Gene ral, mid * of other gentlemen of the profession of the law who had spoken in the house on tic sulijeet. It was cer tainly his determination to go on with this clause. Mr. KEOGH said that the noble lord hail made the answer which was to have been anticipated ; for, earlier in the evening, the Solicitor-General stated that it would be impossible to abandon the clause. But it might bo thought from this strong expression that the clause was really a government clause, and had stood originally in the bill. It was quite clear that no such impossibility existed in the opinions of the government ; for, if they regarded the clause in this light, they would have introduced it at first in the bill. Where war the impossibility ? The bill was introduced without the clause. Nu opinion of the ' house had lieu recorded in favour of the clause. It was adopted at the suggestion of the hon. and learned member for Midhurst; and wily so far could the government be responsible for it. Before Easter the government took credit for resisting this clause. The honourable and learned member for Midhurst stated that he did not think that this clause applied to Ire land. [Mr. Walpole assented.] The Solicitor-General as distinctly said, in replying to the right hon. gentle man, the member for the Univer , ity of Oxterd (Mr. Gladstone) that this was a declaratory clan-e, and that it would necessarily affect the aggres sion of the Ito.naa catholic bishop of Boss, in Ireland. The Solicitor4;eueral assented . Was there no dif terence of opinion here? (Cheers.) But the 'toy° lord denied any differences of opinion between the Attor ney-Geueral and the Solicitor-General. The tor-General said that this was a d.dantion of law. Now he (Mr. Keogh) apprehended that there was no lawyer in the house who would not say that any act in con travention of this section would be a misdemeanour and punishable as a misdemeanour. The Solicitor-Gene ral was • distinguished equity lawyer; and lie (Mr. Keogh) would be sorry to deny the just distinction width the hon. and learned gentleman had won in his profession. llie hon. and learned member for Midhurst was also an eminent practitioner at the Chancery bar. But he appealed to the hon. and learned member for the Cuiverstty of Dublin (Mr. Napier), • distinguished common law lawyer, and to the lion. and learned member for Cork (Serjeruit Murphy), whether the exercise of authority in coutravention of this section would not be a misdemeanour, and punishable as a misdemeanour. Yet the Solicitor General said that the bill would not of Ireland ae regarded its criminal consequence.. The hon. and learned member for Melliurst would not touch the ease of Ireland, for that hon. and learned member be lieved that this clause was so sweeping in its operation that he was afraid to make his clauses applicable to Ire land. The noble lord and his friends disclaimed this. The Attorney-General had weeded that night that the act of the Pope was unlawful. He (Mr. Keogh) was ready to meet that proposition. Atter the legislation of the last 40 years, was it nut incum bent on her Majeety's advinne to prove thee it was unlawful before they asked the assent of the house to this bill ? It WAS no pleasure to him to be compelled to al dress the house so often as he did. Everybody knew that the feeling of the house 113.1 against the continuance of this discussion. (Hear, hear.) Ile knew the feeling of the house too well to . trespass too lung upou it. (Hear, hear.) But he was Waged to argue that the statement of the Best clause wax not founded in law. lle then quoted the words of the clause, declaring the title., jurisdiction and authority conferred by the Pope's rescript to be unlawful and void. %Vas it under the 13th of Elisabeth, or the statute of Richard 11. that the government said the au thority was unlawful lle conteuded that it was unlawful by neither, and he quoted the words of the statute of Elizabeth, affixing the penalties of high treason to the pro mulgating a bull, in support of that position, and then re fermi to Lord Lyndhurst's act, repealing the peualties con tained in those acts, and argued that unless it was an offence at common law, which it was not, the removal of the penalty removed also the offence. 11 denied that the statutes of Richard 11. and Elizabeth applied to such a case so tide. They were altogether applicable to the rose of an established church with dioceses, ben-Ores, and profits, and not to a dissenting church like the Reiman catholic. lie contended that the case of lea'or was no precedent, and I that the Solicitor-General knew it was not; because at the time of Lalur's trial it was illegal to profess the Roman catholic religion. The noble lord was not a lawyer, but a statesman, legislating for the interests of all cheeses of her Majesty's subjects; and therefore, even if some old musty statute did net upon the statute book affecting the interests of millions, would the noble lord rely upon that as the foundation of his legislation? There was a statute produced in Hell, which the right host. baronet the nuenher fur Ripon would remember was not popularly rut-dyed in Ireland, a great portion of the catholic population objecting to its restrictive clauses. But a great portion of the educated catholics saw many advantages con ferred by that bill upon their church, and supported it. He asked was it the intention of the government of that day to keep on the statute-book in full force those ancient sta tutes alluded to by the noble lord and his advisers. Ile now turned to a statute which had been treated by the Solicitor- General with great levity, and that was not the only matter that hon. and learned gentleman had treated with levity. (Hear, hear.) It might be all very well to