Star. — London, England, 1825-06-15 00:00:00

1 _ r , i Y ; . t ~ 'lf ;j 1: 1 1 : was passing in the Coukts of Justice, it would be but justice to all parties come:fled in such Companies as this. that the deeds should form part of all future Bills. It was fleawort that the contents of such deeds should be known to all parties, or the Legislature roust decide upon altering the , practice of the Courts of Law. The Mike of ATHOL spoke in favour of The Coin" pan;. He concurred wi - h his Noble and Learned Friend on the woolsack, that it might be advisable to make its. anocladon deeds a part of Bills of this kind in future, but he thought it hard to begin with this Bill. Other Rule of a similar charactensad passed without being subject to this coodltion. The LORD CHANCELLOR would be extremely' sorry to say anything disrespectful to indivi Wats. He would therefore say nothing with respect to the deed and the Bill, which he did not ntrao to condemn; but he would'say, that be would take no conveyancers or profes sinial man's opinion before th it of the twelve Judges of England. The conversation here dropped. The VIII was ordered to be committed to-morrow. It was understood that the deed was to be incorporated with it in the Committee. Adjourned at HALIC-rAST SKY= O'CLOCK. HOUSE OF COMMONS. A person from the Irish Secretary's edam presented a return of the number of freeholders in the counties of Galway and Sligo, which was ordered to b. printed. On the motion of Lord GaAs:mei floweasee, the Western Ship Canal Mil was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Mr. S. Wes, the I3il to enable the bipedal Mining Company of Ireland to sue and be sued was reads third time and pawed. sip °tura TION OP 111 ACH in any. Mr. LITI'LETON presented a Petition from the in habitants of N ntingham, playing that no alteration might be made in the laws prohibiting the exportation of machinery. Amongst the evils which would result from suffering the exportation of machinery. might be principally leckosed IS inventions in mechanics, now exclusively known to English manufacturers, but which would be thereby lost to the country ; while even on the principle s! reciptocity, the latter could be no gainers. because the French had but three inventions in mechanism which were unknown to the English. The Petitioners concluded by stating, that if the exportation of machi nery were allowed, according to the new doctrine of free trade, they should then consider themselves citizens of the world. and emigrate to such parts of the world as their machinery might be sent no d , Mr. 'Alderman WOOD supported the prayer of the Petitioners, which he thought worthy of the most serious consideration. Mr. HUSKISSON said, that it was doubtless a mea sure of great importance, and he was aware that con siderable alarm prevailed amongst the manufacturers, lest the exportation of machinery should be allowed. Still he thought that the labours of the Committee upon the subject would not prove wholly unavailing, in ascertaining how far the prosperity of the country was indebted to the manufacturers of machinery. At all events, lie was not disposed to abolish the ?resale laws at a sweep, without further enquiry, more particu lady at a time when alarm upon the subject seemed to be so very prevalent. Mr. HUME was convinced, that imaginary- fears of. the results of the exportation of machinery prevailed to a greater extent than they had any evidence of, and although his opinion was unaltered, yet, in deference to • the prejudices of the manufacturers. however erroneous. be thought it would be unwise to proceed directly, in allowing the eSportatioo. He was also of opinion. that the prosperity of the country was at least as much owing to other causes as to oar se. perierity in mechanism. He hoped that time would be given for the-consideration of the Report of the Committee, and that the Mouse might be enabled. in the nut Session, to proceed, unshackled by the prejudices by which they were at present impeded. for. BA RING said, that his opinions coincided with those of the Member for Aberdeen, as far as deterring to the prejudices of men, who, even if in error. were still Men of information, and whose opinions were at least worthy of attention. Mr. T. WILSON concurred in the same opinion. After a few words from Mr. Lawler. Mr. PIULUIPS. and Mr. EMS. the Petition was brought up and ordered to be printed. COMBINATION LAWS. Sir M. W. RIDLEY, in answer to a question from Mr. Ellice, said, that he expected to be enabled to lay b" fore the (louse to-morrow, or the next day, the Re. pert 'of the Committee upon the Combination Laws, and that he would also be prepared to introduce a masers founded upon that Report. Mr. HUSKISSON wished, when the measure was introduced, that the discussion should be postponed yaw the eseond reading. Mr. ELLICE said, that would depend upon the measure itself, as he should feel bound to oppose it if it went to revive the former laws; but it should have his support if it went to leave Combinations open to the Common Law. Mr. WALLACE said, that it would do neither, but would tend equally to suppress Combinations on the put of Masters as well as Journeymen. KR. SENDRWIC, THs wELCS