The Express. — London, England, 1851-05-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—Mmehrt, Mx 19. 'ilia Loan en•Wcittn.t took his seat at five o'clock. PETITIONS PRESENTED. A number of petitions were presented against papal &g -ar the eufranchisensent of eo_py. =7= Myiis sa agriculture ; see from BM flare, rubes Ise Its eleblielment of • transatlantic packet aiellea; me hem Cork, against the importation of foreign S and ems against the Capitula Estates Bill. EXPENSES OF PROSECUTIONS BILL. On the Medea of Lord Coax won= this bill was reed a Mesa time. PROPERTY TAX BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the mond reeding of this bill. He was not a great admirer of this system of direct taxation, and In shoOld he a moot unfit person to propose the adoption. of • system of direct instead of indirect tauticas, if such were intended. Although he had on a former occasion shored the seeend reeding of a similar bill, he always had s objected to its principle; and his objections were well stated by the late Sir Robert Peel, when parliament agreed to the Mature as a temporary one. It was liable, u all direct taxation must be, to an imputation of inequality, which parliament could never dreamily remove. It was the duty of parliament, when Imposing an immense wawa of bur. • Jens on the isometry, to make them as palatable 'Me, and to carry with them the feeling and coneurrene of the people. (Hew, hear.) There were two questions to be considered—how far, by the continuance of this burden, they could facilitate the importation into On■ country of that which was important to its prosperity, and to the us were of its manufretarci, and how far it would improves the revenue and facilitate the means of getting rid of the tax altogether at • future period. He would ask them to consider whether they could think that in the state of this country, the property tax actually operated heavily se an impost, and prevented the develop- ' ment of the resources of the country. Had it sines 11141 ' bad the effect of crippling the commerce and prosperity of the country ? The revenue, he thought, furnished the beta reply ; and not only in one, but in every department of it. He would not state to their lordships, fur it must • be ',efficiently known, what hail lamed in the other house ol parliament. The surplus would, they were aware, be applied fir the purpose of liberating certain duties on the artic:es of coffees and timber, ankh he thought had been wisely selected, and also fertile purpeeseuf repealing • direct ' tax which pressed more heavily even than the income tax; • and he trusted there would hr no difference of opinion be . tween their lordships as to how they should apply the re mainder of the staples, namely, to the reduction of the national debt. The removed of the window tax would not only remove • severe pressure generally felt, but have • ben, tidal effect in a sanitary point of view; and by sacri ficing a million of revenue they would also encourage build ing and vine an additional impetus to manufacture", and • notwithstanding the statements of noble lords opposite ' every branch of industry was now in a most flourishing ' Mate. (Ilear, lieu.) The former repeal of a part of the duty on coffee gave a marvellous in crease in the revenue from that article by the increases! consumption; and, no doubt, • similar result would fellow the reduction now proposed. As to timber, he might say that since the reeolutione of the House of Commune had been known they MI given a stimulus to skip building. and the price of timber hurl been reduced. To secure the continuance of the present prosperous state • of the country, their lordships, he hoped, would assent to . the re-enactment of this measure. there was only one alteratem of importance iu it, which applied to the occu piers of land, mil by which, instead of paying upon mo hair of their rents, they might, if they could prove their prelim to he le", pay the income tax on the amalleramount. He now moved that the ball be read • sowed time. (Hear, hear.) Lord STANLEY said that the noble marquis had rested the viudicatieu of the measure on two grounds; first, can • the necesetty, in which he cordially concurred, of main tenting the public credit of the country, and the impossi bility of demensiag with the whole ansouut of the in come tax in the present state of the revenue, at least in the pre. seat year. 'I ho noble marques also ri.t.4 it on another roe. sideratiun, with respect tee which he must take leave alto gether to dissent from the noble marquee namely, the ex pediency of developing and still further extending our pre sent commercial system, and still further facilitating the importation of those articles of foreign produce, the me *MIK, earelsitant, and unchecked importeition of which has already brought so much ruin epee the country. (Cheers.) Ant he did not wish to take that opportunity of doecuseing the commercial polity of her Majesty's government, be cause they were in that petition iu which no opties was left t., them as to the course they should pursue. A bill wee brought up to them ifelll the other hies, of parliament, the pissing of which in some shape be odrusttal to be neceinary Aw the main. tenets, of the credit of the country. Apart from all other consideration he wee not the person to eon *ad, is.,, hail he ever imateneleel, nor should he contend that in the course of the pnawat year. sor could he honestly my as the course of the next year would it be possible, in his °lemon, to diepease with the coistinuaiwe of a certain pewi t . of the imam ax. (Hear, hear) And he hoped be nei ii ma say for himself and for thine with whom he acted, that no consideration nimbi induce them to sanction that rule and no lams reduction of taxation which would place the rountry in a 'tuition not to meet its engagement.. (Hear.) Their leel-hipt were placed in reference to this question in a position different from that of the Ileum of Commons, • because when a bill of this kind was brought before them they were not in • parities with regard to the privileges of the other house of parliament to amend or alter or modify it ise the slightest degree. The simple question which was submitted to their lordship.' consideration was whether they would adopt the modified elreltle US now proposed for the Senn ..f me year, after the. other home of parlia ment had avowed its int. ntion of inquiring into the irreut- Intim" and anomalies, and inner!. lawns of the income tax, or whether they would reject the bill altogether; and then fire reject the means of procuring • TetellUe of be tween Seellitatinle. and eereknefie And by this proceeding esavert a gimlets of about 1.„400,000/. into a deficiency of an equal amount. &Almon these two propoeitions he did out think there could be a moment's hesitation. it, his mind there was nose, nor slid he believe. there could he any in the minds of any of their lordships. When be said their lordships were debarred from con sidering any modification of the bill, their lordships had • str iking proof of that statement in the fact that they were compelled to per the measure in a shape which re flected no credit on the blundering legislation of parliament. The noble earl ((hey) adinittesl that a blunder had been committed in the bill, which while it was only to be con filmed for a single year, contained a provision applicable to the lan year of that term of one single year, and the noble marquis said it was • blunder introduced by the amend ment of au individual member of the other house. Now he must take lease to differ from the noble marquis on that poiut. The blunder was coneequent on the introduction of the amendment, but was not contained iu the amend ment. The blunder was committed by the government, who having acceded to the amendment, or leaving it forced upon them, did nut look to the contest of the hi.l and did not take earn that the remaining clauses of the bill were iu accordance with the amendment. (Hear, hear.) But they mint pass the bill blundering and non eensical as it was or they must pm no bill at all. They mint pass the bill or lease the country without a revenue ade quate to the public service. Under these circumstances he did not feel justified in opposing the paring of the bill, and bet wren the two ateruatives he should consent to the second reading of the bill. Ile must also, to • certain extent, concur in the opinion expressed by this noble marquis, that de what they would, whatever might be the ingenuity of committees of the other house of parliament, it would be impossible so to modify or emend this as to do away with all the irregularities and imperfeetionstkat mast be foam' is an income tax. What he took the Home of Commons to have decided was this, not that the income tax should met be renewed in any ease at the expiration eta not even that if it should be ' found