treat with levity the religious liberties of her Majesty', subjects, when he knew ho would have the cheers of 300 or 409 members of the honse—(hear, hear)—but he hoped the honour able and learned gentleman would not assume that there was no argument against him, sail he begged hint to recol lect the many mistakes, miscalculations, corrections, amendments, and alterations which his colleague, fn office had made in regard to this measure before he was so flits pant. (Hear, hem.) The hon. and learned gentleman then referred to the 641 section of the act of ISIS-6, which provided that when questions arose before the commis siencrs concerning the usage or discipline of the church of Rome, they should be referred to a committee of the said commission, m consisting of those who profeseed the catholic religion; and that the committee should certify to the com miseionere the parties entitled to take the benefit of the be quests or donate ins. These commissioners consist. ;nee only of catholics but of protestant* also. The 11th section of the same act enable( persons to convey property fur the maintenance of archbishoprics and bishoprics in the church of Ireland. He asked the noble lord to reflect upon this. Suppose a question arose concerning a donation or bequest made to a bishop of the Roman catholic church acconling to the usage and discipline of the Roman catholic church, and he asked the noble lord how it was to be ascertained who was a bishop of the Roman catholic church according to the usage and discipline of that church ? (Ilear, hear.) Was it not by reference to the bull rescnpt, or letters apostolic, which had created the Roman catholic church in Ireland ; and did they mean to pretend that they were ignorant who were the bishops of the Roman catholic church in Ireland? Mr. Keogh then referred to a return made during the government of Mr. Pitt, by the Roman catholic hierarchy of Ireland. giving an account of their sees, the number of clergy, their incomes, and so on. The report was signed by the Roman catholic metropolitan and primate and other Roman catholic prelates. Die lion. and learned member then said that that was a document which gave answers to the queries of the ministry of that day, disclosing iu the most open and candid manner the state and condition of tho Roman catholic church. And did they then pretend to ignore the existence of that church? (Hear, hear.) Did the Solicitor-General mean to et de as a lawyer in that house, with the chance of his authority being respected out of doors, that with the legislation of 11344, when the late right hon. baronet the member for Tamworth was at the head of her Majeety's government, and produced this bill referring to the usag es and discipline of the Roman catholic church, authorising inquiry into them and receiving these declarations in return—did the hon. and learned gentleman mean to say that in the year 18.51 he could conic down to the house with this wretched bill—a " thing of shreds and patches" (hear, hear) a thing burrowed from every quarter in the house—(hear, hear)—did the hon. and learned gentleman do that and say he was not destroying religious liberty? The hon. and learned member then analysed in detail the arguments of the Solicitor- General, and he then argued that it was the business of the house to see that the Roman catholirsiof Ireland and of this empire hail the free and undoubted exercise of their reli gion. There had been an unbroken existence of a hierarchy and they were essentially an episcopal hierarchy, and not vicars apostolic, but this clause would be most inquisi torial, and would declare all that to be illegal which the Roman catholic bishops had been doing to this present time, because it would render illegal the source and foundation of their authority. Ile had suggested his amendments because he believed they were borne out by the statements of the government to which he had thought they would adhere. As a test of Sincerity, he called upon the n o bl e l or d to re strict this clause to England. The qii ition was then put by Mr. Ilrneat from the chair, that the word " England" be inserted. Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. and learned zentlensen had told the house for the third or fourth time the bill would be inoperative, but he had nut favoured them with any argu ments. On the question before the house he had said nothing. Let the house consider what evil it was proposed to remedy. A rescript or paper from the Pope appeared in this country purporting to be a rescript or letters apostolic., founding an archbishopric to be called the Archbishopric of Westminster, and founding eleven or twelve other sec-* or bishoprics named after Southwark, Birmingham, Clifton, and various other places. It was affirmed in the preamble of the hill, as originally introduced, that the attempt to establish under the authority of the see of Rome or other wise to establish sees or dioceses was illegal and void, and in conformity with that preamble, the clause enacted that " the said brief, rescript, or letters apostolical, and all and every the jurisdiction, authority, pre-eminence, or title c inferred, or pretended to be conferred, thereby, are and shall be and be deemed unlawful and void." Any one would have expected that the hon. and learned gentle man would have shown that the see of Rome had the power and authority to establish sees and bishoprics in this ' country: that what he had done was in conformity with the law of England, and that the assertion in this clause, ' as well as that which had been contained in the original preamble, was unfounded. But had the hon. and learned gentleman said a scale word in support of such a proposi tion ? If not, then he had not made out his argument