The Sun. — London, England, 1837-06-13 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The Church-rate Bill for the present was last night formally abandoned in the House of Commons—Lord John Russell, in moving " for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the mode of grant ing and renewing leases on the landed and other ec clesiastical bodies in England and Wales, and into the probable amount of any increased value which might be obtained by an improved management, with a due consideration to the interests of the Established Church, and the ,present lessees of Church property," stated that it would be vain to expect to carry the Mi nisterial plan into law in the present Sesiion, with so small a majority as approved of it in the House of Commons. Thus one of the most important mea sures of the Session, and beyond question that which evinced the greatest ability • in its preparation, and was most eminently adapted, not only to protect but to promote existing interests, is shelved for another twelvemonths. For another year shall parochial feuds be kept alive, and the Church desecrated by being made the scene of conflict between the supporters and opponents of this vexatious and iniquitous assess ment—for another year must the Dissenters and the Liberal members of the dominant Church, who refuse to be parties to its oppressions, endeavour to effect in the Vestries the relief which has been denied them in the Senate. The greatest enemy of the Established Church could not have devised a more certain mode of aggravating the animosity which its undue exactions are every where exciting against it, then delaying the set tlement of this exasperating question. Church-rates in England, like Tithes in Ireland, will serve to orga nize the recusants into an impassable resistance ; and having attained a knowledge of their power, and ex perienced the advantage of the voluntary principle in one instance, they will be the better prepared and the more inclined, to extend its operation to others. If the . Legislature do not improve its pace, and accelerate its movements, so far as Tithes and Church-rates are concerned, it will have little more to do than expunge from the statute-book laws already rendered obsolete by the force of public opinion. This procrastinating system, however objectionable in other respects, is the most effective possible mode of instructing the people in the science of democracy, and stimulating them to its application. Lord John Russell, in the course of a very able and luminous speech, distinctively im pressed upon the House that he did not ask for the Committee in order to consider whether Church-rates ought to be abolished, but to inquire into the present manner of leasing Church property. It needs no Committee to consider the question of abolishing Church-rates ; it is already decided by the country and its Representatives in the affirmative. The question for scrutiny is the mode of providing a substitute, and fortunate may the Church esteem itself if it obtain one so efficient as that which its infatuated friends have rejected on its behalf. As to public opinion, the country would be well pleased to sec Parliament recognise the abolition of the rates, and leave the providing of a substitute to the ingenuity of the Churchmen themselves. They have ample funds already in their possession, and they might better employ their clerical leisure in seeing to the maintenance of the fabric by which they live, than in concocting forgeries on the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, writing inflammatory pamphlets, or indulg ing in incendiary declamation at Exeter Hill. Justly dreading the effects of inquiry, the Tories strenu ously opposed the appointment of the Committee. Mr. Goulburn, Colonel Sibthorp, and Sir Robert Peel flung themselves into the breach, and inflicted upon the House a terrific amount of jargon and false assertion. One denied that any increase of revenue could be derived from the better management of Church lands, but with a laudable foresight insisted that if any increase should take place that it should be applied exclusively to the purposes of the Church. Another impugned the accuracy of all the Minis terial calculations, but prudently opposed the appoint ment of the Committee, which would furnish the best test of the truth or falsehood of conflicting state ments. Like men arguing against their convictions, the Tory speakers committed all manner of inconsist encies, of which it would be a waste of our readers' time and our own to dwell on the exposure. From recent proceedings in the House of Commons, it would appear as if that assembly were disposed to lighten the burden of the Lords, by becoming a participator in the odium which the conduct of the latter has now almost universally excited, and dividing the responsibility of rendering the Session abortive of all practical result. Some Members, whom, looking to the manner in which business is conducted in the House, We can scarcely censure, have paired off for the rest of the Session. We know not if this retirement from legis lative labour have proceeded from disgust or indolence, or if June be the usual pairing season with the senato rial tribe ; but it is high time that the people should institute a searching investigation into the causes to which the failure of the Session is attributable, and guard against a similar occurrence, by preparing a due penalty for all defaulters, when the general suffrag,e be next appealed to for its verdict.—Morning Advertiser. It was but yesterday morning that we stated our conviction, that, whatever might be the petty interrup tions to their progress, the direction of affairs was clear and decided. Well, last night's division has come. What a blow to the Tories'l How has the majority of five been dinned in our ears by the gentle men who found it a very convenient and pleasant thing, notwithstanding, to govern without any majority at all! We did say something, to be sure, with a charitable intent of dulling the severity of coming disappoint ment. We did venture to talk of present accidents, and to whisper something of future divisions. But no ; the case was clear. There was—that especial favourite at the Carbon Club—a reaction : yes, for the nineteen hundredth time, there was a violent reaction. The majority of five was speedily to degenerate into no majority at all—signs and symptoms were abroad— miracles, such as a smile on Mr. Trevor's countenance, were seen—the reign of the saints upon earth, of the pure and the spotless, of the borough-corruption-hating followers of Peel, was nigh at hand. Blessed period ! How unfortunate it is for