impnetieekle to sound or remove the anomalies of the present tax. that tea or • portion of it would not be enstamed; bat be Milt the House of Commons to have Ensidmi, nod as he thought decided wisely, that they would rurel • erearierrien of this question at the expiration of am ysee, amid that they would not leave the govern ment in wash a state of security with regard to a large portion et*, femme as to induce them to proceed la a reckless ~se of disposing of every petty surplus in such a way as indeleitely to postpone the ported at which the tax might be done away with altogether. (Cheers.) They decided alas, sad as be thought decided wisely, that during the per Ste whisk the tax was granted, they woad inquire wrlnnthan they oral& reduce or mitigate the anomalies, the hilaselse.madieequalities of tin. income tax as it now existed. lie eat/ sued he mg iamb regretted the course adopted by the Home of Osiememe Mine respect. He regretted they did not aiept the repeal made hr a right has. friend of , Übe* atone with plum rid of • portion of this rejar awl apenetere tat, either by • ralliiilll et these solerinhe writ nerd rest riaareely, ea W afro area sedaetion of the while ef the nak He reralled they did not begin by dig the reams end searat et the re, ant apply to that redeetim Mk em ainevat of Same as might be fairly spared frets the wire ream of the e ls enery, withoat attrint e r e lhe etiltueld &Int the rai Wth.alear.) Ile be that wOOld have been the mead to have pursued. Ha believed the beet meal the of Commons emili hem takes would haw bets to dine est at the earliest yeedlite period the plee shwa to the people should be err nark and that this tax elo.Y set be emlinsed fur the i =etwanblieg her Kajestragemeamentie propose an ' verities el in direct tasolliele. mei thereby incorpoledne Meet trades r a part at the peersent financial teem et_the eessory ; a t that, the ether lead, no reduction dwell be mole sore rapidly than was areirent with the reireseree of the public relit. The noble marquis Id it to be tandessemell that there was to be an indeinit• ==liras be called it, of our existing cum. otent —an indefinite removal of indirect InaMisa s mil a sabstitutieu for it of direct taxatios—an kibilliski sztession nod encouragement given to the freest tempo Impertatien of bre' n produce. Now he said that, Beth ami ' y, they had carried that in -Ireffeselms produce to a dangerous and mis dimes ere& care, bars) They were sacniciag a mesa et mime as orally, the pusession of which I sist Malls Ilia te Mal with the met oppressive dr et %T r ee= whilst th ey were istlar a large of *de is this reentry and their colonies, they wawa ems tints sarrihdag their revenue , and they was net prime in the shape of a redaction of price , the only abesitee mid* weak eamensate fee the 100 of terms "Yoh they seetatsed. (Hear, her.) II ap plied this primeipie Mi the two mess whisk the : l io' armee r--4e the pressedworries et the tat 7 es wile mei *alai. Me Itia euseislies wee • --- THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 20, 1951. that whilst by a reeestion of the dilheential duty is the impssig ge hop a lex ea this he • areh year, he on ease they would waidally Yuri the nionial pro- web* entemalled ia rho abeertelina of the noble ford who dune, sad would give as wean easeewernme4 Co his bail wises kW. Fla it a most dangerous husks rind; they would net sear* to the tler o mason • but it was one fe swil llft e hr government was not Mlle the adman". Ma redentlest in (Heusi . . . to the lon of memo they would 4 ... leile. .Dtivrworas:Maldßiltrigia in eefhwittsi. quit would nil him ad the . et • Thk itl aread • snood tine. andsphorod wag ame. innoseed by the home •-• ' . he ; emitted • . • - l =IA bin thee*, ''''' nail in the " • The 'owned at a quarbree eight o'eloolt. ties daft wee net le , - . . • the Imp aiwoost d— • ._ _ ‘ pelt le mac Bat tint woad be y • mother HOI3IIE OF COM M ONS.—MONDAY, MAT 19. Wel while h appeased to blot =24 her The Sew= took the chair at 4 o'claki. wined perfectly ' ble. (Choirs.) 1 " Soto,d to to" the *lightest precaution The foiloWing bills were read • third time :—Midland Nana that uswisswaa whit& did not affect the higher Railway (Extension of Time, &c.) Bill ; Xeek, ?Immo* amuldboraiwwis, bat sdill.pwolgony enabled the retail and Berwick Railway (Branch to the West Durham Emil deagir le Wise es the pow Owen of the ems- way, ifie.) Bill ; Taw Takr-lieSerair and Daft Bill. maturity as aidisested , and frequently • noxious THE CI:MALEY WATEMWORMS BILL. article, charging on that adulterated article the prior On the motion for Ow abthse wmilowesisw of this bill, which might be Katy charged for the genuine article. Mr. CARDWELL eideglelle Sheba Oa tb• ground that Having further objected to the reduction of the duty the town of Lieugemel kili wig ben chewed a y 0,,,, 04 ,,,,gi on timber, Lord Stanley weat on to asy that the on th e comm itt ee l o a m the ha sate marquis took great credit for • reduction of one After a brief diseemion, Lon of direst taxation, by which he considered Mr. eattnvrata. withihow We opposition, and the AL coati- smaas t boon in a sanitary sense well as in a Sean- denims of the bin was scrod r el ine wetbe bestowed on a large portion of the The Eastern Union Railway Bill was considered and was not going to say that he am en ded. =in ads is which the window tax operated as The Liverrol Docks (alteration of management) Bill obilsikenegia, • Ike it tow not fraught with any serious was recomm itted. but wisest Ow noble marquis took cre&t to the The following bills were also considered : Midland RUL- E; eat for doing away with the window tax, he should way (purchase of Leeds and Bradford Railway, and in that be to • great extant charged • similar tax me crease of capital) Bill, Midland Railway (rwuMtion and the same pieties of the community by the sub- Mcrae' of capital, des.) Bill, and Weston-super-Mare Im illldiss of a house In he the window tax. Ile believed provmment and Market Bill. Ai mbailiow taw was drawable on about 500,000 houses, PUBLIC BUSINESS. Manly ea ialleiloW snail portion of the houses of the PETITIONS PRESENTED. -- , orlibt the Tows tax would be chargeable on P APAL AGOILISSION.—By Sir D. DUNDAS, from Su. Insitom, and, therefore, although there was to bo a thalami ; _Mr. COWAN, from Argylesbire • Mr. FRESH neggles is point of amount by the conversion of the tax, FIELD, from Lincolnshire ; Mr. - PLUbIiTRE (several), there wet still • direct tax charged, not upon windows, it Mr. OREEN'ALL, from congregations of Weeleian me was trot, but on house which had window', exempting the thediste in 20 places; Capt. ARCHDALL, from Wc!doioa remaining small portion ; and he did not know why that reogrem m oue ~ n Fermanagh, praying for more strumpet exemption was rmide. Ile did not see why they should mai- measure . ; he r . CHILD, similar petitions frets Raiford, See the revenue for the purpose of exempting put that clam shire ; Mr. HEA LD it , also to the same ell" ; Mr. which exercise the elective franchise, and winch was alWayl COWAN, f rom t h a syn of the united original seceders, supposed to be correlative with the amount of taxation. Ile held at Edinburgh, from lamthesdi Limner, and Ellamle did not see why they should gratuitously sacrifice the ford, in Argyleshire,. i gl' ilw ' t " ~. might obtain if they did not ECCLVAIAiTICAL Itr amount of revenue which they uss aesuerrtom BILL.—B 7 Mr. exempt that clsos. This exemption might be very cunveni- GRACE (several), fit ,m Roscommon; M r. J . 0 CON ant to the constituencies of metropolitan members; and that NE LL, from Limerick and Du b l in ; Col. DUNNE, from Whence might not have been without its weight. Other- Queen's County; Mr. . COItBALLY, from Kilmore and wise be did not know why the man who resided in the 201. other places in Ireland; Mr. REYNOLDS, from Galway, house should be subject to the tax, whilst the man who Tipperary, Donegal, MOIL glum, Meath, Tyrone, and Las. lived in a 101. house, and as such was entitled to a vote, was donderry, Dublin, Clare, an I Leitrim; Mr. FOK (several), exempted from it. Ho maintained that without sacrificing from Longford and Meath ; Sir J. GRAHAM, from Cork, the revenue they might have obtained to a great degree the Dr. POWER (several), from Cork; Mr. E. K. TENISON, sanitary objects they had in view. lie believed that by the from Leitrim ; Mr. O'f LAE Eitrii from thelwaY ; Mr. conversion of a window tax into a house tax, pressing on the htooßn, from Mayo, Sligo, , •nd Louth ; Mr. SCULLY, same amount of property and the same number of houses, from Tipperary, King's County they might have effected the change without any lose to SELL (8), fro m and Limerick ; Mr. MON a, Clue, ~,a (2) . from Kerry; Sir J. the revenue, and without any injustice to individuals ; YOUNG Corp), from Connaught' tar. ROCHE , from 13 or they might even retain for the present the windox tax, clues in o ; Col. CHATTERI 'ON, from Blarney and and enable parties who were liable to that tax to compound Whitechurch, county Cork, against. for the present amount, and allow them hereafter to open HARWICH ELECTION C 'OMMITTEE. any number of window* they might think fit without being Mr. K. SBYMER, as chairman o f this committee, re subject to the inquisitorial visit of the tax-gatherer. ported that the committee had deter% lined that Mr. 11. T. (Hear, bear.) Her Majesty's government might make Prinsep was not duly elected to serve i i parliament fur the what professions, what declarations they pleased against the b oroug h o f H arw i c h at t h e last &Aeries t„ and that, cones , income tax, ' but the country would judge of quently, the election we. void; and fort. 