The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1820-05-13 00:00:00

~ i . ~, ~ , .4 1, - 44 4 ' t , it 11 1 1 $ . I 4 ! 4 I : . .. ) ', • 1 s '' able timeline*. It was due is the Petitioner to stale, . that Ibis delay wits not imputable to hie,. So fdr • - 11 1 bek es hilt Novernber,the hid applied to a Noble tood, as much distingsn.hed by Inseloquence ov by his ardent love of liberty, and generous sympathy - Myth all who were siffering under wriii.g—he meant 1111 i Noble Friend Earl Grey, who had readily con. - r..1P41..-et 4oritiepetitinsc.:aud -anarcat:ialilin•iiet - . 'before the tiptoe. illues., however, tio4l prevent .esitirit from' keeping his promise, and had caused , iittsraffsur. to-be teanelbrillfrikffve (laertratili4vhf's) .. ..,isageinent ; and t4t,e,,,,disoflutitoi of: Parliament, ',., ....veil, lit.persaual ivii‘vo l i t itrop it meitirealioni of '..tie addifinnal del..y. . As lothe.evpinktpaiii , ..lho orklitioner was. drivels lorlitheic I .i. ' . .5 ., Ornier lite s oiponitletatieit:of OnollitotscliiippingillicClAthliffdir. . • ...lOU' frail periwig teeltf 'on ;the 'CA . 40 alttOe * l4 ne rellifyibiguli_i!:!; a dame* ta rsi arilralei fi • (14 the present occastbn,.iiri • ,Iltat S.sylitels sue. :. !110.,P940.4htet1i tiglit. tos.,,tmosue., Ai l oold,./ wre Er e . . _. a te.sutroduce- the retithio-to-the noticiet O. liptsse. ond, 111 Cleft it , illou Id be. laid an the table, ~,a. found snub motion thereon .s under,illeAietAim. s:onces of the dove 'night. iii.em tnoper. „put he hod thought it more . fair ond c0n414 to adopt the. Saone he was following. In dpipit, So burros acting li.tirely according to the ,liiikktio.of theinalitioner, who had 'hewn the atmost , .desshr to .proceed in the %mai fair, candid, temperate. and upright man. oar, and had so condocted. hitnvelf in, relation • • Ito• the Reverend Pieletes, whose . proccediogs Crete canvassed in the . Petition. He shook! ,00w . . proceed le i she allegations. of the Peti tion itself. In substance •it stated 1 hat the Pe -Witt/net was a Clergymen of the Church of Eft . . hod, regularly ordenied, sod, that, he kid held a curacy in the diocese of Exeter ; that some few months before a meeting hail hens publicly con. ' ve t ted in the &utty of Exeter; for the purpose tit presenting a Petition' tis.the .Eitig.esel both houses of Parliament *grime the elitism of the Roman Catholics. The Petitioner Stated. that has. Aisle beets charitably inclined towards that body of people, he had attended at the same meeinsg, sod bed delivered • speech in. smote to one made "fie a Rey. Brother, in supprot of the object intend- Some time after, through the .Isindnees of a Piend. lie weepresented with.* we livings, one in the diocese of Peteelowough, the other in that of Lincoln ; that begot tesjiluonials from three neighbouring beneficed clergymen, who stated,. that he had lor three precedisig.years led a niurel,orderly, pious" Me, and had net. diarists: that *pore of Moe, or before, so fee ow they knew, held. professed - . or Itionghiviefrefkions opinems contrary to the dec. titAkfrei of the Church of England. That he sob.. - .40A th e se regimenia,ls. accueding to the nominee: „ ,Fitetops suchcoles, , to the Bishop of the diocese' lui.whiell his clerical duty was to he performed, in, order to have them cousterragootl, bat that he con stantly refused its to do. He then wrote to the two reverend and very respectable Prelates who pre sided over the dioceses in which the beings tee. to know whether they would be willing to institute . him without the couuter-signature.. They replied, that on loch testimonials they would. havinable, though their determinotius proceeded im teases. hot different ground*. He then request sd•ao interview with his own ,Diocesan to know the ,resioris why be had refused his counter-signature, .ocrl in the interview grouted, that Irv. Prelate as .attened a right to refuse, without accounting for tired Lapse. The Pelitiorwr affirmed. that the decision irmi tint fitilllded on any incompetency or hint .peoity to discharge the functions of Ins order, be caws the Bishop had at hi, request mode a distinct, siseelrimer cf that. Subsequently, however, the. jammed Bishop allowed that the refuwl was. Vitrified on the fact of his having made nee of certain words in a speech delivered in the .hewing of the public. Whir the words were al leged to be, the Noble Lord said, woe Id presently be seen, whether they were ever spoken, sod what the effect of them would lie, if they had been spoken. The Petitioner .elfire•ed he had never spoken them. He was caswervil that siersons who r.rej h ea rd hint said otherwise. 