Star. — London, England, 1828-05-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARWMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS. MA' 2. The Logo CHANCELLOR. Lord Mammas, and two other Peers, set at ten o'clock this morning, in the House of Lord*, to hear Ap- peen. MR. MRLIARLIT AND HIS CHILDRIM Tha arguments of Counsel in this long pending csuse were re sumed. Mr. lloorte spoke at great length on the affidavits, but nothing new was elicited. The Archbishop of YORK presented Petitions from the Arch. deaconry and Clergy of Nottingham, and from the Clergy of the town and neighbourhood of Sheffield, against further concession to the Catholics. Lord GODERICII presented Petitions from the Roman Ca tholics of Etberington and Sidney Bransby, Yorkshire, praying to be relieved from their civil disabilities. Also, a Petition front Knaresborough, against further concession to the Catholics. Lord GODERICH presented a Petition from the Mayer, Al dermen, Sheriffs, Masters, and Journeymen Weavers of Norwich. This was a Petition from a class of persons whose condition bad frequently engaged attention, and whose conduct, as well as the vicissitudes to which they were exposes!, had at all times entitled them to the consideration of the House. This observation applied to the majority of the Petitioners; and the purport of their prayer was, that a law might be passed providing that in all cases where the majority of masters and workmen consented to a certain rate of wages, such agreement, during the time it was to exist, should be binding on the minority of both parties. The Noble Viscount, in consenting to present this Petition, stated to the Petitioners that he could not undertake to support their prayer, apprehensive that If such a law was passed, the effect would be contrary to what the Petitionets expected. At the same time, as the Petition was signed by a great many respectable people, he had no hesitation in pre senting it, confident that it would meet the serious attention of the House. ~Lord TEYN HAM presented a Petition from the Carpet Wea vers of Kidderminster, praying that the House would interfere to settle their rate of wages, there being a complete variance between the manufacturers of that town. The Nost.z Loan postponed till Nienday his motion to Inquire lato.the State of the Agricultural Labourers of England and Wales. The Duke of GORDON presented a Petition front the Medical Gentlemen of Aberdeen, praying their Lordships to adopt men. sures to facilitate Dissection. Earl SPENCER presented a Petition from the Catholics of a Parish in I ancashire, iu favour of their Claims. Also a Petition from the Unitarians of Northampton, praying for the removal of an Religious Disabilities. •Lord RADNOR presented a Petition from Windsor, in favour of the Catholic Claims. Lord KING presented Petitions from the Catholics of a Parish near Warrington, Boston, Horsham, Carlisle, Yarmouth, and Moe peth. in favour of the Roman Catholics. The Marquis of CLEVELAND presented a Petition from a numerous body in the County of Durham. against the importation of Lead Ore. Lord DA H N LEY presented a Petition from the Roman Cw't then - es of Canterbury, praying for the removal of all their dis• abilities. Earl FITZ W I LLI A M presented a Petition from the Catholic! of Worksop to the same effect. Lord CA li NARVON presented a Petition from Herts to the same effect. . Lord Y A It BOROUGH presented a Petition from die Governor. of the Lunatic Asylum, at Lincoln, praying that they might be exempt front the operation of the Act. The Nom.x Lotto also presented several Petitions from Lanai owners in different parts of the country, praying for a protecting duty upon c .rtt Earl 6 REY, in presenting a Petition from the President and College of Physicians in London, praying that the impedimenti now thrown in the way of procuring subjects for dissection might be removed, expressed bis opinion that the object of the Petitioned' was not likely to be attained by discussion either in that Hosts et" elsewhere. The Earl of ROSSLYN presented a !Millar Petition. MUSSON FSOM THE COMMONS. LIDDILL, Mr. CASTVISIONS. and others, from the Cetiti. t mon% brought tip some private Bills, which were subsequetitit read a first time. VS the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, the ['unifier Navigation Bill, and the Lincoln Improving Bill, was read a third time and pas•ed. The Cards and Dice Duties Reduction Bill was read a second time. GANG LAWS. On the 'notion of the Marquis of SALISBURY. the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Sale of Game BilL The Earl of MA LIM ESBU It Y saline had some observations to make on the Bill when the House went into Committee. The Alarquis of SALISBURY said. if he understood the Noble Earl rightly