JUDGE. Mr. DENMAN presented a Petition from a person named . Caufor, against a Surrey Magistrate named Kendrick, who was also a Judge of the Principality of Wales. No Judge had ever been made the subj.ct of such a motion as he was then about to make, most probably because no Judge had ever deserved to be so. The charge against Mr. Kendrick was founded upon affidavits; ;.id, although the oppressed individual had received damages in a Court of Justice, yet, as the per sonal injury was trivial, compared with the public misconduct of the individual, be thought the House should investigate the conduct of that individual, pos sessing as lie did a high office in the administration of public justice./ He should not, then. unless required to do SO, enter into the merits of the Petition, but move, it , the first plate, that the Petition, and the affidavits or which it was grounded, should be printed, that the Members themselves might bait: an Opponuaity of weighing the case before it zarne under discussion. Mr. DENISON said, that Mr. Kendrick was a near neighbour of his, and that be could bear testimony to his character in private life. He hoped that the House would suspend its judgment until it had heard both sidei of the question. He wished to state that Mr. Kendrick had an objection to the printing of the affidavits, prier to the Rouse being in possession of the matter which is contained Mr. Secretary PEEL said. the Honourable and Learned Gentleman bad given an intimation of his in tention to ca ll upon the House to exercise an important privilege- which it possessed—that of addressing the Crown- to' remove in individual, independent of its power under any other authority than that of a vote of that House. He *oulti not throw any paltry inspedi- L-eitt'in the way of such a motion, if the individual de ice it. He would, however ? . put it to the Hon. sad Learned Gentleman, *tether he thought he could prisceed during the present Session; and. if not, whether it would not be ..unfair to Feint them biz months before any measire cenld be founded open than? 1 . 11 % 14N bIAN replied, that by thought the probable duration G.. EDc want Session of l'arliam nt would afford sufficient time for loro;edure. said. that Ciro • character 0111711 CW WIZ colud not Parliament do the same? Church property belonged to a corporation. It could not be alienated by sale, nor be bequeathed' by will. Wizen a Clergyman died, the law resumed the rights it had imparted, and no one was injured thereby. What was the object of Church property ?—the instruction of the people. This had been tried in Leland, lied failed. Only one-four teenth of the Irish population was Protestant, and the other thit teen-fourteenths Catholic. There were more and they l o P o r g o tinaont be C r e l e d r o g e y e m d , e a n s t b h a a b w e e e r n e f n o e rm e e s s r ly r ca,y done in the case of the Irish Bishops, when the Sees were consoli dated. Ten parishes were sometimes united into one benehee, and he thought tut the twenty-two Bishop rics might be consolidated into four. Four Bishops teould be quite enough to perform the duties which now deviilved on the twenty-two. If this change were made, a hat a vast saving in expense there would be to the country. If the L"gislature would resume this pro. perry into their own hands, a fund would be created, nut of which the inferior Clergy might be liberally paid, and a large saving effected to the country. The Honourable Member here referred to the estimates of Mr. Wakefield, to shew the great value of the lands possessed by the Church. In seven Dioceses only, there was land to the value of 2713,0001. a year, if resumed by the Crown, and let to individuals. Here was a large fund which might be made applicable to the religious education of the people. He next adverted to a public speech of the Bishop of Limerick, and delivered in the House of Lords, and defended the correctness of the itatements he had made of the number of non-resident Clergy, which, on the authority of returns on the table, he had stated at 551. But the Right Reverend Bishop urged, that a persUn holding five or six livings, and residing at one of them, was not to be held as absent from the others. But that was not the ground of his complaint; what he stated was, that they were not at their posts; the duty was done by deputy. The land in possession of the Bishops was very valuable land, and worth, in one Diocese 20s. per acre. This Diocese had 51,000 acres, which made 51,0001 . per annum.