against the clause. He had raised an adverse argu ment with respect to the extension of this clause' to Ireland—(hear, hear)—and as to the effect it might hays in Ireland; but with respect to that which was the rosin proposition, namely, that a rescript had appeared which pretended to cooler bishoprics, but which gave no authority at all, but was void, as an unlawful act—with respect to that the hon. and learned gentleman had not taveseed with a Single argument. The bon. and k.a I gentleman contradicted the authority of erase. (111 r. Keogh here said some words in explanation.) g Lalor's e oodlotr,itniste, resin; pronounced u that t onced h it did t no a t t a tlec ppi bpon t:o7 t to be present The hon. and learned gentleman likewise said that the ex ercise of the Roman catholic religion was forbidden at the time of that case. But the statute snider which Latir wa. ltumut part of the hon. and learnt , ' gentleman's argument could not c co ,,t n i v . ic li t c ed re w ligi as o a n win i n ti c v a e t r tl , ic an s d ta ttuhteere, therefore n t t h h a e t branded as unlawful. That was the authority on t b h y e o d n ee tt i t s o i r o i n ty i n L froin alo r ociansoc wasth t Lo a app ly to case thatof and east. d . he apprehended remained to the present day. But the hon. and learned gentleman found iu the Bequest Act some authority which he conceived gave power to the Roman catholic church to establish any bishop ric and to manage that church in any way they thought ll th th e ei l r l 2 o r m 4 : u in . catholicrconP c t s r. t h b e . i r y , h b c o had h ., o s u i a n s i ediw oul d d t h . r e c r em although e w m as b o h h :d y t oiunb didat not insu,ne titles, did exercise their episcopal functions in the ancient , dioceses. Therefore that was never opposed or in any way interfered with so long as the bishops did not interfere with the law of the land and do that whisk was forli'delen. The noble lord then continued as follows:—Now, I not only state that that is the case, hut liar my part, I wish that state of things to remain, and I do not see any reason for interfering with the Roman catholic bishops in the ex cerise of their functions. (Hear, hear.) But the Bequests Act, insteaul of being, a, the hon. and learned gentleman has said, a solemn and public recognition of three powers and authorities, is an act which, as I have stated on molly former yet isions, carefully and assiduously , and as I think most skilfully avoids any such interference. (Hear, hear.) i In the Heat instance, in speaking of bishops it dues I on gay, " of bishops exercising spiritual junsdictiou," " of bishops exercising authority over any diocese," " of Roman catholic bishops eruling or governing any diocese," as we have heard said in this committee, but it sacs " bishops exercising their functions or officiating," not within toy diocese, but "in any district "--(hear, hear)—who must therefore be bishops apostolical or in orders, as Roman catholic bishops, end officiating in any districts. But then there must come a question with TV spurt to certain persons. For instance, it a Roman catho lic priest, its any district in which he officiates, were to as sume a title to which he was not by law entitled, there might be considerable embarrassment created to the emn missioners. There might too be a question whether there was a claim of authority from a bishop, by virtue of which he exercised his functions. That difficulty, if it arose, might, as I have said, cause very considerable embarrass ment to the commissioners, because if that title were to be produced before a court of law, it is evident that by the powers of that bill the commissiouers might say, " that is a title which no Roman catholic priest or bishop can ae suine." (('heers, and "hear, hear.") The bill sacs that if there be any difficulty as to the person entitled to bequest, the question is to be referred to a committee. If the person who is entitled to the benefit of that bluest be a Roman catholic, then that committee is to con-fist of the Roman catholic commissioners. These esmmiuioncrs, according to the rule of their church, will decide who is entitled to receive the benefit of the bequest, and the com mittee who have to give in a report, would report not that a certain person is priest, not that a certain priest is bishop of Limerick, or of any other diocese, hut they will rep in who the person is who (ight to receive the benefit of the bequest, and therefore if you say, "the Right Rev. Or. Ryan" or " the ltev. Mr. O'Connell," or any. other person, •• is to receive the benefit of this Iseittust," that is quite sufficient for the commissioners, and Wlqusstion as to the assumption of a title can come before the commissioners or the public. (Cheers, and " Hear, hear.") Such was the case with which the framers of that most useful hill—introduced for useful purpose', and worked out in a manner to make these useful purposes really beneficial—such is the mumer in which that act was framed. (Cheers.) Neither, then, in regard to Latin's cam., nor with reference to the Bequests Act, has the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Keogh) made out any lawful power or authority in the see of Rome to erect bishoeriee and give episcopal jurisdiction and authority in Ireland. (Hear, hear.) That was the whole of what the honourable and learned gentleman endeavoured to do. lie did not endeavour to prove that such authority existed in England, but he did endeavour to make out that it existed in Ireland. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the practical effect of this bill, as I have often said be fore, there is trinity any portion of it—althoierh it is a bill for the United Kingdom, and therefore extends to the United Kingdom—l must say there is hardly any portion of it which practically has any effect on 'rebind. It would melooffitedly operate to prevent any person from ;mum* the title of Bishop of lialway, and it would, there is no doubt, affect the Arelibiehop of Tuam. (Ilear, hear.) But with regard to another matters, this bill will leave the state of Ireland, after it is passed. as nearly es possible what it has been before. With regard to the first clause, it declares that to he law which no lawyer has yet denied to be lew, and h the him. and learned gentleman him self has not denied to be law. (Cheers and " Hear, hear. ') And therefore it does not make a new law, but declares to be law what is at present the law, both in England and Ireland. (Cheers.) The second clause prevents the as sumption Many new titles. Every one knows that if Ro man catholic bishops were to assume titles it would be those of existing sees, such as the Bishop of Armagh, the Bishop of Dublin, and the Bishop of Ross, which I believe is a title existing. It would be the titles of existing sees that would be assumed, and the bill therefore Is a bill di rected—as I think it ought to be directed—to the particular olleuce which I thick has been com mitted against the crown, the parliament, end the nation—(eheers)—and dues not do anything which is not necessary fur the purpose of me e ti ng that offence. Ou the other hand, if we made this declaration of law solely as re gards England, the Pope would erect any new sees in Ire land which he thought proper, and would give jurisdiction and authority in Ireland, notwithstanding the authority of the crown and the independence of the nation. (Loud cheers.) It would amount to a great change of the law, in derogation of the authority of the crown rind the inde pendence of this nation, and I trust this house will not sanction any such alteration. (Cheers.) It suits the purpose of honourable gentlemen, it appears, to make a great agitation in Inland; to proclaim, as I have seen done in some resolutions that came from Timm, that hereafter •• our bishops will be driven out of Ireland," that " our chapels will be levelled to the ground," that "no priest will be allowed to officiate." These are the statements made in order to impose on eery ignorant people, but every one in this house knows that after this bill is passed there will he perfect freedom of conscience and the full exercise of the Roman catholic religion. But some hon. gentle men get up and say, " We Roman eatholics after all, the best judges as to what is M ammary fur the organisation of the Roman catholic religion." But I say, stop a little. I am quite ready that you should have everything you think proper for the exer cise of your religion or the organisation of your church if you do not interline with others. (Cheers, and " hear, hear.") As long ax you choose to have two bishops in England, or four bishops, or even twelve bishops, that is a mat ter with which I have no concern whatever, H you think them necessary for your organisa tion. But when you come to my that von mast rule English counties and English places, I leave • right to take objection (Hear, hoar) You might jest es well say that because by the act of 1791 Roman catholic priests arc allowed to perform masses, if you say you maned perform them without cutering Westminster Ablier, yea are at liberty to enter there. (Hear, hear) M e my: "You are at liberty to perform masses wherever yea like—in whatever chapel or other proper ;duce, but Is Westminster Abbey you have no right, and into West- Winter Abbey you shall not come." (Laughter and loud timers.) Organise as you please, but only allow us to preserve the independence of the nation, and not be subject to a foreign power. (Loud cheering.) Mr. ROCHE said that if the noble lord (Lord". Russell) wee right in saying that the bill did not affect Ireland, he could not understand oil what ground he refused to agree to the amendment. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the committee divided, when the number: were : For the amendment Against Bl-15 On our re-admission to the gallery we found Mr. KEOGH mining another amendment on the first clause. He (Mr. Keogh) proposed that the following words should be added at the end of the first clause .—" That no thing in this section shall be construed to interfere with the ecclesiastical and spiritual functions of the Roman catholic bishops and archbishops in Ireland." The ATTORNEY-OENER AL said that the clause to which these words were proposal' to be added did not affect the ecclesiastical and spiritual functions of Roman catholic bishops and archbishops, unless their jurisdiction and autho rity should be exercised in pursuance of titles illegally as sumed. (Hear, hear.) It would certainly be inconsistent to say that the bishops might lega exercise spiritual juris diction which was oie Autt illegally bltdoorttnetyt assum e .tnoh. nseis or Attorney - Gene ral ( 3; 1 ndo by hhi:dr amendmentsr . t ) ih aajetstt3s this go i o kind t K d o E ,i ° t t ha t l I i t T e l eld amendment was inconsistent with the clause • but he (the Attorney-General) must recollect that no R oman catholic bishop could be appointed except by a reseript or letters apostolical, and he (Mr. Keogh) was anxious that the Roman catholic clergy should be fully protected in the exercise of their spiritual functions. The noble lord (Lord J. Russell) said that he did not wish to interfere with the religious liberty of the people of Ireland. Would he put i n a dal" to this effect, •• That nothing in this bill contained shall be construed to affect the spiritual liberties of the Roman catholic people of Ireland ?" (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Keogh) wished to know