he did not object to that part of the Bill which related to the Sale of Game. The Earl of MALNIESBURY did not r bject to that part as an experiment. Although he felt that it was an erroneous notion that legalizing the sale of game would diminish poaching. upon a former occasion. when he was informed that this measure was intended merely as an experiment, and that it was to contioue in operation for only two years, yet he now found that the Bill had assumed a new appearance. He therefore felt it a duty to dissent ft om it in Soto. Lord SUFFIELD hoped, that he as had hitherto abstained ftom add'essing their Lordships on the sub ject of the present Bill, he should be pardoned for of feting a few . bservations upon it. He rejoiced that be had been no party to the Bill before the House, because, had be been engaged in framing it, he would have re commem'ed the adoption of some more general tepeal than the Bill now comprehended. lie also rejoiced that he was no pity to it, because it enabled him to give the Noble Lords under Whose auspices it was brcught for ward that applause to'liebich they were so justly entitled. Although the Bill did not go so far as he could with, it was still a matter for congratulation that it gave up that exclusive system which was the main evil in ail the Game Laws. That monopoly which had hitherto rrevailed was a cause of a very great pottion of the evils which every one must deplore, however they might differ as to the causes which pro duced them. It, in fact, rendered the laws inoperative, because the public odiuM attended the system. The opinion of society was such, that these laws could not be enforced. Julies were averse to convict poachers, and if he 'might judge by a recent dictum, it would seem that some r f the Judges were nearly of the same sentiment. if men were permitted to buy game, much of this feeling would be removed. If this subject could be placed upon a satisfactory footing, it would be a matter of congratulation to this House and to the country. It lie had 'followed the dictates of his own judgment, he would lave moved the repeal of all the statutes for the protection of game, Mid would have been content to leave it to the common laws of the land. The present measure did not go so far 4 but so fat as it did go. it had his entice approbation. There was notori , usly less poaching in Nottolk last year than had eve , been known b' fore, which the Noble Lord ascribed to the greater indulgence of the great landoorneys ti their 'tenants ith respect to game. Lord REDESDALE approved of the Game Laws as •a Matter t f licy, for since the days of RObit Hood the "idle and d.ssolute.had been fond of th , pursuit of gan , e in preference to the pursuit of lassie iadastly. He knew an Alderman of London. who, • ItOipikality lie well remert,baed, and who asked him he thought Alder Man with'plenty of sisoisey:ritul _ . be plevented fiom boying'same if be wanted it? appealed to him etre:atilt to be a folly to attempt prevent a thing ssh;th tl ey must know they it*ve could prevent. He was tinter/met fillop3#le to thi pre.entßilL Witlinspect to the right of Iciiting gni be had no objection to gig( that right to any man on bits min land. Lord SI3FFIELP'said, tbat'tbe first law ever passed upon the subject was in the reign of Richard 14 this preamble of which was that it was to send the peopin to church. It was a pretext, in short, for disiiiiing tb. piople. Tie House Oleo resolved itself into the Committee. The Marquis of SALISBURY stated the diffeeioco •betsteen this Bill and that of his Noble Friend, which stood this night for st second reading. The immediate Object was to permit the ale of 'fame hythose to whom' the game belonged, and thus to establish a proper me thod of supplying the mat ket, and diminish the temp fat:on to poacliing. He had limited the right of selling game to persons possessed of 1001. a year in land, be cause any lower qualification would be an inducement to persons to purchase a small piece of ground in the neighbourhood perhaps of a presetve, to pay the rent, and obtain a profit by the sale of game. lie did anxi• ously hope that the Bill would be permived to pass without alterati.m. Any further improvement which was thought necessary by other Noble Lords might be introduced in a separate Bill. Lord SUFFIELD said, the Nible Marquis had not contrad cted a single word he had uttered. The Earl of MA LM ESBU la thought the Bill would disappoint the expectation of his Noble Friend. He could not conceal, besides, that he was aver se to become a dealer in poultry or - game; he preferred to give it away to his friends, to show them that he had not for gotten them. It was, besides, he thought, injudicious to encrease a privilege which in its present extent was considered in an invidious light. The Bill was then read clause by clause. On the clause respecting the persons to be licensed as dealers in game being put, Lord It EDESDALE said, that the persons who prin- cipally wanted to buy game were inn or tat ern keepers, and these were not licensed. He recommended to the Noble L• rd to amend ills Bill in This respect, or it v►oald nr t answer his purpose. 