'ter that the com their sincerity not by their profession, but by their mitt ee h a d s t ruc k th e names of several t visions off the list practices, and however strongly they might condemn the of voters. tax In theory, if the country saw that year by year they were taking steps by their disposal of every surplus of revenue which would render it impossible for them to re move the income-tax, they would come to the not unnatural conclusion, that however theoretically her Majesty's go vernment might object to it, practically they meant to con tinue it as • perineuent tax, and to incorporate to • greater extent than had ever yet b een done, • system of direct tax ation as the basis of their financial policy. (Cheers.) He entertained those objections to the course which had been pursued by her Majesty's government. He thought they ought to have taken steps gradually, but certainly to get rid of the income-tax at the earliest possible moment ; but in the =in which their lordships stood, be should be sorry to himeelf the responsibility of advising or suggesting to their lordships that they should reject a bill which they were not able to amend. and the continuance of which was absolutely memory fur the maintenance of the public credit. (Hear. hear.) Thu Earl of MALMESBURY said he wished to know hem the noble marquis upon what assessment the house Inn um% Ito levied t The Mrsqui. of LANSDOWNE was understood to say Ihri NM mantel was under consideration, but he believed ft meet be PI the local assessment. NEW WRIT. was ordered On the motion of Mr. HITTZIL, a new vnit Clackmannan to be issued for the election of a member for Ccassd sad Kinross, in the room of Gen. Morison, des DINGLE WORKHOUSE. Mr. REYNOLDS wished to know whether at investiga- Ron had taken place ea to the conduct of cert. "1", of fi cers (lay and clerical) of the workhouse at Dingle, a n, " f so, whether it was proved at that investigation that t h e blatant rector of Dingle had collected money in the churc h, which he afterwards paid out in bribes to the paupen to io dine them to become protestants. Sir W. SOMERVILLE had found that, in C. "'se quence of a complaint made by the Roman on the. he chaplain, that money was distributed in the workho I'`e for proselyting purposes, an inquiry was ordered by t. 'e Poor-law Commissioner; when it appeared that the pr.. natant chaplain and his curates had given small sums to the protestant paupers who attended to their administra tion. It did not appear that they had given any for prose lyting purposes, indeed their having any such intention was denied upon oath, but still it could not be denied that the practice was highly objectionable, sad therefore the com missioners had directed a letter to be written to Mr. Good man, demanding that the practice should be discontinued. K AFFlit WAR. Mr. HUME asked whether there would be any objec tion to lay on the table copies of the despatches which had been last received from the Cape stating the probable charge of the Kaffir war, and the grounds upon which 300,0001. were made the probable estimate? His belief was that the expenditure would be nearer is million. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HAWES would answer the question to-morrow (this day). Mr. ADDERLY asked whether commissioners had been sppeiated to proceed to the seat of war; gad, if so, whether their appointment wow out of the select com mittee ? TM Zarl of MALI1E8111:111f said that if that were so, o more unjust and tyrannical tax could not exist • for it was notorious that the local &movement varied in d ifferent parts of the country as much as to 12 and even 20 per cent. After • few words from Lord BIAUMONT and the Earl of ILii•nesuc fir, Laid BEEN KItS called on the government to give some odiefte the tax payers from frivolous and vexatious our- Lord MONTEAGLE said, that with regard to the general adasioistratien of the property tax, considering the eiseemstances in which it was introduced, and the small ex mismes of those who had to administer it—those who had ed under the old income tax having been either vemovVfrom otlice or having died—he never witnessed enytktog on the part of those who had to carry outs system of taxation more praiseworthy than the resolution, good sew, and moderation with which this tax was enforced. Is thought, however, that the country ought not to be led bliadfold into a system of perpetuation under the pretext of a periodical ft newal. Earl GREY, in reply to Lord Renters, said that he MB afraid that no further check could be put upon sur than those employed at present, unless the secrecy it MS ace, wary to throw over the levying of the tax woriellisteribeed with. After some observations in reply to Ohs afectiens of Lord Monteagle, Earl Grey went on to my that the taut& lord opposite (Lord Stanley) took the proposition of her Majesty's ministers to imply an un dertaking gradually to get rid of the duty on customs, with a view to trust entirely to direct taxatiou. He (Earl Grey) did not see how the noble lord could draw any such infer ence. Ho cEarl (frey) considered that the object was not to get rid merely of the customs duties, but of those taxes whether customs or excise dutie s— which proved obstructive to the industry of the com munity. (Hear, hear.) A largo portion of the revenue which had been sacrificed in consequence of the income tax had been derived not from customs but excise duties—for instance, glass and bricks. The improvements that had taken place in the manufacture of glass since the removal of the duti, were most important, and these improvements MA ftm the period of cessation of the excise officers' elite. The duty on bricks had been only one year re titled, yet the purposes to which they were now applied were exceedingly numerous, much more so than heretofore. Asa landowner, and one who, like others, felt the pressure of the time., he could say that the remission of the duty on betas was vastly benebcial to the landed interests, and mold prove still mom so, owing to the facilities the ellbrded fir building and improvements. (Hear, hear. With mg :aril to the tams of the present year, the noble for Manley) had found great fault with the repeal of the shies on coffee and timber, and had stated that no advan lege was derived by the consumer from the repeal of the WM duty. That reduction had now been some weeks in egmelles, as it took effect from the time the resolution was reII the HOLM: of COMM; and, on Saturday last, d reed a circular from an eminent commercial firm in lie Mad trade, stating that the alteration of duty had whoa so reduction in the price of colonial timber. The MINS was, that for some years the import of colonial tim ber bed been confined to timber of peculiar kinds with width the Baltic timber came very slightly into conipc- Mtion. At present the reduction had not affected colonial timber at all. (Hear, hear.) His firm belief was that nothing ever did so muck injury to the colonies se the existence of those differential duties. Already, be Nam Mmeress, the consumers had got the advan tile fel Immehisis of the reduction, in others of tiedebliff s end In ether eases the difference of price was equal btlewble redaction of duty; but until the supply could be made 00-extensive with the increased demand, the con mid not calculate ea having the full benefit. Hut I•stthe reduction had soomited to the extent to which it MI gene, was perfectly -deniable. The extraordinary astlyiq now manifested utlea d all the trades 4 which timber was large mit selliefy every erne that the reduction of t bees a measure al* greatest advantage. The noble lord (litenlig) had add fat the reduction of the duties on coffee we. as am to *a esaseaser. Ile had been in communication with gen tian= illisseted in colonial produce; and though it was not femme for persons engaged in any particular trade to recognise the advantage of the reduction of protection to that trade, he had not heard from any of those gentlemen a hint that any disadvantage would result to them from this =ll. And this for the