'His Lordship, afire commentisie on the severity of proceeding on evi. desce "Inch there vrao no possible opportunity to niaut, said that the Petitioner went on to state that but may hope of remedy was grounded on their conrickratiun of the Petition. es he was instructed that the law atiOrded none. The Poi. limier. the Noble Lord continued, riot only had various documents to produce in covroboratten of the farts on the face of the Petition, hut thought tR necemory to state all the farts winch had come to hislppopiedge that might serve to ex plain,ne account Ise the proceedings of the Rev. Bishop. He, there. kw, set forth thethia °tension had most eandidly, at her request, informed the two other Prelates that he had no objection whatever to hip,. on the score of 'mend character. Hr 1114 even gorse a step far ther than he desired, and described to those learned aid reverend iedividualeslie.: piasoaw of his with. balding hieouaiter-iigiaatpre. The Petitioner lastly elieged, tlie consequences' of this step had fallen most heavily on him. and had. destroyed fop prospects in hie Prefeeenrit.• He still. how. eget. held his avocet, which woe . mom, of surprise, became if he bad. committed oily co. remind offence which rendered the cottater.44. itiktore improper, that abould also bit a nemess• iew kir. being deprived of the curacy. iLasntg mid re lunch oe the allegstiona of the Petitairo. be. ; M ou ld observe that it. wee, he supposed, no great ttkeCtiOn to a went tp tine cossomy, that he was* wapn .goliticiere-,-(A'./quak.)- , -Tbe inquiries he Inek, spade intp Ilse lul u . s will celiversetion of this i a ftkidual,. primed loupe siedateldo, to him.. He bed letiPW d that, elootll,. qfer,,heintr ordained (we belie se the feat 18441..14,4nel been ap pointed to a, curacy ?II: the cootity of Devon, itin.cnivs of RI!. 4 1 ). lie eitomptionly. fdrstufttllfu-riltsl ;he Dever ;tem, ahamet. from it week or Seto.4:ll/14:41,11d io Coo" qtterssi ge • 10 .4 r - 4,411 o ther Kite. • and exercised on this occasion would has*, if al lowed, the• preposterous effect of --miabling a 1 Bishop to preveut prefernient io.stiorliet Siorese in a way he could not iu•his own. Insuch se! ease a . Shop should be compelled by proviso or law to Mate his moults of refusal before another 114)010, and if he did not give his reasons. there should be Mate .f another. power to eavoliet. the • intaitsoto a . : 'ffirelllte 1 was mid that there was no superintending jortsdits. lion in case of a refusal of counter-signature, and'. ..eaten 'ttspnweing• that it vow einiscientiomily • and . justly execwted. yet this. win :on etiorinona and • arbitrary diarrebonary peer.' ;If it oat to can. time, it should be comadereil what injury, sti.hout mean' of prevention yr redress, might iii Aar way Are done, not only to a great number of re ',el.:we :individual.; but to the rights of flair • LottEoliipa' own property in livings, as pimp*. :Poi, thtlumb Mr. Jonas houttorably- surrentlered the tore, • sentation to the porous, yet the law did tot oblige. : hidi,and if lie had traratieeingty Insisted on the rights with which 110 had bees iovested, the 'Mien; have nig had oo opportuisity.lo•present anew, s h e blinks • would have lapsed to the Bishops event/lolly. • eta. he could Hot refrain from expressing other observe. tions to which the Petition rive rise. The diorite •lion had been -harshly and intudicintaltesecutell ; the reason alleged for its exeittoi. was she •delsvdry of.the words to this ett-ct by she petitioner, in • speech at a county meeting :.