if this bill was introduced with a view to affect the episcopal protestant church in Scotland ? The episcopalian protestants in Scotland did not exceed two hundred thousand persons. Would the noble lord grant them a clause that the act should not interfere with the religious liberties of six millions of Irish catholic% ? In every form of expression they had sought to extract an expression from the noble lord that he would not interfere with the reli gious liberties of the catholic,. lie now tried another form, and if the noble lord rejected it, he could assure him they would oppose the bill in all the forms which the ndes of the house would permit. Mr. A. B. HOPE said he had hitherto supported the small minority who had so consistently opposed this bill ; but though he should not vote with the majority. yet in this case he could not vote with the minority. 'o doubt this bill was a grievance to the Roman catholic, of Ire land; but he thought if they looked dispassionately at it they would see that religious liberty win as dear to 60,000 as it was to 6,000,000. Mr. ANSTEY was surprised that there should be any opposition to this amendment ; he saw no necessity for the amendment, but as it was moved he should vote for it. lie trusted teat the noble lord would yet introduce a clause exempting Ireland altogether from the operation of the bill. Allusion had been made to declarations signed by Roman catholic", hut Roman catholic" had signed de clarations au inconsistent with each other, that he paid no attention to them. Hon. members would recollect the (a mens address of the clergy of the diocese of Beverley, which was presented to Cardinal Wiseman, against the establish meet of the hierarchy, and deprecating the introduction of I any foreign system of ecclesiastical legislation, as oh noxious to taeir own feelings and us hostile to I the feelings of the millions by whom they were surrounded. That document was agreed to at a district meeting presided over by the dean whose sig nature was attached to it, rind the document with the sig natures appended was published. What followed ? Every ;one of the subscribers within two or three days had a circa lur sent to him to this effect :—" Reverend Sir, you will please to peruse the enclosed draft address to Cardinal Wiseman, and if you approve of it you will sign it, and send it back by return of post." Ho believed there were only two clergymen who had the hardihood to refuse to sign it. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY said he wished to ask the hon. and learned gentleman whether lie ad dressed the house as a catholic or not ? (Loud cries of I " hear, hear." from the catholic members.) Mr. ANSTEY ruse amid cries of " No, no." Ile said, if the question was in order, he supposed he should be in order hr replying. Ile could only say . he should be very sorry to commit what he should conceive to be the unpar donable °trolley of putting such a question to any gentle man. As the noble lord seemed to expect an answer, lie should smother his tidings, and tell him that he was to the full as gond a catholic as he was. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY said that was suflici.mt. Ile thought that when an hon. member got up among catholic members and expressed sentiments totally at sariance with catholic feelings, it was then fair to ask the hon. gentleman that question. Mr. NAPIER said there was no difference that he was aware of, created by the act of 171/1, between the catholic' of England and the catholies of Ireland with regard to this question. Mr. ANSTEY said the difference between the operation of a bill of this kiad in Ireland and England was, that a bull which related to the hierarchy was legal in Ireland, but not iu England, because, under the Relief Act, the hier archy was tolerated, but in England, not the hierarchy, but the vicars apostolic. Mr. M. GIBSON would admit that there would ceitainly have been a stronger case had the proposal of the hon. and learned member fur Athlone (Mr. Keogh) =omitted a pro. visa applsin,g only to Ireland instead of to the whole of the United kingdom ; though he (Mr. Gibson) preferred taking it generally. When, however, they considered the monstrous injustice of forcing on tho people of Ireland a church which was no use to them, and then saying by an act of parliament that they should not maintain a church of their own—;cheers)--litat that they should be subjected to every species of insult and oppression—(cheers)—lie must say it male one anxious to include Ireland most especially in the proviso. (Renewed cheers.) They forced a great bench of bishops of the esta blished church upon a Roman catholic people—(cheers) and then they brought in a bill to say that that Roman catholic penp:o should not maintain their own bishops by their ox n contributions as II non-established community, and should not give them those titles which they believed would tend to make them most respected and useful, and so would raise the Roman catholic church in that country. (Cheers.) There was something so palpably unjust iu the whole pmeeeding, something that so violated the very principlis of justice, that lie could hardly condescend to enter into th•Leletails of thi, clause. (Cheers.) Sir H. W. BARRON took the same view of the case, and accused the government with acting a two-faced part in wishing to p. , rseente the Roman catholics , but with pre tending that they did not. Captain TAYLOR. was decidedly in favour of a mea sure the effect of which would be to repel emphatically the insolent aggression of the papal court, but while he would vote for this bill as lacing a step in the right direction, he wished it at the same time to he understood that he considered the noble lord had proposed