1-le supposed nobody ,►►ottld find any difficulty in haring a game dinner at the Ca,' of London Tavern. Lord WHARNCLIFFE thought the Noble Lord_ misunderstood the scope of the resolution. Toe object was to appoint certain channels thrnugh which only game should be permitted to find its way to the public ; the suggestion of the Nibble Lord would defeat that object. Tavern keepers were by the Bill permitted to have game in their possession fur the use of their own houses. After a few words from the Marquis of Sausleav-411se clause then before the House was agreed to. Lord WARNCLIFFE said, that it now became his duty to move the Amendment of which he had given notice, in pursuance of the recommendation of the Comniittee above stairs, and he beggedlloble torch td Consider that the rn• st, or iather the only effectual ;bode of preserving game, was to give the small landowners; the farmers, and the laboerers about their eitates, interrest in its Oreserbatior. It was unjust that a per sols pbould not be permitted to kill prise on his biln tench He 'entered to say this, although he knew that the assembly he was addressing were great landed pronviei toes, arid lealotrs of their privileges as such. The law of ROA/cation Was most anomalous. The son of an -Esquire, or "other person of higher degree, was quali fied, but unless fie bad is qualification in property, when he became the E-quire or person of higher degree him self, he ceased to be qualified—Lords of Manors nere not goateed—lrish and Scotch Peers were not qualified —the 'second tons of their Lordships acre not qualified: These were anomalies which they otglit to correct. When they made game stleable, in Order to put down F aiching, they must, to be consistent, do whatever was necessaty to ensure the market being well supplied, for othernie poaching would, instead of being checked, be facilii.ated. It was not to be eseected that the small proprietor would suffer the gr at landlord, who had tl e preserve in his neighbourlscod, to derive all the benefit of the game which he had contributed to feed. He had seen an advertisement in the Nottingham paper, asking any man of one hundred pounds a yearlanded property to come and shoot game on the farm'of the advertiser, which was clo,e to a great preserve. This was natural, and it was, he did not scruple to say, what he would do himself in the same circumstances.. He did not wish to give a license to the small proprieftir k eteepting to *hoot upon his own land. This was ail. He hadattempted more formerly, and he_still wished for more; but with the view to a successful result, this was as' far as he dared now to go. The Noble Lord here entered into a detail of the difficulties and tie litigation to which the pre sent state of the law gave rise, and with a view to correct these evils he wruld give a right of summary process in cases of treseass. This system prevailed in Scotland, and was found advantageous. They should show their determination to protect the boundaries of every man's property, and when this system was once established, the boundaries of propertywoold be re spected. His resolutiOn 'inured' the' tights of Lords of the 'Minor now existing, and the'rights of persons hunt ing upon horseback in pursuit - or recent game. He would wish this truly manly and English spott to flourish more and more; and, although they were tres passers, he left them in possession of the protection which the law gave them at present, that of being only liible to an action. He had now gone through the particulars of his measure, and he begged in conclusion to say, that without this addition, the legalising the sale of game would only be adding injustice to injustice, And would be sure to excite resistance in the country. The Earl of M ALM ESBURY gave his-Noble Fr iend full credit for the zeal and perseverance with which, for so many years, he bad followed up this subject; *bile he cheerfully bore this humble testimony-to thy . met it% of his Noble Fr lend, he regretted that he could dot-agree 'nith him in opinion upon this subject. If lie had had the honour of being on the Committee, he would have called before it Magistrates and keepers of bridewells in the game counties, to know from Them whether the persons committed for poaching were 'not generally agricultural labourers driven by the distress of the-times to this mode of ekeing out a subsistence. If be had not been misinfermed, they would have• convinerd • their Lordships that the increase of poaching had' Wien from the distress of the agricultural population. The increase in the quantity of game, and theincrease of wealth and l uxur y in the towns had, no doubt, contributed to the effect.. lint, in fact, the increase was not so Cobiiilerable as was generally imagined. In . 