-Nme.waths arf the clergvnien of the church of England, in sigoing the eighth article of that church, which contains an approbation of • the Admission Creed, sod its . illaronahle causes, rigned What they did not believe. The petitimier affirmed he had not wed this I.iii gunge ; sod, indeed, judging from the context and, the tenor of the whole address, the words must have been incorrectly r;.ported ; and instead of damnable, the word &mutt/tory should be inserted in the passage. The petitioner offered proof of hi*, assertion, and referred to these there nwp..rtant points : He said,look at the newspopirs iii which the speech was reported at the time, and you will fled no inch thing—look to the evidence of rooms who were pre.ent, and they will say that they did not hear the words—look also to the whole tenor of the . argument, and you will find that this• would MK ' afire out of it. The Noble Lord then referred to the statements of three getitlemen a. hearing out the denial of the petitimer, o u r of whom hid 1 wit neat him at the meeting ; the pecond was Mr. tferjeant Pell. rho had attended it;. and 1 . the third was a elergetnasi (as we undeollood) and a relative of Sir I/waxy Gibbs. •He stated hie impressions of Mr. JOl4C.'O conduct in .a let ter, and appeared to be rather against the .COs tholies than for them. He did mention one" ratt which was not in favour of Mr. Jones, hot ohisilt was very far from justifying a proceeding winch corn. pletely stopped a roan in his carer, to the Atatioe ii(Mb sod emoluments which his profession afforded.' The Noble Lord then read an extract from the • letter, which. he said, had been submitted to the Bishop of Exeter, without producing any effect. Ile then described the general nature of the, speech which had called forth Mr. Junes's, the main argument of which was. that coniiiissing the , dsrao.:l bailie' of the.Rootan Cstlsolies was javtillettliy ills intolerant doctrines which their etergyergned; and' by the exclusive creed of their church. Mr. Jot* replied, that he could not deny thew stihoCribing such doctrines, bat thot was tin proof of their reel opinions or practical intolerance. Here the Noble Lord begged leave to remind the House of lire • 10:11001 of the chinch of Semisolid, nor/la eetra re eksiane tales. The came argument, Mr. Jones pro ceeded, might be used against the church of Eno-, Mid. All the members of that church sub- . scribed the eighth article, which moo/lined an alb -fiemance of the doctrines of St. Athemoius`s Creed. ' But it would he an erroneous inference that the whole or them believed it, for iiiiie-tenths of illoole who signed it did not believe in it. Some of the ,brightest (moments of the church of Englend, the Made Lord oliserved, had formally and deltbovettly delivered the same opinion, among whom lie quoted the names of bishop IVilkins, Archbishop Teeny. 6011, mid Archbishop Tillotson. Burnet had said des. tinutiy In The History of his Own Time,. a taro portion. sixty oat of a hundred, signed the articles *Oboist reading. without understanding, without caring for them, sod others sign them hccause they must do so. Archdeacon Paley said the moue thing over and over. Mr. Jones did not soy. that ' he disbelieved the Athanision Creed, but that i ine. tenths of the clergymen who subscribed is-did not believe in it, or at least believed it in a sense dare. rent from that commonly received. But how, he asked, would the Reverend Prelate himself like tot be judged by a report ? Lord Hollaiid here read an extract frown a report of an address deliver. ed, we believe, to the clergy of his thocere, at a' visitation by the Bishop of Exeter, refeiling to the Coronation Oath. and that taken by the Prince Regent, in their differeot effects ow the Coe tholic qitestion—which, with another eacctrilies. immerge. as reported. he 'dinned to be I Pao sod deliberate breach of the privilege* of• that House. Bishop Horsley had once said in the Howe; on en ',pest from The Court of Chiricerv. where the question turned on the conversion of a misaor front the Catholic fairb—s• I do not . Amen to my that he entered into the qtwatioas of the invocation of saints. and transubstatitiatiotio s und such. eannadrams."—(A laugh.)