simplest ofd masons : the fecylon alone produced a larger ger laity of cab* flan this comers consumed; hence it Me *vines that the geatectioe tees nominal and utterly Taub. ; . Ow gesel be a eagles for the markets of lite weal] emir that me= se the protection mar be of value. B a t Ele of both duties wee Illelebleset vase. It eennoied tweisimodirs, and hemied le amps the who , .. Mt of mai liemble ID smhee. b SSW Wag ot/ , e , hide of coffee Isle eseinspllaa. sal wadi throe be so uo . Meld benefit to the Exchequer. TM whir lord had dr Ord the goverument with refusing to cheek ad ow n ,. Iten, and hail implied that the goverment rather 11,, oure d It Ora otherwise. But the fact wee, that not onl y the pre sent administration, bat that of which the bade keg y) had been a emaabar, sad the peeseCag an, bad l i elt thtt practically it was IN* Impeoliht , by me N. , monstrance or interfONSlM if UM Miginfig. to maim adulteration. He tesredialleheration we. too alems, no t only in coffee, but in a pea many this) fp flit an eo n . ansed. The other a : o l,± a m the Morelos of loommie , he had hem ante vslm ass dog, H e eft it was =AZ naf um MN that its sZriuse was to ad ' hest Nulls mustard. ser)—that a very Sip qmssatity of lees se this sub-' sees was ground up and Mid tif 111/11111.111. lee believed lb leas a very harmless sublearae. Int milattleily it was laK Re as mustard. With owl lb alillueboh, the seedy was in the hands des emeembeel the only emit Tall to ascertain whit INS per ma what was use. , as far as It weste r eseessms reer wee calculated to meet the • be dos ahniabbied the price et peg ro ds bleb le ow % adulterate t h at whisk was 1 fah** peNlk a nt 1:01 *at it would be of is Os pew memo , to Spb te pivoted Mit Ilme• W iadeibbieg mire. 1 bee erlielt malted the set ebb of ea - ••ffty . pretes ship tbsresbeet the sentry , . allrinsgpa Lord J. RUSSELL said that commissioners would be appointed to go out oa assistant commissioners to Sir 11. Smith (who was not superseded) to inquire into the affairs of Calearia. It had been intended to send out commis sioners before the appointment of the comraittee. Mr. ROEBUCK hoped the noble lord would tell the house whether these commissioners would hare power to settle the question of peace or war. Lord J. RUSSELL said their duty would be to mist Sir 11. Smith. Kr. ROEBUCK—WouId they have power to make peace with the Kadin ? Lord J. RUSSELL—They would Le 'claimant commie sioners to Sir H. Smith. iiTrci.l:eniSiili; asked whether there would be any objection to substitute the name of Mr. Keogh for that of Lord Arundel on the select committee ? Lord J. RUSSELL bad no objection. PUBLIC SERVANTS AT THE EXHIBITION. Mr. HUME said he had learnt that government had Even the dockyard men permission to come up and sec the xhibition. lie wished to know whether government also meant to pay their expenses, and, if so, whether a like in dulgence would be extended to other public bodies ? Sir F. T. BARING said that the Admiralty had given the dockyard men two days to come up and see the Exhibi tion, but they did nut propose to pay their expenses coining up, or going down, or during their stay in London. (A laugh.) ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL. On the order of the day fur the committee being read, petitions in favour of the bill were presented by Mr. Spooner, from Warwickshire; against, by Messrs. Moore, Roche, Scully, Mogan, Dr. Power, Lawless, Col. Chatter tun, Clements, Simnel:, 11PCulleigh, from various place. in Ireland. In favour of, by Mr. Miles, from Somerset; and by Sir J. Trollope, from Lincolnshire. The house then went into committee, and on the chair man putting the usual formal question that the bill be read • first time, Mr. REYNOLDS roes to move, as an anundment, that the chairman report progress. (Laughter.) They had last reported program on the understanding met the noble lord would prom his bill. They (the Die members) had not violated that understanding. (fresilal cheers.) lie might be charged with violating it understanding in the spirit, if not the letter, but he thought he could justify himself against that charge. He begged to rewind the essamittes that this was nut the bill vaiM i had been ori &ally laid ea the table, and it wee oat wily not the Sent bin, bat it wee ass the second bikini/mire to the second the midi had bat said the einniinnts el the hon. and leaned itsgeber for Yidlning. the eater, of the two side" had cedy led to greater cow:Mat locautre, In addition to what he would call the Walpola dame, ha found a proviso which was mot insultiog to nimmea wmtholia. He meant the ca tion of bat wield not tel_goehlshismt Mime from inertia e sPesstian of the h. 'similar clause excludits g the )demon @Wm& prelates of the United Kingdom. '(A Legit.) They bad it recorded now that petitions had been pesemated signed by no less than a !clinic in of persons agehest this bell, yet the noble lord w uu ld pay lam attend= to the prayers of that million of 'people than to the Male voice of the Bishop of Durham or any ether lighey. (Hear, ra n :l r ,bject wee not to elk haliou op, bu merely to obtain there fairly to IMO. the ' Sect of the bill as it stood In its amended sellft• reed r J hewed the committee would mot think him wageelftemil Au fig he, as a catholic de ending his own MP ad ler a delay of 24 hours only, a delay which As an "ty save considerable time in the future ,401.1 1 W ON details. Ile would now move that the linnow on do report progress and auk leave to sit again. ( 11 1 1 ' hear.) r G. GREY was not going to argue whether the see .rse punned by the hon. member was or was not in ac re. adanee with the spirit of the understanding arrived at on "iriday might ; that was a question he would leave for th e de tain OHM Someeittee. But if the hon. gentleman thought Ibeg the thee bad own for the revision of the standing or ate elbiei with the general consent of the house, and not at the illiweelen of a elide government, as the bon. member ammimoi s erith regard to the presentation of petitions, it would be t Ilia whin the Speaker wa s i n th e c h a i r to beteg teastiee Were the house, and to ask its decision = i t 4 bp t eat wigwag house was in committee upon a bill 1111111111=1111ha with that subject, and when they olidd eat ememele It. (Beer.) He hoped the committee wail wee be led into a useless discussion of the order of the hank field a ft er the declaration of the hon. member of whit hie object was it could have no other end than that of waft obstruction and violating the understanding come toes rriday to enter to-night into the discussion of the de- Idle tithe 111 AIWNDEL and SURREY had risen to second detemondiment of the hon. member for Dublin, when the right bre. baronet interposed. He contended that that mumberat was not a violation of the understanding come to ea Friday. (" Hoar," and " Oh.") That understanding wee that the Speaker should be allowed to leave the chair, wed the hone go into committee without oppo s iti on , an d that arrangement had been adhered to. (Hear.) He could en no reason why they bed eat led the bill in its amended Om plated in their bftd• en et in Wag . delayed es a Ine e hear d 7: = Allesa wben *see who, like lueseeltdreieg mop* day Mug at etne- Mans up stairs, wield Iran sr opportunity of considering what effect the membegge Ltrodncd might have. (Cheers.) Yr. ROEBUCK 111111116/1114 that, under the Mena gleates, the request which had been made was not warm me bl. Xhare were propositions in the bill, as it n... steed. ~appeared to him to be of vital importance, area of se grads. • character that if they had any sense or messing at ell they would go to call in question the actual erstere ,of the Roman catholic faith iet this couple,. (Beer, heat.) The committee ought to be pet In a position' to know whether this would be the effete of the amend meats or got. The bill wee now to all mimosas a new ha, sad ought W go through the forms of new bill. Them several Sam had the noble lord of himself thAinged his whole seem of policy in regard to this bill. (Hear, hear.) He believed the law officers of the crown, finned upon, would be unable to trace the legal bearing of the extra-' ordinary changes which had been introduced. (Hear.) Mr. GLADSTONE should mppoit the motion behove Ste chair, as be did not think it would be v'— --t with the understanding that Wes come to on YAW te Wig fixward any amendment now for the purpose ef ohs strutting the program of the bill in committee, and though hen. gentlemen might have made an imprudent meet, he would advise them to adhere to it, and at proper time they would be justified in demanding some days' delay for the consideration of the legal effect of the alterations which had been made in the bill. But what he would propose was what the hon. and learned gentleman (Kr. Roebuck) bad suggested, via., to call upon the