1821, the number of convictions for offences against the Game Laws in the county of Wilts was 181 ; in 1822, the number was 149; in 1823, the number fell to 97 ; in 1824, it rose to 153 r In 1825, it was 140; in 1326, 109; and in 1827, it wap 128. This increase was not disproportioned to the increase of other crimes. The persons convicted of the crime of larceny in the same-county, between 1821 and 1826,fisr instance, had increased throughout the whole country from 6,499 to 8,081, which was an increase of no less than 1,800. This general increase of crime was variously accounted for. If they asked his opinion, Is 4, ssoUld say that it arose from the diminution of employ:' theist, or, which was the same thing, from the diminished means'of the employers, the income of most of these being reduced in the proportion of one-third at least.— The Noble lard must excuse him if he now entered into a brief analysis of his Bill. Could his Noble Friend inform him what was the legal meaning of the word Esquire? He did not know what the word meant, and he did not know any lawyer who could inform him. Then with respect to the small proprietors, he had no doubt that the measure proposed would operate as a bounty arm poaching, so far as they were ememised. He could not help thinking : that the summitry proceeding in Pius of trespass would lead to great litigation, nor wat-he the less inclined to this opinion on account of diotorlt Advocate of Scotland having said that it did nbt pttfddce much litigation in that, country. They did not malt know how' Muth* litigation that Learned Gentleman might tilktk too much. He begged also to call the attention of his N ible Friend to the clause which protected hunters on horseback from this sum mary process. Was he to understand that if a man rode upon his lind, so long as he remained upon horse back he must not touch him, but if he could by any means get him off, hi might then take him? After several other Oservations, the Noble Lord conclUded by expressing Mk inability, for the reasons he' had given, to concur in the Bill. Lord WHARNCIAFFE contended that the clause should be retained in its present shape, or otherwise it would lead to endless litigation. Lord CALTHORPE supported the Bill. He did not, ascribe the increase of poaching so much to the distress of the agricultural labourers, as to the temptation of a market. of which s by the present law, poachers had a monopoly. The Committee then divided on the amendment proposed by Lord WH•IINCLIFFIL.••• • Cont vitts . 33 Non Contents . 18 Majority in favour of the Amendment —1.5 Several other clauses. no the motion of Lord WH ARNC MITE, were then added to the Bill. On the elau.e being put excepting persons on horseback, huntinZ or coursing with any hounds or greyhounds, from the summary peneess against trespassers — The Fad of MA LaIESBU RI moved that the words canning ind greyhounds be left out. Atter some convertratiott between Lord Wetmore:mg, Lord Surimalisom.s. the Marquis of SALISBURY, and Lord !torts, the Committee divided on the question that the words, "or coursing," stand part of the Bill— - Contents . . 46 . Nun Contents lB Majority for the Amendment . —8 The House then resumed, and on the motion of the Earl of SIM FTESBUItY, the Bill was ordered, with its amendments, to be printed. I , IIIIIIX DISTRANCHISIMIXT BILL. Their Lordships then resolved themselves into a Committee of the whole Douse upon the Pentyn Disfranchisement Bill. Counsel were called in, several witnesses were examined, after which the House adjourned at a QUA RTIR to Ei MIN O'CLoCK. I HOUSE OF COMMONS. Lord STANLEY presented a Petition from the Roman Catho. lies of Enfield, in favour of the Catholic Claims.—Ordered to be printed. Similar Petitions were presented by Mr. FARARRIIIERT, from Bonham; by Mr. CARS'', from three places in Westmeath; by Lord BLNUHA74, from a place in the county Mayo and from Kil. more ; by Colonel Been, from Donegal and Tuthill; by Captain BOtveasx,from two places in War w ick shire.—Ordered to be printed. The Marquis of CH A NDOS presented a Petition from the Clergy, Gentry, and inhabitants of Buckinghamshire, against any further concession to the Catholics. The Noble Marquis declared, in energetic language, his determined opposition to any alteration of the laws affecting Roman Catholics,—Ordered to be printed. The Noble Marquis also presented similar Petitions from Wick. low, Kilmoran, and Eallmaree.