— Now it was well known that the' Bishops 'interest was only one-third of what it would be worth if in the hands of the State. From this calculation it would appear that this Dioce.e would be worth 150.0001. per annum. The Honourable Gentleman then4enumerated the value of the different Dioceses. The Honourable Member concluded by saying, that he should propose two resolutions; the one declaring the property of the Church of Ireland to be public property, under the controul of Parliament, and applicable to such pur poses u it may think most conducive to the interests of religion, and of the community at large; the second, pledging the Houle to inquiry, as to how tar the same may be dealt with, with a view to a reduction of the Establishment in the next Seseion? Upon the latter resolution, the Honourable Member expressed his determi nation to take the sense of the House. , Sir F. BURDET'r seconded the motion. • Mr. Secretary CANNING said, that however much he might be inclined to find fault with the Honourable Member for Aberdeen for the tone of his speech, and the proposition which he had brought forward, he could not say of him that he had gone about his busi ness in a covert way—that he had kept back any free and frank explanation of the experiment which he had wished to prevail upon the House to try with respect to the Church Establi htnent of Ireland. He must do the Hon. Member the justice fo say, that'll' had plainly and freely stated the object he had in view, which had been imputed to others on former occasions, as the ne cessary result of their arguments, but which he did not recollect any individual but the Hon. Member for Aberdeen to have boldly avowed and placed in the front of the battle. Before he submitted to the House a very few observations, he would request the Clerk to read the article of the Act of Union which related to theCherch Establishment in Ireland. The Clerk then read the fifth ankle of the Act of Union, which declared, that the Churches of /LogiAnd and Ireland should be united In one Protestant Episcopalian Church,to be subject to the same laws, and that arrangement should be taken so be a funds. mental part of the Union. Mr. Secretary CANNING resumed.—lt was an advantage that in coming to the consideration of the question, the House were placed in no circumstances of uncertainty, they were not absorbed in mystery and forgotten time. The sense of the Legislature .on the subject was not to be gathered from Statutes the con struction of which might be doubtful, or which might be ineffective from disuse ; but they had a clear dis: tint authority, only 25 years old, to compare with the Hon. Member's Resolution, and to help them in coming to a decision, as to whether it was possible to pass that resolution consistently with the law laid down in that Statute; and, what was more, consistently with the compact which that Statute was intended to re cord and enforce—( Hear). Ile thought he should have the admission of the Honourable Umber himself that the Statute to which he had referred stood in his way. The Honourable Member had, to be sure, ex pressed his disapprobation of the settlement made at the Union ; but with respect to the state of the 1.4 w, there could be no dispute. The compact „which had been made at the Union might be broken ; but until that was done, it became Parliament to act with ;pod faith on their part. .Parliament could nt t, without a v!olation, which would lead to the apprehension of violations of all kinds, concur in the resolution of the Hon. Member, which went to put out of the purview of the settlement made at the Union, the whole of the property of the Church of Ireland, and to declare that .it was a thing with which Parliament had a right to deal as it thought fit. The difficulty of the Hon. Mover's case was, that it went directly against all that hitherto bad been considered as established. The chutes property of Ireland might be compared to a leeeporate property, which had beta revised and con ferred by get of Parliament ; but the Hon. Mover seemed to think that he had a right to go back to a pe riod antecedent to the establishment of a right to the 'property on the part of the Church, and when it (the property) remained to be distributed among mankind for the benefit of particular classes. If the House should agree to the Hon. Member's resolution, there ,was nothiag to prevent them from seizing upon pro. perry of Corporations. Then, again, why was the House to stop with the tithes of the Church ? Why not, also, possess themselves of the lay tithes ?—(Hear, hear.) In ,bart, the proposition of the Hon. Member was so mon .trous, so likely to lead to the most alarming conse quences, that it was, he was sure, quite impossible that the House could for a moment hesitate as to the course which they should pursue reg siding it.— The Hon. Member had, in the cour of hF speech, such a proceeding which origintted much of the G D p n . sition to the Catholic Claims. Ile was, there'ruip, rather pleased that the Hon. Gentleman had atrattlei the House an opportunity of *hewing how they wo,lll meet any such proposition. He was confidzot that the vote to which they were about to come, would tran quillize any fears which might be entertained oi t the subject. The Right Hon. Gentleman conclucltd iry characterizing the motion of the Hon. Member itn• Aberdeen as one of the most barefaced proposition'i injustice that had ever been submitted to I ) ..rliamenr. His GM belief was, that to such a resolution the llon. Memb, r would find few supporters in that House ; and still fewer--er (Mr. Canning) was much mistakea—in the country. Sir F. BURDETT contended, that the Right Firs r . Gentleman who preceded him had net foilowed hit Hon. Friend through what he called the lahyrintil his speech, because the facts of which it comiaed wcret unanswerable. Neither would he allow that the Right Hon. Gentleman had made out