law silken of the crown or some member of the govern% meat to give to the committee their general view of the legal bearing of the changes made in the measure, and he for one could not consent to proceed with the bill in detail until that was done. The committee should not lose sight of the feet that the progress of this bill was unexampled in parliamentary history. After three mouths' investigation on a subject of vital importance, and of a most delicate nature, government introduced a bill adequate, as they said, and no more than adequate, to the occasion. That bill consisted of three clauses—the first imposing penalties for the assumption of titles under the swop rescript; the second annulling all writings or deeds in respect to titles assumed under rush rescript ; and tho third cancelling all bequests made in favour of persons assuming titles under such rescript. The vote in favour of that bill was given by au almost unexampled majority—a majority cd to I—a testimony, he was willing to admit, of waves Er tional feeling on the subject. (Hear, bear.) The went, having that vote of 6 to 1 in their favour, Mlt l i fit, after the lapse of a short time, to announce the with drawal from that bill of the two most stringent out of the three operating clauses. A great and fundamental change was then made in the measure, and he was bound to my that the right hon. baronet the Home Secretary, on tho part of the government, explained in fall what was the nature of that change, and the operation he thought it would have on the bill. (Hear, hear.) But such a change, however great and unfortunate— and every great change, after its introduction by the government, was unfortunate, even if I unavoidable, iu • measure which nearly and deeply touched the religious tenets of large masses of the people—but how ever great and unfortunate, he was far from saying that such a change was altogether without example. (Ham) But what was without example was that the government, having after three mouths' deliberation introduced their' measure, and having afterwards changed it so as to alter its very essence in the way of relaxing it—that they should then on their own motion, and not on a vote of the Housed Commons, introduce new amendments not in the sense of the former amembnents—that of relaxing—but in the err of greatly binding and enhancing the stringency of the measure. (Loud cheers from the Irish members.) He be lieved he was right in sayiug that the iutrodurtion of the clause of the hon. and learned member for Midhurst (Kr. Walpole) would have the effect of binding and enhancing —if not, he should be glad to hear arguments to convince him of his error ; hut he thought there was no lawyer who would not admit that the introduction of an enactment an uulliug the rescript was an essential change in the bill, and a change in the direction ho bad stated. (Hear, hear.) Then he wanted to have the precise legal bearing of the change which had been thus made in the bill, in order that they might be able to enter upon the dissuasion of the details. (Cheers.) He would state his opinion of the change from the bill as first intro duced—from the first edition of the bill. (Cheers.) Iu that edition it was provided that all writings and documents executed by persons under the papal rescript should be void. But they were told that that would interfere with the rights of the Roman catholic church, and that part of the bill was accordingly withdrawn. Now, what he wanted ' , to know as to the second clause of the original bill was, whether its principle was not re-introduced by the amend , mane now made ? And whatever might be the difference o. r opinion amongst lawyers—if no two of them agreed upon gs, • legal bearing of the bill the more necessary was it that th e , ,should be informed of what the views of the govern ment soars in makiog these amendments. (llear, hear.) He wou Id state what, as it appeared him, would be the eff ec t. Imperfectly informed, as lie neeessarily was, I be contes seed there was rnueh to be said ou the part of those who, think ing • pc nal act neccesary, determined tor pport the amendmeno: of the hon. a nd learned member for liidhunt, tow if there were an ocea ,ion (which he, however, denied this to be) fir retracing th ..ir steps and entering again es a course of penal ligielatior„ whatever they did they Arid take tare nut to make this law • mockery, hut gave it as Intelligible and legislative p rinciple. (Cheers.) The hon. and learned monis, r for Mi dhunt dectazed by his amend ments that the brief or rescrip t of the Pope, appointing the hierarchy, was illegal, and, coneistently enough, that all other merlins and briefs issuing from the Pope were illegal. The government, in their dilator, appeared to have adopted the clause of the hon. mid teamed gentleman which made the rescript illegal. Oa that he (Mr. Glad stone) would put two questions to the government. As he understood another rescript had been sent forth by the Pope posterior to that appointing the hierarchy in England, relating to Ireland, with regard to which, it they were to observe uniformity of legislation, some atterien was ne cemary. What was that rescript? It was, r he under stood it, to abolish the jurisdiction of the Roman catholic bishop of Cloyue, in Ireland, over the diocese of Row, erecting a new sec of Ross, and constituting • new diocese. (Hear, hear.) The main difference, he believed, between this case and that of the rescript iota/Airing the hierarchy here, was that this bad been done at the request of the Roman catholics of Ireland ; but the acting power which gave farce to the instrument was the same in both reseripts. (Hese, hear.) Now were they to.legialate so as to give uniformity of legislation in both these cases, or were they, by their legislation, to annul the one rescript and leave the other in full farce ? (Hear, hear.) Ile wished to have it explained what the intentions of the government sure ; for,. imperfect as it was, it was better than any- Wig they (mold bops for from those who opposed it. Mr. I'. HOWARD observed that though the second "epilog of the bill had been affirmed by a majority of 6 to 1, ay committal of the bill—the stage which went to the reakisatitm of the purpose Intended by it—had only been car tied by about one-sixth of the representatives of the people. Mr. NORBMAN suggested that the hon. member for Dublin should posmone his amendment, provided the law officers of the crown, or the noble lord, would agree to ex plain the present position of the bill. Lord J. RUSSELL said that what he had stated was that when they came to the first clause the Attorney- Oeneml would make a statement as to the bearing and effect of that clause, but that would not touch the preamble. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said the agreement on Friday night was that there was to ho no opposition to the Speaker leaving the chair. Let the hon. member for Dublin withdraw his amendment for the present, and let the law officers of the crown explain the provisions of the bill. (Hear.) Mr. ROCHE said that as this was a question of the keep ing or breaking of good faith, he would state his recollec tion of the proceedings which had taken place on Friday night. On the house going into committee, the bill was read a first and second time, the postponement of the preamble was objected to, and the bill was ordered to be printed, and its further consideration postponed until to-day. The committee were now asked to go two steps further than they went on Friday, and, having gone these two steps, they were then promised that they should hear the explanations of the law ollicen of the crown. The bill, however, was a new one, mid, being new, the explanation ought at once to be given. If the learned gentlemen showed that this was not a new hill, hut the old one, then the committee might take it into consideration ; but, what ever their explanations might be, the Irish members were exactly in the same position now as they had been in on Friday night. Mr. KhOOH assured the noble lord that if for a moment he conceived he was violating the spirit of the arrangement of Friday night, he would vote against the proposition of the hon. member for Dublin. But he was of opinion that the Irish members were not violating either the spirit or' the letter of that arrangement. He had asked the noble lord on Friday to reprint the bill. The noble lord at that refused, but at length consented to do so, on the under standing that be should stand to-day in the same position as he did on the last day; but the Irish members were also to be in the same position now as they were then. Let, the explanatory statement be made at once, and let the noble lord adjourn the question until Friday next, the more par ticolarly so as the amended bill in its printed form had not reached the hands of hon. members until a late