—Ordered to be printed. Similar Petitions were presented by Mr. LANGSTON, from the Corporation of the City of Oxford; by Sir Join, Owe+, from the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists of nut ; by Mr. MODEM, from 5,000 of the most reseectable Protestant inhabitants of Dublin. —Ordered to be printed. Sir E. I-IA RV EY presented a Petition from the Aldermen and Town Council of Saffron Walden, against the Innkeepers Licensing Bill.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. LYGON presented a Petition front the Carpet Manufac turers of Kidderminster, against the suppression of the circulation of one pound notes ; and one from the same parties, against any further tax upon foreign wool.—Orilered to be printed. Sir J. OWEN presented two Petitions from Wales, against the Friendly Societies' Bill.—Referred to the Select Committee. The same Hon. Manua presented a Petition from the Gentry, Merchants, Shopkeepers, and other inhabitants of Van Diemen's Land,praying for a Legi.iative Assembly.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BEN ETT presented a Petition from the Licensed Victua l of Trowbridge, complaining of the expense of maintaining sol. diers.—Ordertd to be printed. Mr. SY KES presented a Petition from a Mr. Stapylton, com plaining that an allowance had been stopped from the prisoners confined for debt in Horsham Gaol, which had formerly been given to them, in consequence of their having petitioned Parliament on the state of the Gaol. Mr, CURTEIS said it was time that a redaction had taken pbce, the allowance being entirety charitable; and that if the suns had t • t been reduced from three shillings to two shillings a week, the prtsoners would soon have been left merely to their groats. In consequence of a former Petition, there had been a Committee of Magisteates, and he could say that there was no abuse in the 'Gaol of liorshino, which was as well conducted as any prison in the 'kingdom. Mr. HURST said that he was the party responsible for the re duction of the allowance, as it was he that ordered it, and it was done in order that by the reduction the charitable donations might last the longer. Previously, however, the prisoners In the gaol had been collected, and the account of the funds read to them. if he had been in the country two months sooner, be would have re doced it to Is. thi. or Is. 3d. Mr. BURRELL concurred in the statement of Ms Honourable Colleague. The Petition was then read, and on the motion that it be printed, • Mr. SYK ES read an extract of a letter from a prisoner, who itited that debtors confined in the gaol were not allowed to see their friends, nor consult their attornies, without the presence of some third party. It that were the case it was a hardship, and if net, it ought to be denied. Mr BURRELL said that the facts stated were not correct, as there was a room set apart for such prisoners to see their friends. The gaoler might pass in or out, but there was nothing like what was stated. Mr. fIURST had always given directions for accommodation to be giiien to the prisoners, and there wasp room on purpose.— The assertion. in the Petition were libellous and scandalous, and be would object to its being printed. After a few words from • Mr. CURTEIS, the motion was withdrawn. Mr. MAXWELL presented Petitions from the Pastors of the Dissenting Church in Scotland, in favour of the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts; and from two Chapels in Glasgow. ADM AAAAA COURT, WIELAND. Sir J. NEWPORT presented a Petition from the Assignee of a Bankrupt in London, a ship belonging to whom, prior to his bank ruptcy was sold in Ireland for payment of seamen's wages. The Petitioner stated, that he wished to get an account of the proceeds, and applied to the Registrar of the Court, who referred him to the Returns presented to the House of Commons, from which it ap. feared that there was no balance coming to him. He employed a Solicitor in Ireland to make inquiries, and be replied that several of the items of the Return were fictitious—that the officer with whom the money was lodged was not worth a shilling, and that there being no security token for his good conduct, there was no remedy but an application to Parliament. Mr. L. FOSI'ER suggested the propriety of referring the subject to the examination of the Commissioners of Inquiry, who were now in Ireland. Mr. IMIOUGHA M thought, as the matter was one of a false return made to the Order of the House, that the parties should be celled to the bar. The Petition was then read, and after some conversation, in which Mr. ilitoumeau, Mr. W. LAMS, Mr. Secretary Pan, and Sir J. Nawrom. took part, the Petition was withdrawn, in order to have inquiry privately made. Mr. EDEN brought in a Bill for the amendment of the Bank. ruptcy Laws, which was read a first time. CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS REPEAL BILL. It having been moved . 