the propositions uroti which he grounded his opposition to the motion. he article of the Act of Union which had been read, di .1 not apply to the maintenance of the property, but the religion of the Church. The compact implied by that Act was not violated, if those who were the parties to it mutually consented either to its entire removal, or try any particular alteration. He - did not mean to pledge bimseli to everything that may be proposed in connec tion with this subject, but he thought an enquiry w.ts demanded by the situation of the country. The reso lutions he considered to be perfectly harmless, and if they applied to private property, he should be equally ready to give them his acquiescence. kt TRANT opposed the motion. M. Alderman WOOD made a few observations in explanatinn el' *bat the Right lion. °cadent= opposite had done him the ho. sour to aUude to. Mr. Secretary PEEL thought the lion. Baronet had entirely failed to shake the propositions of Hon. Friend. In other parts of the Act of Union be sides the Article which had been read to the House, tl,o present Government and Constitution of the Church of Ireland was fully recognised. and particularly in that part which provided lor the sitting of the Bishops as Representative Peers. He was surprised to hear the Honourable Baronet speak as he had done of this Act of Union, when he bad not long ago brought a Bill into the House framed by himself, which set out by declaring it permanent and invi Table; so that what ever contempt he might now entertain for the Act of Union, he certainly at that time was satisfied- to rest his measure upon the corner-stone of its permanency and inviolability. But the Hon. Member proposed, in a somewhat singular phraseology. that the Bishops should be " doubled up"—(Near, from Sir F. Bardeit). He did not mean to say that the Hon. Baronet was going to " double them up''—he was sure that was an eaptes sion which the Hon. Baronet would be the last to use— (Much laughing). It was the Honourable Member for Aberdeen who meant to double the Bishops up; and his mode of" doubling up" was a remarkably odd one. There were twenty-four Bishops in Ireland, and the Honourable Member thought they ought to be " doubled up" to two—(Laughter). He considered two quite enough; but feeling that he had to deal wi h a prejudiced House, he consented, in the excess of his liberality, to double his two up to four. Tile Hoak Baronet admitted the principle that Church property was equally Sacred with that of private lodividuals. But then he declared himself ready to support these Retsolutions, which be eon. adored perfectly harnaleskes applied to private property ; and yet thellesolutloo.bepo by stating that" the property of the Church ol , Ireland Is public property." The Right Hon. Gentleman impressed his willingness to enforce the strict performance of the duties Odle Church by its members, but be would never consent to principle, which sancdoned a violation of its lawful rights and possesostes. Mr. BROUGHAM contended that there was an es sential distinction between the property of the Church • .and that of individuals. The pro. ; erty of the Church was sold by its members not as private individuals hut as members of a public body. He did not wish to be- • come an advocate for spoliation, but that was no reason why he should not look at the subject with a statesman. like view. It was monstrous to say they were never to legislate with a view to the disposal of Church pro perty. In making arrangements for tithes, was it pos sible to satisfy all clerical persons ? No, it was not, and Parliament must therefore legislate upon a general principle. They had been told to wait for information, and he thought there was no disposition to urge the subject rapidly into discussion. If a pledge were gives to bring forward the subject next year. his Honourable Friend would not press his motion. He should recom mend his Honourable Friend to give up the Ant, and take the sense of the House upon his second Resolution. He could siet ace hew the House could refuse a promise to go Into the Isesdea nest Session of Parliament. Redeem ONSLOW, to the unqualMed assertions of his Hon. and Learned Friend respecting Church property, pve his dissent. Mr. HUME made a brief reply, amidst a loud and general call for the Question, which was pot and negatived without a division. Mr. HU MR :hen moved a Resolution, pledging the House to appoint a Committee early neat Session, to inquire into the aatuut of Church property in Ireland. Upon the question there was a division of the House. Ayes • • 37 Non • 126 —BO 't Majoriy Mr. MONCK withdrew his Bill respecting the Wages of L. bourers till next Session. The Customs' Regulation Bill went through a Committee. Thesecond reading of the Bubble Act was postponed toThorsday. On the Order of the Day being read.for the third reading of the shooting and stabbing (Scotland) Bill, Mr. R. GORDON objected to the bringing on, at so late an hour of the night. a Bill of its much importance. Indeed, it so hap pened that business of very great interest was rarely brought before the House until a very late hour. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that as the private business was now very nearly got through, he thought that in future business of a public nature might be commenced at half past four in the afternoon.—The reading of the Bill *was postponed. The House adjourned at TEN filisuras *mai Owe ()Twit. Capt.KoTzeamt, after contending with terrible storms in the South Seas, arrived, on the 29th of June, last year, at St. Peter and 'St. Paul's harbour, in Kamtschatki, whence he sailed, on the Ist August, for Silka. Accounts from Stockholm state, that complaints are made of the new tariff, because it enjoins too many formalities for the valuation of the goods. It is remarkable that the disea e which prevailed in the winter among the horses in Denmark; and which wits an inflammation in the lungs, was by Ito means coma. gious. Of 1,256 horses that were under the care of the Veterinaty Instituti.ms for the cuts of this.disorder, re veutyseven died. Mr. Graham yesterday made his 24th ascelt from the Bedford Arms Tavern, Camden Town. He was accompanied by two females, Mrs; Graham and lei $ • Court ar,fCn:t the Pass, to which he thought proper in the first plate to : appeal. Mr. SCARLETT thought it would be an injustice to have the affidavits printed, unless the House were to proceed immediately upon them. The affidavits were expire., and he thought therefore the better plan would be for his Hon. Friend (Mr. Denman) to move for an office copy those of affidavits tia he laidbefore the Rouse, which might be panted neat /session. when there could be no difficulty in proceeding upon them. Mr. C. W. WY NN feared that the effect would be prejudicial to Mr. Kendrick. if these es-pavie affidavits were to be distlibuted amongst the Members such a length of time before proceedings could be Instituted. _ _ _ Mr. STURGES BOURNE was or the same opinion. After a few words Irons Mr. flotus Seise's, Mr. PEEL asked the Hon. Gentleman net to preu fee the slide 'its, hut rather to lay before nix House a charge founded upon them? Mr. DENNI.kN was not aoa.e that such matters had ever been put in the form of a charge. He was tint putting forward the affidavits as evidence against Mr. Kendrick, but only to skew that grounds existed for a charge against that individual. He also felt, that proceedings should be immediately instituted, that Mr. Kendrick might not go another Circuit with a character tainted by what had already taken place. Sir M. RIDLEY said, that the individual (Mr. Kendrick) de sired that any form of the House might be dispensed with, and the fullest inquiry gone into. Mr. Secretary CANNING said, that whatever disposition there might twin the House to evade forms, If depositions were laid on the table, the individual answering the charge must gi7e an answer not upon lath. The Petition was then read ; and on the question that it helaid on the table. . Mr. DENMAN said, the objection here was very sin gular, that the statement *as too solemn, too well sup ported, and therefore the individual in answering it on his simple affirmation, . would not be in so good a situa% tion as the accuser. Hp would now propose to lay the affidavits of Mr. Kendrick on the table, together with that affidavit which proved him to be the author of the letter in /he blatlford News. On those papers he thought a case would be made out. to skew that Mr. Kendrick was unfit for the high situation which be held. Mr. Secretary CANNING explained. Mr. BARING said, that after the _speech of the Klutz's Attor ney. General. which be had read in a Newspaper, it was impossible that his Majesty's Government should not take some steps.-{The ArroeurrAinmaas. said, across the table, that the speech was not made as Attorney-General). Mr. DENMAN then moved for the production of Mr. Ken drick's affidavits, on moving foe an information against the Mussing Cisyssiole, and other affidavits, *hewing that he was the author of a letter in the fiteusjond News. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, to duce affidavits be had no objection. Mr. Secretary PEEL said. Ms objection went to the production of all the affidavits in the cause. Mr. Secretary CANNING said be should also withdraw his ' opposition. Mr. C. WYNN said kis oblation to the want of croos.ezasni. nation, could not of course apply to the affidavit of Mr. Keadrisk himself —The Motion was then, after a few words from Mr. Lost sax, agreed to. IV IRSLAND. Mr. HOME, in rising to submit a motion relative te the present state of the Church Establishment in Ire land, was induced to submit it to the House from , a strong impression that it was not calculated to pro. mote the welfare and the prosperity of that country.