— Bat would it Sot be ridiculous of any one who bad heard dim& . words to go and tell the King that Bishop Horsley! wars • man not to be preferred, for that he looked upon all the cittetitions which had so mach ogi• need the•religious world as so many coasixdreinkr OP He thought that the couuter-signature was gene rally looked on merely as a testitnosiy to the lowly. end testiorawy Of the teatimouial itself—as a coofirmasion of the substance of the testintdeiy. With respect to the obscure of soother irsteerly, follows he should be told that the poor curate Might have brought his gnate impedit against the Billups 'fused institution; and if they. put boa ripe , he was entitled ton demurrer, snot that if determined in his favour, he criold hove a maridemmi from •the King's Bench, to compel moth. Whether that could or could not be done. not take it on himself to say. but he 'said milting web a remedy was open, it was so a beyond the meow of. a poor cosine,. rho it ao weal to. nurse. After. e variety of other ots aervatious. she Noble Lord said. that after Mb : 4 atini - should have been read.. and laid on' (if it ',Mold br). be semi to NW. cep .ris ktier frooks ►.at f or, the Rector., who have brou iraa disabled by Morse from writing himself.. Mit- who refs,. lOt4lier fisfbiud'ir entierepisan t ot hariug procured .eial . pleu. t , *ay"?' I I divot and eonacieotioui in. ships , . Mot was i fiff. NI 'pc e , nr.the.d a lies,devohred ociiiitn, And. mos . wedges ' ll l* 00; 'ln* 4telec-died. the Dernhinoets 'tenure. 1 4 ~p,.. Recipe tp.the..4l.l4ls..ftf the diorneee., •lie "mold Ibuttitlirr,i. r e4io96er ,Aiiilo. be spg ui*. that. adm ~• • CP01 1 .4 ',lftllffiSli: .4 0 1 1 .31 1 4 1 18 11 . dui. ob. . couch be) t• s til,llols l olllMg , elol 11114..:; 4 1 1 ^ ti wbblitP., .e** rat tMZ.' :W I :lIA :1 11 14=. ' . l* Ont, as, .s ' la- : lir pe r tZien iums . AMPAltkig • . chaos! . the Ishii r ....:,...„... :,..,. I .• • . . Mutt s Select C i ro* , ; titre 1)* isrpointed In telt* • into coasideratiou the pelitiAtt Jones, • slot the rule which Ita;lboolld..stl : l'firbttPr before instituting • clrrit to s benefice in hie din ewse, to demond the ctintiterattigtiettirr to his testi- . sonoials of the Bishop in whom set• he boa re s oled. and to report their observations thereon to the . • Ttie petition was then litooght up Mid reed. On the question, that it !icon the table, being put L r The Bishop of !Italia voite.- oliaerviit tons be should ebonite Intlarsalf to •the Matter and tiosorof the Petition. it was true that the Petitioner had been regularly ordained—true that a comity itlieeting had been held at which he had mode a speech; but he wassurtnised that it should. Inesaid or t oisintoated that the mutiVe• of his conduct hatilleen grounded on the favourable opinions espeoriSed of iths Romans Catholics. On the Petit ismetel %frit* so rfilltifted to two liviogs (which, by the could blot hove held longer than stem leant). and ap !plYingto hlm to euuntersign Ids lestiritunials, lie hail declitied to do ao. Bo:the had expressly told him, that his• determination in that respect sees not grounded on the sentiments of his awed§ or Ilia •opittions of the dolma of the Roman Catholic,. with winch opinion', he added, be had no right to 'lnterfere. To the assertion that he heal tefused to countersign the testimonial because of the speech.. he had given, and he now again gave, a distinct dis claimer. If he had erred it was on error of iii. heed, • not of his heart. He had investigated the matter of the case with the greatest care, and weighed with scrupulous nicety every thing offered on behalf of the Petitioner, either by letter or word of mouth. He begged leave to say that when the three clergy men signed the testimonial, they were then igtiorant of what had occurred, but afterwards on losing in formed of it, they had withdrawn their signatures His view of the case might be erroneous, hut he cots tiderrd that the teotituouial did not give credit to the general character of the 'lemon iu whole favour it was signed, but that the persona whose iiguatom it bore, only gave it as to their belief, o r what had Coale under their roomed knowled:.•. • When' be was called on to countersign it, he was obliged to stele use of his belief, mud on that lie *lief he formed his opinion, end thought he was con scietitiotist), right in refusing to sign it. 117 lien lie allowed the Petitittiter to keep his minor snug lion, he done it out of a humane feeling to wards him, at the mime time he did not allow a maineut to elapse before he made the siecesoory inquiries, mid the frank of them counrmed hint lie was right in reltisnig to countersign the tes timonial. The Petitioner had stated, that no hi (loamy was made ; so far from it, it was made, and it occupied hint three week.. lie did tout think that there was any thing else for hiss to