6 That the House should take into consideration the Lords Amendments iu the Cor. poration and Test Acts Repeal Bill," Mr. HUDSON GURNEY observed, that the alters, tions which had been made in the Bill in the Howe of Lords had changed it from a question between the Dis: senters and the Church of England, to a question be tween Church and State. In the House of Commonk a declaration had been imposed on Bodies Corporate, who had nothing to do with the laws but to obey them. This declaration was, in the House of Lords, rendered imperative on the King's Ministers; making them as it were vassals of the Church. Admitting the *mem* putity of the Church of England, could any one say that its Ecclesiastical Court% its discipline, its arrangeme nt of Bishop, Deans, &c. were not susceptible at far o ,, times of change or improvement? As well might it 4 said that the Church of Rome in the times of Leo Tenth, ss as precisely that which it was in the time, St. Polycarp. Yet if any Minister were to propose a ny eiteration in the constitution of the Church, howe st necessary such an alteration might be, he would be by the oath, which the Amendment the [louse of Lo r d, hod made to this Bill declared he should he compel) tes take. On the explanati ut of this clause whi ch he mi , receive from any of his Majesty's Ministers would de his vote, either in favour of the Amendments or in tiling to them. Mr. Secretary PEEL observed , that he co uld not considered as liable to be quest ioned with refererte , that of ha Parliament . t hadbeeni i introduced theuce w di o n t t d o sl the l Bill i n t h e ad been his, he other ny would words Houhs Ave done his best to explain their meanin-, a. At the same time he must observe, that he did not t!Ili l k that the alteration which had been made in the de, lr. ration rendered it liable to the Honourable Gentleman, objection. The [tight Honourable Gentlt!ma n read the declaration in the Bill, as amended by t h e House of Lords. He begged to fecal the Honourable Gentleman's attention to the fact, that by the Act of Union between nngland and Ireland and Enelded and Scotland, the Church of England was estabiishrd and recognised as a permanent and inviolable part of the Constitution of the realer. The Right Elenourablt Gentleman here read the fifth article of the Act ( 4) Union, by which the permanent character of the Churn of England, as by law established, was distinctly freer nize.d. All that the declaration required was, that party ta!ting it should engage not to use the influes, t , of his office to injure or weaken that Protestant Ctsuy which was a permanent and inviolable part of Constitution of the realm. He really did not see there could be any difficulty in making such a th ration ; and, therefore, he did not consider that th! teration which had been adverted to by the IL ble Gentleman, was of any consequence. With rt to the introduction of the words " on the true fa! a Christian," he should be sorry if those w! should be supposed to have any injuri)as effect, ( throw any impediment in the way of the oiler: of the Act. He did not conceive that they :/mild. Declaration did not imply any communion' Witt Church of England. It only declared that, "on true faith of a Christian," the individual ()lair would not injure that Church. It might be m any one, whether a Member of the Church of Enl or not. He begged to call the attention of the Gentleman to two oaths which Magistrates and official persons wire now compelled to take—he the Oaths of Allegiarce and Abjuration. In the which it was necessary that all hie Majesty's ter! should take, were the precise words "on the true of a Christian." It did not, therefore, appear tr that the Amendment in the Declaration had intr any thing objectionable. He was certainly not rt sible for it ; but he repeated that be did not consider as a very material change. Mr. CHOKER regretted that the declaration not come to them in the form in which they had it He was sure their Lordships did not foresee the r quences of all the alterations which they made. object was to relieve the country from all the diffii which the Annual Indemnity Act imposed upon i yet lie thought that their changes would make at of Indemnity still necessary—it not for the adv, of the Dissenters, at least for the safety of the int of the Church of England. If an Act of Indt were not passed, the members of the Church of land would themselves have to make a declarant)! should be sorry to see a new declaration, and present circumstances, should the Bill pass, he that the members of the Church of England wen subjected to very