hour that morning. Mr. WALI'OLE said that all his amendments had been put upon the paper prior to the Easter recess, and that these amendments included the clause which the govern ment had now adopted. It was quite true that the noble I lord promised to state after the recess what he would do with the amendments; and, accordingly, after the recess' the noble lord said that he did not object on principle to the first of his (Mr. Walpole s) amendment., but that he thought it was included in the old preamble. Ile ob jected, however, to the other amendments. Now, it had been said that since that time the Attorney-General and himself (Mr. Walpole) had been cooking up a new bill. Ile certainly had met his learned friend the Attorney-General in the street accidentally, and he had spoken to him about his amendments. The Attorney-Ge neral had not been sent to him by the noble lord. On the following day he met the Attorney-General a second time, and the latter then alluded to those parts of the amend ments to which the government objected most strongly, and also to those parts to which they assented; hut until he (Mr. Walpole) came down to the house on Friday evening, the government were under no arrangement with him, nor was he under any arrangement with them, either to accept or reject any clause. There was, moreover, no compromise between them. (Hear.) He entirely ap proved of the principle of the bill brought in by the noble lord ; and, approving of that, he did not think there was anything unbecoming in the conference he had had with the Attorney-General, the object of which was to see how far his amendments would or would not be acceptable to the government. (Hear, hear.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said it was the noble lord himself who stated that he sent the Attorney-General to the hon. member for Midhurat. I Lord J. RUSSELL said it was quite true that the hon. member for Midliurst had first met the Attorney General in the street. The latter informed him (Lord J. Russell) that he had had some conversation with the hon. gentle man respecting his amendment% but he said that he would not hold any further conversation with him without the authority of the government. lie (Lord J. Ru.ssell) did not give the Attorney-General any specific authority with . . restn:Ct to the clauses'but he gave municate with the hon. member for Midhurst. (Hear.) After a few words from Mr. Hume, Mr. B. Crawford, and Mr. Moore, Mr. REYNOLDS said he was willing to withdraw his amendment, provided the noble lord would consent, after the Attorney-General's explanatory statement, to postpone the further consideration of the bill until Friday. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that he could nut agree to the arrangement of the hon. member for Dublin. (Rear) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no divi sion took plum, the formal motions, that the bill be read a Bret and second time, having been agreed to, and Mr. REYNOLDS having withdrawn his amendment, The CIIAIRMAN then pot the neat formal motion, That the preamble be postponed." Mr. REYNOLDS, thereupon, again moved that " The chairman report progress end ask leave to sit again." The house divided : or reporting progress Against 262-216 The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then nee and said that to would obey what appeared to be the general wishes of tho house and explain the provisiouof the bill as it now stood. It seemed to him that the legal effects of the bill could be asp Mined in a few words, and that the whole matter lay in a very smelt sompass. In the first place, he must state that he totally disagreed with the assertion made by several hon. members that this was a new bill. The only elm= to which the could possibly apply the observa tion was what was now the first clause. Now, he was pre pared to show that that fiat clause did in 110 respect alter the character of the bill, and that the bill, with that addition, meant substantially, and LID more than, what it had meant without the clause. AA the bill had stood before, the 2nd and 3rd clauses of the eriginal bill being withdrawn, and looking only to the preamble and to the government's first clause, which no _appeared as the second clause, it amounted only to thus. The preamble recited that " cerisia of her Majesty's subjects, under colour of a pretended authority from the Sec of Rome, had assumed to them selves the titles of archbishops and bishops of pretended provinces and of pretended secs and dioceses." It then went on to recite the statute of 10 George IV., e. 7, and the enactment of that statute, which provid ed if any person should assume the name, style, or title of the bishop of any bishopric, or the dean of any deanery of tho este bibbed church, should be subject to • conviction under the Istituto, and should be liable to a stated penalty. It (the preamble) then continued to recite, " And whereas it may bo doubted whether the recited enactment extends to the assumption of the title of archbishop or biduip of a pretended province or diocese, or archbishop or bishop of • territory, or dean of any pretended deanery c ii ty kag ria i s il " or Ireland, not being the sec, province, or diocese of any archbishop or bishop or deanery of any dean reeegnised by law ; but the attempt to establish, under colour of authority from the see of Rome, or otherwise, such pretended secs, provinces, or dioceses or deaneries is illegal and void. And whereas it is expedient to prohibit the as sumption of such titles in respect of any places within the' United Kingdom." Then they had to look to tho second clause, for he was now explaining the bill as it had stood without the first clause. f he second dense enacted that the assumption of titles not provided for in express terms by the 10 George IV., shall also be illegal and void ; that was to say, the titles prohibited as :being the titles in pos session of the established church; or, in other words, the second clause placed such dioceses, provinces , cities and towns, not already appropriated as archiepiscopal or episcopal titles of the established church, on the same footing as that in which other places were put by the 10 George IV. That was the original bill. The offence was made precisely the same as that created by the 10 George IV. in respect to all assumption of title by "an person other than a person thcreunto authorised by law said in both cases the penalty was made the same. The first clause, which undoubtedly was a different clause, was originally proposed by the hon. and learned member fur Mulliurst ; and it was now contended that this made the bill an entirely new bill. It did no such thing. The clause was neither more our less than a declaratory clause embodying the recital contained in the preamble. They recited in the preamble that a cur tain assumption of titles was illegal and void ; and this clause declared the titles to which the preamble referred illegal and void. It had been stated by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), when the question was first raised, that the government considered the clause superfluous as being already embodied in the preamble, and what was the first clause of the old bill was the second clause of the present bill, and as doing over again that which had been already I really sufficiently done. On looking at the bill ea it had before stood, a moment's considera tion showed that the proposed addition was not absolutely necessary: and he (the Attorney-General), had ventured to suggest so much to tho hon. and learned mem ber for Midhurst. But the government had found a general desire prevailing to have this clause inserted. It was argued that there had been an invasion of the national independence and of the national sovereignty by a foreign power ; that it was not enough to recite the insult as illegal, het that a national declaration was required of the illgality, In order that there might be no mistake about it ; that this declaration ought to go forth, with the authority of parlia ment, to all the world, in the face of whom this invasion of the national rights h ad taken place ; that no shadow of doubt should be left on the minds of our Roman ca tholic fellow-subjects, so that they should not be in stated to violate the law from any ignorance ; and that, therefore, we ought not to be satisfied with • were bald declaration, but shoullpass a distinct and em phatic enactment that certain papal bulls and rescripta con lining territorial titles in the United Kingdom shall be illegal and void. It had, then, subsequently appeared to him (the Attorney-G en eral) that such a clause would add nothing valid—would be of no value as far as the 11 offence or punishment was concerned ; but that, never bun it would give a more solemn form to that which was already recited in the preamble of the bill, and would satisfy the