observe on, and he begged porta,' for having so lung intruded on the patieoce of their Lordships. Lord ERSZINI: said, he had seen malty testimo nials, and never saw one differ from another. had fallen from the Itvy. Prelate was correct, that the test i monial was not to the effect of giving the pervon in whose favour it was signed general credit, • but it went to that credit which ought to entitle him to that permutation be sought. One of his lobs Was placed in t di6cult situation, 'rein pre. armed to o living by a Noble and hemmed Friend of hie, god nut knowing any beneficed clergymen . in the diocese. The Archbishop of Canterbury came down to that House, and signed a testimonial . that lie woo worthy of credit ; he kiwi/ nothing of him, but depended on the re po r t o f his good z i t ... rector. If there was a general report &optima the character of the Petitioner, the Reverend Prelate would slot be bound to countersign his testimonial. So it was in a Court of Law, if a man was put into ■ witness-Witt, to speak to the bad character of a present, lie waspof aske d . what part of his dia meter he disapproved of, but whether from his ge oriel character lie wag not worthy of belief? But the Reverend Prelate lied stated, that he did not make aft isiquity hay the general character of the Petiti ,e, but that he only inquired as to one single fast. He must therefore say lie was not borne out in reftising to couotersign the testimonial. It creteitily was a hard case, that a moot should be de prived of t h e belie& of a prestentation, became while speaking its a public assembly he turtle use of a loose expression. Flow did the Rev. Prelate know that his •infortmonts had reported to hum the whole of the speech of' the Petitiotter ? It was well known that to take the speech of any mail, how ever versed in public apeoking. it was possible in only hearing a part of it that it would appear very different from the meaning of the 'wool who delivered it. In his opinion, it was the duty or the Right Rev. Prelate to have countersigned the testi- Tim Bishops of this country had always conducted themselves to inch a way.as to give get's rat satisfaction. kind they most properly had a great share of popularity attached to them ; but on this occasion he could not Orbit' the Rev. Prelate had done hit duty in refusing to countersign the testi *sound, as that refit'sl was mot grounded on general teinduct, but • single law. The Loan CHANSnr.OII Piga, could a mafiosi Asientertaiiied for a inumeut by their Lordships. whether a man should he ordained that did not 'hold to the creed of the Church of Etiglend.?— ' Where a Clergyman was presented IM must have • tenet character fur the loot three rears before be could lienebt by it. His Noble Frietid had lord 'Sheol theMit was the defy . of the Bishop to countei sign •the testimmiltil after it liad received the sign*. litres of three Clergymen. Did it become his fluty by tire Comm - Faint ?" for if it did. ia the time of James I. the Cation Law was deternsiued by the Bishops. mud they might hare altered it as they thought flt. If Clergymen signing a testi monial. and a Bielsop,couutersig • g it, thought it ; was a matter of course for a presenloi ion. he would • tell them, that. siccording to his humble judgment, Ilkley were tunitakett. The quoin 111 l came to this, it was or was 11011 he duly of the Bishop to counter sign the tertimunial? If it will his duty. rod be slid • not doit, the Comets of Law were open to the per- Sion aggrieved • to seek redress, and that House wits not the proper trilmital for, him to apply so. If the Noble LordIflollaod) intended to ground ally measure, such MI btiugusg in o.Blii to regulate the Warr conduct of the Right Rev. Bishopo,on this wobjrci. tt would he neeemary•forobini to slew that /else power, as it was now reified in the Bishops, 'is. 'ablated, for it was pot net litigant or one iso slated csse that the WI of tlint . ined shipald be ataartit, _ -- 1. * V* t .%.*:, -\. , 4111 . .