that which was meagre and blotf etive, and utterly inconsistent with the suggestions and pledges of the Durham letter. Mr. REYNOLDS reminded the committee of the question he had put in the earlier part of the even ing, as to whether the noble lord, in the fare of the widely different legal opi nio ns which had been expressa, would think it wise to persevere with this clause. The noble lord, with that coolness which was his characteristic, even in persistence in error, made very small beer of hint (Mr. Reynolds) in replying curtly that there were no differences of opinion, and that he would not give up the clause. But the matter had now been made quite clear. The Solicitor General had declared that a cer tain colour was hl ; and the hon. and learned member for Midhurst, with not less solemnity, had as distinctly pro nounced the same hue to be white. It remained to be seen whether the government would not learn wisdom and abandon so doubtful a clause. Ile (Mr. Reynolds) and his friends, who were taking the same course in regard to this measure, had no pleasant functions to discharge, and felt keenly the remarks which had been expressed in re ference to them, but they were doing what they believed it to be their duty to do; and, few as they were, Go against MO, their reward would hereafter he that their names would be written in Ireland in letters of gull. (threat laughter.) Ile repeated the expression —their names would hereafter he written in letters of gold. Ile would not venture to hint wlmt would in the future be said of those who compssed the majority. Ile should be sorry to any an insulting word against that majority. Ile be lieved that they were driven in this course—that they were but obeying the commands of their constituencies. And he maintained that, as regarded this question, the House of Commons had ceased to be a deliberative assembly. Ilad the government proposed any measure for England and Scotland to lighten the pressure of indirect taxation ? What measure of any consequence had they on the notice paper? Why had the proposal of mornirm sittings been Introduced? What had they done on Saturday night ? (Loud laughter, and cries of " hear, hear," from Mr. Wawn.) Ile wished the hon. member fur Shields would go to his own side of the house. Mr. WAWN rose to order. The CHAIRMAN said the hon. member for Shields hail not transgressed the rules of order. Mr. WAWN begged to ask what business the house had transatted on Saturday night ? (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) Mr. REYNOLDS said it hail been well observed that a child might ask a question which it would puzzle a philoso pher to answer. It would be impossible, for instance, to answer the question of what they had been doing on Saturday night ; but there were other 'questions which it was not unreasonable to ask. lie should like to know whether it Wa3 intended that this bill should extend to Ireland ? (Hear, hear.) Irish members could sit by day, and talk too ; and he would be glad to know who would be tired first. (Laughter.) Ile must now refer for a moment to the hon. and learned member for Youghal (Mr. Anstcy), whom he had heard that night bearing false witness to his creed. (Loud and reiterated cries of " (luestion," which prevented the hon. gentleman from continuing his allusion.) Mr. LAWLESS rose to order. Ile appealed to the house whether the hon. member for South Shields, who had been crying question, was jitstilied in this interruption ? Mr. WAWN said he had not interrupted the hon. mem ' her while he was speaking to the question, but when he diverged from it, he claimed his pris ilege, as a member, of calling " question." (Hear, hear.) Alter a few words froin Mr. REYNOLDS and the Marquis of GHANFIV, Mr. MOORE called the attention of the hon. and learned member for Youghal to a passage iu a book purported to have been written by hint. Mr. ANSTEY having replied, Mr. MOORE, who was interrupt.sl by loud cries of " Divide," charged hon. members with acting in regard to this bill not as a delifienitive assembly, with a view to just legislation, but a s persons addressing themselv es t o their constituents, with a view to election purposes—making this a hustings question. (C r i es o f " Oh.") As they would not permit him to proceed he would move that tho chair man report prose sis. (Cheers, and cries of " Oh.") Lord J. RUSSELL must say that the house had lis tened with remarkable patience to the hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.) If the discussion had been confined to the merits of tie amendment or to the merits of the clause, or even to the merit, of the bill generally, there would be nothing extrawdinary in it ; hut considering that the hon. gentleman had now taken up more than an hour in discus ' -log every other sort of question than that before them, the patience of the committee had been most remarkable, and he could not think it reasonable that the hon. gentleman should persist in continuing such a discussion. Certainly he (Lord J. Russell) could not consent further to waste the time of the house. (Cheers.) Mr. M. GIBSON wished to know what would be the effect of the clause. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied that this bill did not declare that all bulls were illegal and void, but confined itself to bulls and rescripts creating dioceses with territorial titles. (Hear.) After a few words from the Earl of ARUNDEL and Sea- HET and Mr. Mown:, The committee divided—. The numbers were — For the amendment Against 314-28.3 On our readmission to the gallery, Mr. J. O'CONNELL was expressing the wish to the government that some words should be inserted, providing that the bill should not interfere with any spiritual act of the Roman catholic bishops. Sir G. GREY said that it was not necessary to do so, be cause the bill would not interfere with any act of the bishops that was simply spiritual. It was merely to•prevent the Pope from exercodug territorial authority. Mr. SADLEIR rose. The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Bernal) said the question I have to propose is, that the clause stand part of the bill. Does the hon. member intend to move ? Mr. SADLEIR replied in the affirmative. lie would test the sincerity of the right hon. the Home Secretary by the proposal he was about to make. The noble lord had al together avoided touching the question which his hun. and learned friend (Mr. Keogh) had raised. They had been told by the Attorney-General fur England, i n answer to t h e right boo . member for Manchester,thst there were some bulls that ware illegal, and that there were other bull, or rescrip:s that were lawful. What he intended to propose was a proviso at the end of the clause to remove those doubts which he felt in common with many other persons; and the words he hod adopted were taken from a clause in the Charitable Bequests Act. Great practical and political mischief would result from loose legislation on this subject. The proviso was in these words :—" Provided that nothing in this act con , ained shall be construed to affect any arch bishop or bishop, or other person in holy orders of the church of Rome, officiating in any district, or having pasto ral superintendence of any congregation of persons proles sing the Roman catholic religion according to the and discipline of the church of Rome in the United K doni as they existed previous to the 29th of Septemher, 1850."_ .—.„. Lord J. It I;sSELL did not sec any advantage which would he gained by going over the same ground. His right hon. friend (Sir 0. Grey) bad said that the bill did I .( interfere with the spiritual functions of the Roman catholic clergy • they bad just divided on the question, and Ae (lima J. Russell) therefore thought there ►hould be an end of it. (('heers, and " Hear, hear.") Mr. OSWALD wished to state to the house what was the law in Scotland, previous to the 29th of September, isO. A statute had been ptoted in 1567, for I.lle purpw of " *Whiting popery." That statute prohiliited all inter eourie with the see of Rome, under pain of proscription, banishment, and the deprivation of all offices of emolument, honour, or dignity; and forbade, under similar penalties, any bishop or other prelate of the realm from using s a y jurisdiction or authority by virtue of powers conferred cm them by the court ot Rome. If this were the law of Scotland just now he (Mr. Oswald? begged to ask if there existed the slightest use fur extending the measure to that country? Same of the pains and penalti..s against Unm an catholit•s had been abrogated in the fird of George 111. and the 4Rh chapter of that year, but this act of 1467 h a d not been repealed. Ile appealed to the 1...,rd Advocate if be were not correct in this. (Rear, hear.) After a few words from the Earl of ARUNDEL and Sraustr, Mr. THELAWNY wished to have an answer from the law officers of the crown to a very brief question. Ile would suppose a case, in which a catholic bishop or arch bishop assumed the title of Archbishop or Bishop of tt•est. minster, an.l, iu virtue of his office, he would suppose that bishop or archbishop to ordain a clergyman. Now, sup posing that clergyman to fall into the commission of some impropriety, for which his bishop should suspend him, and that the clergyman, being of a vindictive di.position, turned against his bishop and produced the writt.:. instrument hy virtue of which the bishop ordained and entrusted hint with the cure of souls, would it, in such case, he ope n ta the crown to proceed against the bishop for misdenteanour ? (Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, said lie had an.sered the question over and over again. In Li, opinion, under the first clause—the clause then before them—ho meanour would arise • it affected only the validity of acts done under au assumed territorial title. Thu pi•nalti, of the act wero under the second clause, but nut ut all tou.lied by the Bret. The committee tlividcd— For the proviso Against it Mr. KEOOII moved to add the followin7, prori-o.— " l'rmilled that no criminal proceeding shall be comturnced. or indictment preferred against any per-on, under or I, l • virtue of thi. clause. The ellA IItMAN—Do I tand,rstand hon and lc amed gentleman propo.e% it ot the pry rent moment ? Mr. KEOGH—If the noble lord thinks it de%irable to proceed at one in the morning. The CHAIRMAN—Du you move it now? Mr. K EGG lI—I wish to give notice now. The CIIAIRMAN—The hon. and learned gentleman cannot Rive notice of it now. Mr. K HOG ll—Then I move it. Mr. REYNOLDS eunridered that the advanced hour Of the morning was hi+ excuse fur moving that the Chairman do now report progress. Lord J. RUSSELL said he would not give the committee the trouble of dividing on this motion. lie thought it was now sufficiently clear that hon. member. had heeu making the same motion mer and over again. (Loud ern , ut Ilear, hear.") That when they had gone into the lobby, finding themselves in a small minority, they had framed motions at the moment which had been before rejected, awl brought them before the commit tee in a different shape. That tieing sufficiently obvious he thought it as well that they should have time to reflect upon this conduct, and he did not think they would be inclined to repeat it again when they saw that rottlAte opinion ennilmned such a mode of proceeding. Mr. REYNOLDS again rose end essayed to address the committee, but his voice wars drowned by loud cries of "Oh, oh." For one or two minutes the hoe. gentleman