minds of many ' persons who imagined eno u gh was not done in the preamble and would remove all do u bt s whatever as to the explicit intentions of parliament. There hire the government had adopted it, but with the full Wad that it did nothing more nor loss than re-state were in thin - respect. There was another Liu:Mika. By the bill, as it stood, they would annul the rescript of Sep tember last, and declare that all titles conferred by it were unlawful and void. (Hear, hear.) But they declined to introduce (as he understo od) the amendment of the hon. and learned member for Midhuret, which provided that not only as to this rescript, but all future ',- seriphs, any party who should obtain them, or bring them into the kingdom, or give effect to them, should be held guilty of an offence and be liable to prosecution. His lion. and learned friend, there fore, if ho (Mr. (Hailstone) was correct, very fairly annulled all future rescript& Viral as the present. (Rear, hoar.) But look at the position in which the government proposed to place the house. This rescript of the 29th of September they declared to be unlawful and void; but if it should please the l'opo to issue another rescript—porhaps the same m terms and effect—that was, if be did the same thing they now declared to be illegal and void, but did it under a dif ferent date—a date posterior to the act of September—it would be good toall intents and purposes except as regarded the penal clauses. (The Solicitor-General hero made an observation scams the table.) Then let the hon. and learned gentleman give the committee the be nefit of his opinion. (Hear, hear.) If he war to understand the hon. and learned gentleman to give it as his opinion that because they declared in an act of parliament a certain rescript, there specially referred to, to be illegal and void, they declared other rewripts not there mentioned to be illegal and void also, let them hear it on the authority of the law officers of the crown or of some member of the government. (Hear, bear.) But if that was not the view—if the intention was to del) with the past, but to leave all future reseripts of the Pope to take their enttne—that would be to assume a position which would be ridiculous in the face of the world. Ho would suggest to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Rey nolds), that according to parliamentary practice, any member pledging himself not to oppose the Speaker's leav ing the chair upon any bill, was understood to pledge him self not to prevent the consideration of the details of such bill in committee. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL conceived the committee had two ques tions for their consideration, which ought to be kept sepa rate from each other. The first, the question raised by the hon. member for Dublin, who had met the ordinary formal motion that the bill be read a first time by an amendment that the chairman report progress. Notwithstanding what had been said by the noble lord the member for Arundel, he (Lord J. Russell) could not agree to that course ; for if he aid, he had no security that when on Friday next they again got into committee the noble lord might not then think he was not taking a factious course by moving that the chairman report progress, so that they would then be in the same position as they were in now. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Oladstone) took another course, and if they disposed of the first question the request he bad made the government would be • reasonable one. (gear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman, as he understood him, said that in going into the consideration of a bill of so much impor taw and especially when the fi rst clause was not ori ginally in the bill, but had been subsequently introduced, that some member of the government, or one of the law officers of the crown, should explain what they understood to be the general sccpe of the clauses, and what their legal effect would be. (Hear, hear.) lie was not disposed to deny, the motion of the hon. member for Dublin being first disposed of, that it would be proper, when they came to read the clauses, that his hon. and learned f r i en d t h e Attar ney-Genend should explain to the committee the view which he and the government took of this first clause, and what would be its legal effect. (Hear.) There was, how ever, one thing he would observe, as it was evident the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) had 'never read the preamble of the government bill, though it had been before the house since February, or he would not have made the observation he had with regard to the first clause of the bill. (Hear.) But he would reserve all dlecussion on the subject until they should have disposed of the motion of the hon. member for Dublin. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY defended the course he had taken, which he contended was no violation of the arrangement come to on Friday last. Mr. ROEBUCK thought the bill, being altogether a new one, ought to have been introduced by • general state ment from the noble lord, for, until they had the scope and view taken of it by the government, the house could not be in a position to discuss it. Lord J. RUSSELL denied that it was a new bill. Sir R. 'NOLO should rote for proceeding with the MOM what was stated in the preamble. This lOW really all that he had got to ay about the lint clause. As regarded the second clause, it had been already so much discussed, that he could not understand " how any person could have failed" to perceive its exact intention and effect. Tho second clause was neither more nor less than this. The act of 10 George IV. applied in its terms only to the territorial titles previously appropriated to the established proteatant church. An attempt had now been made, which the pre amble of this bill declared to be illegal and void, to (tercel out this country, England more especially, into provinces and dioceses, under an authority which had no foundation whatever in the constitution or in the law of the land. The government, therefore, proposed to enact that the lassumption of such titles should be illegal—that WY to say, they proposed to place all titles of this particular nature assumed under a foreign authority, even though not appro priated by the established church, on the same footing as the titles already appropriated by the established church, and to which the 10 George IV. already applied. The clause went this far, and no further. And when it was asserted that this clause would interfere with the adminis tration of charitable bequests of members of the Roman catholic church, the simple and obvious answer was, that the 10 George IV. had not had that effect , and that there fore this bill never could have such an effect, inasmuch as this bill was nothing more than an applica tion of the 10 George IV. to titles not already appropriated by the established church. This was its whole purport, and he could not comprehend how any one could have any doubt or difficulty about it lie thought that ho bad now explained the bill eutfi ciently to the house, and would not longer trespass on its patience. Mr. I'. 110 WARD wondered why, if the matter was so simple as the hon. and learned gentleman pretended it to be, the bill had been withheld, contrary to the usual prac tice, from members until after mid-day that day. (Hear, hear.) Ile protested altogether against taking the discus sion of the bill that night, no time having been given for the consideration of it. Mr. K. SEYMER (who was very indistinctly heard'in the gallery) was understood to ask the Solicitor-General (the Attorney-General having left the house) on what grounds the government had made a dis'inetion between Ireland and England in the bill in referring to the papal hull issued in England, and in avoiding all mention of the later bull of precisely the same character and equally offensive issued in Ireland ? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL knew that his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General had intended to ad vert to this point. The answer was very simple. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) and the bon. gentle man who had spoken last had not distinctly appreciated the nature of a recital in the preamble of a bill, and the nature of a declaratory clause. A declaratory clause enacted on the judgment of the highest authority of the realm that such and such a state of things was the existing law of the country, which all courts of law met without dispute, and which admitted of no appeal. With regard to this particular hull, and the reason for declaring this particular bull to be void, the matter might be clearly stated. That it was void he believed no lawyer hail ever entertained any doubt whatever. That it was illegal to accept • title under a bull of the Pope of Rome, had been decided in James's time in Lalor's case. Later was appointed to a title, and was punished (as shown in Sir John Davis's reports), and since that time there had never been any question on the subject. It was declared illegal under the statute of prtemunire of Richard the Second. This bull professed to do the same thing as was done in Lalor's case: and the remarkable circumstaneu which should fix attention was, that from the time of Lalor's case to the present period, no subject of . England had dared to accept a foreign title of this nature, and no "sovereign pontiff" had ever ventured to issue such a bull. After t e lapse of two centuries and a half an aggression had never been made by the court of Rome, and now they had to deal with the ill-judged and ill-advised proceedings taken in consNnence by certain of her Majesty's subjects. It was thought by the government that it would be enough in this bill to recite that these proceedings were illegal and void. It, however, occurred to the hon. and learned member for Miclhurst—and the hon. and learned gentleman was not single in that view— which had been put forth in an aisle pamphlet printed anonymously, but which was generally recognised as the production of an individual in an eminent judicial position and a privy councillor, that a declaratory clause was neces.ary in addition to the recital of the preamble. He (the Soli citor-General) contented, for his own part, that he thought a recital was equivalent to any declaratory clause. But this being the first bull issued in late times it had been conceded by the government that it was advisable to say not only that the attempt made was illegal and void, but to record a parliamentary declaration, on the one hand, with a re ference to the view which might betaken by foreign nations in regard to the insult to our own, and on the otker hand to put it beyond all doubt that any and every person at tempting to act under a bull of thin description was engaged in an unlawful act, and would subject himself to heavy punishment. This being so, they took the first bull issued; they recited it ; and they declared it illegal and void. Then came an objection, and the government were told that they had committed an error in omitting a reference to the bull in regard to the bishopric of Ross in Ireland. Now, obviously this bull was a bull of the same nature as that issued in England ; and this bill applied to it in the same !ray, as a matter of course. A declaratory clause was the judgment of the highest court of the realm ; and the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) might make the mistake, hut no legal mind could fall into the error of supposing that the highest court of judicature having de clared a certain instrument to be void, the deei cion of other courts would be different, or that the second or third instrument of the same kind would be less void. There was no necessity for following up all the minor instruments that might proceed from the Name au thority—all that was wanted being the declaration of par liament on the one particular bull—thereafter all similar bulls being necessarily equally illegal and void. This err : tainly would be the more dignified course to take. They could not with any dignity follow up or anticipate all the petty ramifications of the machinery of the Court of Rome. Let them take this one monstrous instrument, dividing the country into new provinces, and, as continental writers de scribed it, annihilating the dioceses of Canterbury and York and London; and having recorded their national de claration against that, let them take their stand upon it. (Hear, hear.) Mr. GLAI)STONE hoped he might be excused for say ing that he failed in perceiving that this first clause, as it now stood, was simply • declaratory clause. (hear, hear.) He understood the hon. and learned gentlemen the law officers of the crown to state that it was a declaratory clause. Why he excused himself for not perceiving this n f w o e as r r m e r be lsr u ca e tt u d h ec e u . n lara l . e ) ls to s r he y uc c h l w a . u as se he a7t h u l a t c o d l u ' h — u ia s t uai h p e r rc y u s h l u i a tl ar, seen had ceeiled the recital of a doubt—that the state of the law was doubtful—and that the clause was to decide that doubt. (Hoar, hear.) But here nothing of the kind was done. lie wanted to know whether, the effect of which had been intended to be produced by the second clause of the bill as it originally stood, relating to the invalidity of the documents, papers, and deeds, signed i by Roman catholics under rescripts of the Pope—whether he conceives that the same effect will be produced by the bill as it at present stood ? It was most desirable the house should know, on t►e authority of the legal officers of tho crown, whether the invalidity of all legal documents con nected with the rights of the Boman catholic religion wan to be enacted ? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the right hon. gentleman had scarcely correctly understood. The hon. and learned gentleman here quoted part of the terms of the enacting part of the original clause, and said that the pre sent clause, as we understood, went much further and was more extensive. The objection taken to the enactment, and which led to the withdrawal of the clause, was this. It was said, " You are enacting a clause which will have a retro spective effect of the most injurious description." That was the objection the most strongly impressed upon the minds of the Roman catholic prelates of Ireland. They said that under the old act of 1829—they might be wrong—but they had ordained a great number of ministers under that act, and that after the passing of this :bill ;many of those ordi nations would be void, and the legislature would prohibit those prelates from going on and doing what they had been doing ever since the year 1829, and which they had no right to suppose they were not at perfect liberty to do. (Hear, hear.) Those prelates said, " Don't do that ; but let us stand as wo were under the law of 1829: and, if we were wrong under that act, let us he right under the new one. We ask to do certain acts under the clause of the statute of 1829, and we ask the government to leave us ex actly u we were under that act." That was what the catholic bishops of Ireland had said. Now that was done when the clause was withdrawn. (Hear, hear.) But if the Popo thought fit to come in any legitimate manner s if ho could, and create a new bishopric—which he (the Solicitor- General) did not think the 1 could—let him try to do so. Let the Pope appoint his bishop, as in former times • create a title to it, as the state of things existed before, when the vicars said, " We don't carry a title openly; but still we consider ourselves to be bona fide bishops among our own people, although we carry no title publicly." Our striking at this particular bull, and restraining titles in this instance, did not in any way mili tate against these bishops doing hereafter what and all they had done from the year 1829 up to the present day. (Hear) He thought those prelates had a right to the benefit of the doubt expressed by their saying, " Let us stand in the same position u we were in 1829, and do not go beyond the spirit of that act." (Hear.) Mr. GLADSTONE complained that the hon. and learned gentleman had not answered his question, which related to the effect of this clause upon the Irish prelates. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—His own opinion was, that acts which were of a dubious character done under the act of 1829 might come under the operation of the clause; but if their acts were legal, they would of course remain so. Mr. M'CULLAGII said that a similar document had been issued in the case of the bishopric of Galway, and no notice of it had been taken by the government. The right hon. member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) had asked a question, which his hon. and learned friend had certainly not answered, and had not attempted to answer. (Hear, hear.) He was sure the home would not be put off' with the answer his hon. and learned friend had given. He had not answered the question which he (Mr. M'Cullagh) had been the first to put in that house, namely, whether the subtraction of the first and second clauses by the government—for he bad never admitted, and never would admit, that this was the same bill—(cheers) — whether the subtraction of these clauses was really and sub stantially a change of the restrictive and persecuting policy now adopted, or whether the hon. and learned gentle man (lid not think that every ecclesiastical, as well as every temporal act, was really to be declared invalid by those 2nd and 3rd clauses, and whether he did believe that if brought before a court of law they would bo decided to be illegsl lie contended that when grave r