-, • • ... TIM Ertl of CauttatiOlt said Hitt the ; Right - 11 ". Pteiete had uohtuste to that garment, aasigu •ed any. ream., full Withholding hi. stignature, ex cept that he lied - used his discretion, and that he was ten. bound to assign any is for &prim% the Petitioner of the welfare nod happiness lie might have had by the preeentatieu a .gml. Aut. fur depriving others of their - right of patronige. He had, however, told Owns lie had not given is refusal without inquiry, far lie bad made it autougat his neighbour. ; but lie had out told them that his oeighbours were' nut prejudiced agaiost the Peti• timer, he had trot thetight proper to tell them the names of 111, witiseires, or who they were. 1 He (the Noble Earl) knew molting of that particular tripe except what he heard in that House, but he would *toted against the conduct of the Right Reverend Prelate for the rake of the beneficed Clergymen and those persons who had patronage. The Right Rev. Mellow had mated that the Clergymen wise • had signed the testimonial had withdrawn their sig. natures, but they did not do so until he had pet hie mark of disapprobation on the Petitioner. He was therefore tif opinion that there was a sufficicut atm merle out to demand inquiry. The Marquis of Lexsuuwe said, in the Agave/ of ill expl.nation and excuse on the part of the Right Rev. Prelate, they were called on to look into the situation of the rinforttonsie Petitioner, sod ohm us to the manner in which the Rev. Prelate 'had used his jurisdiction. He told their Lordships lie was justified in taking his report of the conduct of the Petitiouer, nut from his surrishioners, but from a distant part of his (the Bishop's) diocese, and on such information inflicting the worst of• punishment on the Petitioner, by depriving him of the means of support. This might not pee. Imps weigh with the Reverend Prelate, foe they were to suppose that he, as • Bishop, did not, look for or expect farther church preferment ; but it was trot so with the Petitioner, who was • subaltern in the church, a curate; in him it • was pr.oseworthy to desire to gain preferment. which would be the reverse in the Right Reverend Prelate if his mitad soared above his. present See. His Lordship continued : the mast extraordinary ;pot of the Reverend and Learned Prelate'. con. duet tar, that he had felt himself bound from • s.llllO a defy (a mistekeir +reuse of dirty hr should *ay) to act no a manner repugnant to the feelings oreChrietiin. He had chorea to exercise t h e des ereiitio ,vested ip him by law, rather than give the ! l i party au opportunity of appearing in a spiritual court; Mad what is more extraordinary stiff, 'that whets he is asked-how he could suffer this Reverend Gentleman vtillie centime to mislead the emigre mitiose of AI; : aitaall .eye o r 901. per annum. the Lear;lid INselatp,repliete, that it was from feeling* of good name.. Noe as the Learned Prelate had so completely mastered the feelings of compassion in the first iron of the case, he was surprised that he should have permitted them to operate in the latter. The Learned Prelate had (conscious of the duty ishich he owed to his country and to the people of. Peterborough') refused to admit a person who iim • 'refit to teach them, and yet,with regard to his iiwii diocese, with regard to the people . of Hovey, he pee.- mits him to preach what . he likes. In the living of WM • year there is no objection to him, hut the moment he is recommended for • preferment of four or five hundred a-year, he beecmes unfit and e y dangerous. One of two things appeared, clear to . him (the Marquis of Lansdowe), either the Rev; ' Gentleman also had beeu the 'subject of that night's conversation, had been most barbarously used, Or ilse the Right Reverend ('relate had not duly ex. ercised the trust reeosed in him. It was not I question regarding s getersuce to an individual Dilly, but it was a q•sestion of a. great °mire' of publie duty. Under thee! eecirmistances he did not feel diiposed to argue the cieestion legally, more particularly after the little iisfurmation which lie lord derived from the speech of the Nithle and Learned Lord. It had beets said, that there was ti legal remedy fur the Reverend Gentlemate He ' should like to lessim where thst remedy lay. and whether it was within the...reach of an individual. It was the duty of their Lordships to afford at !rest a hearing to a complaint like titre, and he could not but feel indebted to the Noble Lord who had brought the subject before the House. The bishop of LA NDA YI , said he honoured the feelings of sensibility and compassion entertained by the Nub:e Lords who had