unpleasant consequences; for, is instances, they would lose their offices in six mom they did not take the declaration. With cony so oppressive, he felt that it could not stand—any calculated to create so much confusion could s allowed to continue. His persuasion was, that claration would not be taken at all, and the first the next Session would be to justify those who hs taken it. M kg Mr. W. SMITH thought the Church of E. would be considerably strengthened by the Bill, he considered as a final adjustment of differences br the Established Church and the Dissenters. He di think it any hardship to be called upon for the dr tion " on the faith of a Christiao." It was to tilt ciple he objected, and he was sure the great body Dissenters would accept the declaration in chi spirit of conciliation. it he could not obtain wi hed for, he was thankful for what had been gi Lord MANDEVILLE slid he felt an ohjeci the words " true faith of a Christian," as they w accompanied with any distinct declaration of b the TRINITY or Jzsus CHRIST. The Bill left pletely a matter of doubt as to the tene.s in %%flit Christian faith consisted. He should propose tin the word GOD, in the declaration, there should he the words FATHER, SON, and HOLY Gitosr. Noble. Lord then read one of the Petitions, in st Established Church was alluded to with great am of language. Lot d SANDON said, that the Noble Lord mt confound a few ignorant zealots with the great rational Dissenters in the country. The effect an Amendment as that proposed by the Nobh would be to replace the law on the old footini make a religious opinion the test of a civil quail! The necessity for this, he (Lord Sandon) had satisfaction of hearing some of the most vitt; Prelates of the country state, no longer existed. Lord MANDEVILLE, in explanation, said that he wanted was, that if any Declaration %s ert: BM, it should be one of real Christianity. For his part he should be glad to see any solemn appeal of kind struck out of the Bill altogether. Mr. HUME referred to.the statute of the nieette" of Geo. 111. as comprehending an accurate descry' of Christianity. Mr. J. MARTIN thought that that part of the ration in which the words "in the presence of were introduced, was objectionable, as it conve rted declaration into an oath, which could not be taken b. 11), f . ' . large and respectable body of persons, the Qtr ikers. Orotde "on the true faith of a Christian" would al so list the effect of excluding another respectable body of le' sons, the Jews. In a few years he hoped to see all the' barriers swept away ; and no civil disqualific ation 11 maining on the Statute Book, except the commission 4 some criminal offence. The Amendments were then read a sew* time. On t IK t•rot.4 thit they be agreed to, ti Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he could not allo w Bill to pass without a few words. He was ha pp y observe that it was the sense of the great acrodritf the House, that although many objections t existed to t e words which had been introduced into the Bill by r House of Lords, those objections were not strongenoq to justify the House in the rejection of the feco' n it 4 Oft - Mo °PI me, (3 it sse any do °wean -De be en/ . IDS f Lor4 wee niselt e i web e migh t dis depend in ho t . wh tin! not b• W' ente to 'of lin the • 10 een hi ss of o'll4 t 1 I meal lernaiA lob an h em bin by the Tit owe* jest ...Act of the ind iblished ;oh -rt of ite mutable yaw Act d h Chute'', . we: Y tecog. esc that the Re 'basnose, ce Church C bi t tee that 1 • b ▪ it Car n respect ing faith Id this words - fort ct, or to me Iperatio n the aid. The sere ith the .• e ss on the r a t m ,de by • he Englan , • est :he H • •or nd oh • 'pp he mea 4WI .11e fat - • ou sawn , .r true fait • ur t a t r ro l d n o h : 0 )t respo )nsider • 'el • • oi . ation di .e, Lail left • . er. :he cons let Lde.. Ti he lifEcul , i 0 'on it, a 111 :e an A tdvaivaz ' e members cc fildemnit! 1 . 4 r iof Eng. I" ation. He e 1 id ye', pa sits he kart t r : r 7 4 would be • in 50 , .• He months • i sequence. I:, •any thin; atic Id not b • ' an, o r a i sit she to t Ei t , hadAcwgihAtn i d i d the t f es bettte uRs le did n has e declan get Co the pli;• to ,ody of r tak the tia I nc sin ail !! eil n palm; 3 e ijection he y w re iv: a. t bdief : :ft it coo. i te A jliCh tiqt that aftc Ihe A ddel he r. 1 11 • nich • 11111 al le eat ct pis e t ,an eM ; t ton:: di d b it c ;itilobe r f ;s4 c tdi Leaf y otivo s ng i. m !d. • l id that a • A M: i n th his 0 " teal Of ti. , ht ninetten • descriptie ' S the deck 1,1 eof Goll 10 4 wetted it • taken by' e skers. ra also ha' al ody of re ee ail tie' et fication rl et asnissiont el A kr the nlat:' in st a ll o w tt ti s hapiq majority 1• risted tort de Lial by ' 1 ang coon; as aseasur • •