—.. Indeed it had quite a contrary effect, and so fp.r as he had the MOMS of judging, there was no prospect of peace or unanimity in Ireland whilst the Establishment remained in its present condition. He bad already, os three former occasions, submitted similar motions to the House, and had gone further into the detail of the reasons and facts on which it appeared to him that the House ought to accede to his proposition. Much was now conceded on this question which had been formerly denied. This was something gained. in spite of the alarm so often expressed en this subject from both sides of the House. He (Mr. Hume) was as well aware as any one of the utility of a proper system of religions instruction. He knew from his own earrience the great benefits derived from such a system in Scotland. (here the pastors were well fitted to discharge their duties. They were rarely or never absent from their cures from January to December. He contended that it was the duty of the Legislature to contrive and main tain a similar system in Ireland. He ventured to as. sett, that the Irish clergy were open to censure in those respects. On former occasions he had quoted the an. thorities on which his opinicns were founded, and would not trouble the House by repeating them nw. He did not mean to deny that the religion of this country was essentially Protestant, but this was no reason why the form of the Establishment might not be changed, nor why it might not be changed to a different mode of faith. It depended entirely on the convictions of the Legislature. Certainly the Church had always been ready to support the State in nearly all its measures, and therefore the State found its interest in upholding the Church. He doubted the soundness of this line of policy, and he did not believe that the alliance had ever been of any service to the Church itself, fir even to the State. It was not his desire to injure the in'erests of the State by Lis present motion, but only to institute an inquiry into the condition of the Church Establish ment in Ireland. Looking back to the time of William the Third, he believed it was intended by that monarch to have given Ireland as a religion, the religion of the country. His letters ate upon record, in which he in structs his Government to pass an Act establishing that religion which was most agreeable to the disposition of the people. Unfortunately for Ireland, circumstances induced William to alter his intention. If that had taken place a century agoOreland would have had century of happiness, and England would not now be the gaoler of Ireland's rights. The Presbyterian reli gion in Scotland was not more general than was the Catholic religion in Ireland. Whilst the religion of the country was proscribed in Scotland, that country was a scene of murder and anarchy, and he would call upon the House to mark the difference that had been cleated since the Presbyterian religion was estabEshed by law there. The question was not, whether the Protestant, Catholic, or Hindoo religion was the best? but the question related to the policy of Government. In 'a political point of view, he was satisfied that every act of inquietude that had occurred in Ireland had been occa sioned by the system of Government adopted in that coun try. The present was a fit opportunity for Par liameatery interference, and he would have brought the matter for. ward at an earlier period, but for a with to give way to ,the motion of his Hon. Friend (Sir Francis Buidett).— The Church, and the Church alone, had defeated that motion. It had impeded the march of liberality, and so long as its influence lasted it would injure tl.e cause of those human and civil rights which England aught to protect, and which Ireland had a right to enjoy.— vt,k ,, .. r in u t f .A.,.. an :ou itt it eti f l i : \ ar te li_a= u w re o . uld afford SUOICICat area Her 1 ' • ,N , .:IN' ILLIA MS s ai d , that Mr. Kendrick bore on the Ciro -...-.. fir erOtt, due character of an honest, upright Judge. - C.i - hult . c - Question j-i. • - .• - Pe 0 - E - 17z - a ... u . e . clet - t.. " The - ba . ll - o - on ascended in - Ise - autifui " io v ;;;;,% - t — wa; " ;iik - e - fy --- tFat ... t . 1 . ; • • The Hon. Member had, in the course of his •S speech, • r. . - . could ever be carried whilst the Cabinet was divided. attempts to carry remarked that the Session had. been wasted in frti.less the Catholic Question. The greatest style, when the immense mass cf persons sent forth an I : . considering this su b ject he Meant to treat it as The Al A:1 ORNEY GENERAL said that Mr. Ken•• ° could d • d' question not nave erne a surer almu , st deafening shout as the aer - onauts passed sitter hem. This was one of the finest ascents that hat h i d ' of property, and nnt of religion . lbe right of property ea "' Altick -never bsen beard in the Court of King ' s • Y Bench, and nes judgment had been prmouneed by the in the Church originated out of the enactments of law. means a procuring its detest than by causing to be .. een w inserted on . the journals . of that House a resolution de- ;messed. After a the voy4ge of newly al sour, Mr. Graham and firs lair companions alight. t C. nit of Kigles Bench- u the merits of the- case. But the property of the Church did not stand on grounds • • wh:elt liii istds POO Wet imam. Mr. Kendrick l e ansrlf so sirmg as private property did. If Henry the Eighth pouncing the spoliation of the Protestant Church pm., , f F 1 1 n perfect saa k t y at c t ram, between three and .0 tr s porty next Session--.(Hear, hear). It was the tear o. _ pealed to dm Press, and mold therefore get air from costk P ; could set aside the rights of the Church with impunity. rules beyond Hounslow, and atriv. si 1 t c Lill- pas .. 1" . • • - . • • . , ................... i • . _ __ . • ‘off ~~