spoken, and must himself take credit for some share of them. Yet he ' could not are that the Right Rev. Prelate had exer cised tiny other than a sound discretion in refusing his sanction to one whom he must consider ohjec • tionable. It was the duty of the Bishop, if he knew any thing against the personal - character of the individual, to act upon it. - The Right Rev. Prelate observed. that he had himself passed through every grodation of the Church, and lie ' thought it-a gross libel to say, that nine-tenths of thi Clergy did not believe the Atherissian Creed although they signed the articles. The Earl of CARNARVON rose and : said, p. ! his words had beet' misapprehended, lie *mild -explain whet the question was which hi realty ' Imeant to ask—it was, whether the Learned pre late wally did approve the dumnatory clauses of the Athattetern Creed? Fur himself, he must 1 a s io say, tha t if these were the tenets of any church, that church was certsinly not Christian. • The Birliop of EXETER rose, but before he Lord Hoeeeen rose to order. He said that it was the rule or that House that when • Noble Lord hod explained words which be had used us debate, it was not competeut for any Noble Lord to impute other words thou those which had been acknowledged. • The House then divided on the question. when it appeared there was fur receiving the Petition— Contents Nua.cuateuts 34 Majority.... 17 The Hauge adjourned at holr.part eight o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRIDAY, MAT It. ER MEMBERS. . greciii., peel litiptom took 110 °nitro mot their oasts, mom them were Lord Receive .ad Lord Rt*llLaT. NEW WRIT. O Ille Malian of Lord J. Nowt*, S or+ writ wee or• tiered for the DOIVIIOI4 Tavisheek, is 04 eysollt, Fosekerley, who ohm hkeketiia bad aeceo Jibe Chiller* llordreds. . f ISio • , . . . • • ' • 1111. T TAX. A Petition wu presented from ibt Froth*Mato of D ee . bats. i assiat lbe Malt Tex.—Laid um Obi 1•41 e. • FOREIGN WOOL. Laird IMWrot prelesaseel • Follies from the of Wakehel4, an she Wes. Ridin g of Yeekshare, ..... „.,,„. Ise of She preemies ' distress moans the Woollen ilio.utse : Isue" fif conotU(rilistoo,the table. AGRICULTURAL PETITIOM Mr. PINTS presented a Petition from t h e . 4 1 111!sits - tmtd OcortMen of Dowd in The cuosatv of Hereford. praying for an inquiry into the state of their distrees.,—Laid ai.tha table. • • . , ! , Animas presented 4 Petition from 0. ? ()tapers pr Laud tit „Neither)) in dm nrno 4 Berks. praying fot.a eausultratnni of the tleinr.--:1 idato.nf. intriepolt um in that ceiataly. Lord Tesirrut entse.sted she attention t.fr Honor to the Prtilion 'nhich. he, held in tr. h..•., from the l'roprivrors of Louisa to Backwgimino.ire. It set forth the heavy tliatrentro under which laboured, and expresoed their confident bop, ' that the Legislature would take, into its row.,l• fa n t ,„ the prrtlicatorot in whirl. they were placed. The N o ble Lord Oleo presented • similar Petntoafir, o Newport Pewit', sod two a i r Iwo more arum other pics of /lie Courtly of, buck:oghsm. Mr. If Virg thought else saceenire inimiloction of those petition/ sheered sus asisiety to proeor• same esclusive encouragement for one itorneolor e:5011 the commonity—a course which lie convid e , e d highly impolitic wire& all. were alike muttering. Ti.. inquiry to he efficient should be general, and alike applicable to the state of the general distrom winch leo unhappily pervstied'evety part of the comma. arty. He war of opinion that any ;partial enerante wsnehl only aggravate the general distress.-.411ear.) Mr. P 1311,111 stated, iind of the Hoo. Measlier had given himself the troteble to read the rvier of the ,Petitimi, he would and that it did n o t ask ler immediate relief but for iiiqulrep-4fiedr./ All the Petitioner, wanted was inquiry; they did slat ask, in the first instance, for redress. Their snits •tion was critic4l.'and every body knew the gent eel effect piton other classes of the communite, When an many lialtourerr west thrown out of tan , ploy. He (Mr. Caromia) woe not• the adrocrle for Any increase of the price of land, either for the land. lord or tenant. lie owned, indeed, that he felt regret at mein swim* stank any "Isere to stlt. rare the Littlest of the egritaJtural cleat from tint etc the niNnufactiering.