tried to obtain a bearing, but every attempt WAS met by renewed " Oh, 0h.," and the hon. gentleman sat down saying some- thing about " beastly interruption." The motion that the Chairman report progress was then agreed to. APPRENTICES TO SEA SERVICE (IRELAND) HILL (No. 2). . . . . . . Thiq bill pa• - •ied through committee and the several elitt.ts were :igrecil to. ST. ALBANS BRIBERY COMMISSION. On the order of the day fur going into committee on this bill, _ Mr. BANKES said he should oppose the further pro gress of the bill. and moved that the house adjourn. The CHANCELLOR of the E Nell EQUER deprecated the course pursued by the hon. zentletuan (Mr. Bunke.). The house had unanimously resolved there should he an in quiry, and some expense must necessarily be incurred. Mr. BANK ES would withdraw his objections, it the word " salaries" were omitted. Mr. ELLICE said the provision was only permissive in ease the house thought tit. The house divided— For the adjournment Against it The house then went into committer on the bill. Colonel stirritont. moved that the chairman report prottrcas. After a short discussion the committee divided— For the mutton A;, , ainst it Mr. BANKES then moved the omission of the word " salaries" from the first clause, upon which the committee again divided— For the motion Against it .tn bon. MEMBER. moved that the chairman report progress, whereupon the committee again divided— For the motion 1 Again■t it Mr. BANKES moved the chairman should leave the chair. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed to the chairman reporting progresr. Alter a brief discussion, the hou,e divided— For leasing the chair l•i Against 42-27 While - reporters were absent, the house divided a second time, the question put being that the chairman should report krogress : iur l4 Against 42-28 The galleries were again cleared, but no dirisbm was taken, and it was understood that the whole subject w as punt tuned. The other business on the paper was disposed of, and the house adjourned at a quarter-past 2. PMlt'.-Mr. Christopher paired off last night iu favour of the Ecclesiastical Titles Dill with the O'Gorman Mahou against. PAIILIAMENTAItY COMMITTEES. M.►ItBET 11EMO►,tr. COMMITTEE. Yeatenlay, Mr. Cardwell in the chair, this committee re sumed their proceedings. The witnesses examined in pro motion of the measure were Mr. Bond, of Uak Farm, Taunton; Mr. Haynes, of Bridgwater; Mr. 'Purr, Lin colndlire ; and Mr. Bryant, extensive graziers. Their evi dence went to corroborate that already recorded in the Blue books of the house, and was to the effect that under the existing Smithfield n'yime great injury was dune to the cattle, by their being driven through the thoroughfares, besides being confined in su inconvenient a situ, and great advantage would accrue if the proposed new market were in the neighbourhood of the railway stations. The com mittee soon after adjourned to ►Yednlesday, to give time for the production of further evidence. 'rite Islington Cattle Market Company's Bill has been referred for consideration to the committee by the house. STAEFORDSIII ILE AND SUM/PAH= NILWAY.--Yester day, before his Honour Master Richards, Mes.rs. Gregory and Brynton, two of the directors of this company, were ex 'mined at great length, by Mr. Daniel and by Mr. Roxburgh (counsel for Mr. Hutton, the official manager), and both gentlemen concurred iu stating that no authority was given tar the removal of the company's funds out of the Commer cial Bank. li . trr it TIMER Co3lllllTlTE.—Yesterday this committee met for the first time, to arrange the order of their proceed ings, and choose a chairman. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. HOUSE OF COMMONS. ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION BlLL— (Conaidered in Committee.) MISMILITT.—.CIitIie I.—Another amendment wopeeed. In pie 2, line 24, to leave out the words " unlawfal and .• (Mr. M'Cullagb.)— Question put, that the words projavaxl to be left out stand part of the clause." The Committee divided: Ayer, 179; NOM 43. NOES. Arundel and Surrey, Hutchins, E. J. Peel, Frederick Earl of Keating, Robert Power, Dr. Barron, Sir H. W. /Gogh, %Ilium Power, Nichols. Blake, Martin J. Lawless, lion. C. Reynold., John Burke, Sir T. J. Mogan, W. 11. Roche, Fslmund B. Csetlert nit, Viscount Maher, Nicholas V. Sadleir, John Clements, lion. C. S. Meagher. Thee. Scully, Francis Colebrook, SOT. E. Mansell, Wiliam Sullivan, Michael Cortially, Matthew E. Moore, 0.11. Talbot, J. H. Devereux, J. T. Murkily, Prancia S. Urquhart, David Fortero le, Chichester O'Brien, J. Wall, Chattel B. Gladstone, Rt. tie. W. O'Brien, Air TiTotby °odd, wyndbam O'Connor, Venrcus TELLW. Orace, Oliver V. J. O'Ferrall, little. R. MlCullash, W. T. Oration, terlabertv, Anthony Grattan, Henry Higgins, G. G. 0. Oswe'd, Alexander MINOSITIG—Another amentlmen• proporvl, in line 21, to add at the • end of the Mauve the words "in Enaland " (Mr. beegh.)—Qoestion put: than words be there added."—The committee divided : Ayes, 39; Noes, 84. AYES. _ Anetey, Thomas C. Iligginsn, ii. G. 0. O'Connor, reargue Arundel and Surrey, Hindman, Edward ()Terrell, Hon. K. M. E.trl of Keating, Robert O'rlaberty, Anthony Blake, Martin J. Lawler% lion. Cecil Power, Dr. lii Rrglnald J. SPeullsgh, W. T. Power, Nicholas Oorbally, Matthew E. Megan, Wiliam H. Reynold*, John Derma:, John T. Maher Ninholae V. leadleir, Jobe French, Iritutephen Meagher, Thomas Smilers, John Patrick Gibson, lin. T. M. Moose% Witia.n Sullivan Michael Goold, Wyndham Moore, George IL Talbot, J. Hyacinth Grace, Oliver 1). J. Murphy, F. S. Grattan, Henry Warren Sir D. I. TET.LCIE. Greene, John Nugent, Sir Peri Keogh, William Herbert, Henry A. O'Brien, John Baehr, Edmund B. Heywood, James O'Brien, T. PI