-„-f Veer, hear,. tear./-1.1 . . . proiperity of the floe woa itioeps , ahle that of the. other, —(fiecir.)—lje was free io say, that the loot Cent Mil woe productive of no pito ; lie lamented that ally neer:oily should ono for my special protection fur agriculture, but then it eras not called for in behalf. of any particular iliterett. it was required for the gectral good of die shot-. The iofoine. of the country must, he thought, be kept up.. . Though Ull%llllll to - try *wilier ettlien. meat. yet he was not sunguine of uitimite sitters.. • The only chance, he thought. fqr the country utast arise from a diff-rent state of things, that is, from • diminution of talker, and a reduction of the merest of the national debt. .13y iro other mews did he thick this country could compete -CI the foreigd market.--/Ileue, herr.j.--He regretted thirst 93 there Petitions an lion. Member opposite had no a former iiight 'mutated the alarm throughout the Country, . . • pram! aiscoitsts lamented any premature agitation of the sinputtaut question referred to in ibese Petitions. lie denied dirt he was blotc.oo-t• for having early sounded an alarm, fir be thong .t that starting such v question as this in the present 'temper of the country, crustal only be productive of ' much harm.—( Hear.)—Nu mats could (troy b it that the object of these ipetitiumers was. by increas ing the importntion price of corii.to Internist to re pair. the distressed state of agriculture. •ile not averse to au inquiry, though the Hun. itemiser who had just s:mkets may perhaps view an inquiry, now Oak he was Member for Cumberland. ins a dd. ferent light from that he would have :taken of it while Meutber for Cathale. Of Ws (Geakeral Gar coyotes) constituenes, who were 110,000 um 'Motto-, there were rt least 9 out of 10 averse to the illject the petitiohers contemplated. lie thought such en ► object ought to be resisted in the roiliest stage.- . Hear.) :st Sir Joon NEWPORT was at a lose to see whey I t re tioo.Grocroi should have my more caste to b. surprised .at the coarse m i kes by the Hon. Mem , p er for Cuinberlond. than the latater.tbould at his o pt. esionnarioalem`./1.- And it was nut a little extra c thump that the Hon. General, who how complooh ti of premature discussion, should have been Manse If the first who entered at large into the subject, c the mete presentation of one of 'he first of the P t titiorte.—(//ene, ienr.) —All he should say at VP aria was, that the question of whether any inside I dual or set of ;rename, considering himself or Vnen s • selves aggrieved, should or should out prir no t a petition to that'House, praying for an. enq,vary int t the cause of that alleged grievance, ougity p ee n to be discussed wit;iin their walls—(flef.e)—on the contrary, they. should always, in the repressive btu guise of their former Speaker. to oro pr their dam e wide open for the irdmission of t'ke petitions of the people of every class.—(Hear.).-Wheit the manu facturers presented petitions on the s ubj ec t of cot ton. no objection to entertain their apeptscation had ever been made; why shook/ it then to the vti tions of the agocultnrel iu'rrest ?—fifear.)-11e sides, the permits on the part of the latter i for sin specific redress, they merely aollieiteil I a gility; aid why should inquiry be refused by Legislature to.any set. of perilous iii the etinatou ty ? lie also condemned the opinion that there ant nay 'operate tasteresi betweria the manufacturer foal the itgricultundimi; the iolere.is of boils wet* t ow.• Hip.)—He earnestly M0ped...164 -raw. Itrmrut would ever be found ready, to maim Airmth cahoots*, candour, and temper, -the politic) se eves-Trine of 'the people, come frotn.whet it. lt tett ihey.may. Every inhabitant of Om .exipiee cospritl..re himself aggrieved had an undoubted to routs with his. petstiois to Parlsomest...-fill aw../ Eat' TEMPLG. begged to state; is Ohm its what had linen from sit Hon. Member (Mr. H ismr), that the petitioners prayed for no speptic they merely solicited inqiney, and lyfttled `tier wielhaideretian to the collective wisdom of 1 ?Arbil.. iseot.—/litar,hear.j Grimm' Poscov is and Mr. Cumin au 06,64 . . ~• • •-, . • lw•la •••• Mr. RICARDO foils agreed that ; Om *hi I ( .Mhs itaii:e *hamlet ba throws. wide mega for * 'vet lion f r oisiiiiie,list stilt die Mink vim id • ::‘ I I '. A I