us—delusive, like the enchanted islands of the Mediterranean, you vanish for ever as we approach you ! Lord Lynd hurst, for he is the real hero of Tory fable, is to be once more in power ; the thing is settled, decided ; the oracle of Printing-house-square has scattered am biguous words ; the Morning Post has mysteriously repeated them. But no, as surely as the prediction is made, so surely arrives some untoward vote that upsets it. Cassandra uttered true things that were never believed ; " the Old Lady" is the very reverse of Cassandra ! Last night's debate was remarkable, not for Mr. Palmer's speech, though he does quote Burke, and threaten us with a place where Satan is presumed to take up his abode—not for Mr. Goul burn's speech, poor good soul ; his vapid violence was just what it is in general. No ; last night's debate was remarkable for Sir R. Peel's speech, and the division that followed upon it. " A Committee," said Sir R. Peel, " a Committee to inquire into the ma nagement of Church property I why, it is the very worst of all the bad things that possibly can happen ;" and saying this, he turned round, as he usually does when he means to be impressive, to Mr. Plumptre, or Mr. Hardy, or Mr. Charles Ross, who are always, of course, ready to raise their pious voices into a cheer on the right occasion. Well, the House is called upon to decide whether it will consent to what Sir Robert Peel, in all the pomp of wisdom, declares to be the worst of all bad things ; and the House laughs at Sir Robert Peel, and votes by a majority of-83 against him. For that is the point : Sir Robert is as strongly pledged against the Committee which is now carried by a majority of 83, as he was pledged against the abolition of Church-rates that was carried only by a majority of 5 : and Mr. Goulburn might just as well have omitted his precious amendment ; for, after all, even if carried, it did not mend the case of his party. Against that party would still have been the little majority of 83, which neither Mr. Goulburn's nor Mr. Hardy's splendid eloquence, such is the hard ness of men's hearts, seems likely to vanquish. Mr. Goulburn's proposal, however, which was to have re stricted the use of any surplus (if there is no surplus, by-the-by, why so earnest about restricting it ?), was lost ; and lost, not by a majority of five this time, but by a majority of '26. So that there vanish all the brilliant prospects of the majority of five. Mr. Spring Rice made a very able and spirited speech in reply to' Sir Robert Peel, and showed up the absurdity of all that wit which wasted itself in calling a Committee " a cabinet," and sneering at a Cabinet Committee as a ridiculous and incompetent tribunal for examining facts. But Sir Robert Peel has such a short memory! He had forgotten all the Committees he had ever granted for examining into facts. What, in the name of common sense, can Committees more properly inquire into than facts ? Then, there was that direful error the Government had committed ! The motion for the Committee contained a proviso for protecting the interests of the Church. " Was there ever anything so atrocious ?" said Sir Robert—" a proviso for protecting the Church that testifies, evi dently, a design to destroy it I" " What would the Right Hon. Baronet have said," observed Mr. Spring Rice, "if there had been no such proviso ?" Ah what, indeed ! There is, in fact, no way of pleasing men who cannot by any device creep into the smallest majority ; but are always pushed further than ever from office at the very moment when they think they have just attained it. Mr. Harvey's motion was, as he said, for "an abstract principle." It is a little too hard upon the House, when they have been dealing practi cally with a question for five nights, to bring it upon them again in the shape of "an abstract princi ple." That Church-rates should be abolished is the first part of a great proposition—that they should be abolished in a certain manner, and with a certain sub stitute, is the second, and perhaps, considering its difficulty, the most important of that proposition. Well, the House dealt with the two parts—decided that Church-rates should be abolished, and decided in what manner and with what substitute this should take place ; and, when it had gone thus far, Mr. Har vey, by way of advancing the matter, hallooos back over the old ground, and starts again at the very point which the House had some 'weeks since started from and travelled *over, setting forth as an especial merit that he does this, not, indeed, in any practical or useful manner, but as an abstract proposition. Mr. Hume, Mr. O'Connsll, and many of the most intelligent of the Radical Members voted against Mr. Harvey.—Morniug Chronicle. A curious specimen of what is technically called splitting has just been furnished by Archdeacon Ba thurst, whose sacerdotal wrath against the Whig dis pensers of mitres and mischief, having been some years in the gathering, is at length bursting in heavy drops upon Lord Melbourne's head, as the precursors of a more terrible outpouring, which, it seems, is presently to follow. - The object of the Archdeacon's letter to the Premier, as disclosed in in his own quiet and diffi dent way, is to rouse the indignation of the country, because the Whigs, not having appointed him to one or another of the vacant bishoprics which have been so rife lately, have at once falsified their promises, and shamefully neglected the most 'meritorious clergyman in England. With regard to the gross unseemliness of their recent episcopal nominations, the opinion of this modest censor of theirs is pretty much the same as our own. Contrasted with the unrequited services which be himself has rendered to the cause of Whig partisanship, the claims and qualifications of the new Whig Bishops are treated by him with perhaps fully more irreverence " than pi jest beseems." The Rev. Liberal declares that— " The appointment just made to the see of Norwich is (without meaning any disrespect to the individuals alluded to) like that of Mr. Denison to Salisbury, extraordinary and improper, because, without any adequate cause, it makes, as it were, a captain over the head of long standing generals, and gives a slap in the face (which Lord John Russell's goodnature,-no doubt, n ished it do) to all the dig nitaries of the Church, as if they were unfit ; and it is par ticularly insulting to me to have a private clergyman of no extraordinary fame put over the hezd of an archdeacon, who had at feast . fait/rfully served the cause, and with far more distinction, though not with more vehemence, than Mr. Stanley ; and that archdeacon, the son of Dr. Bath hurst, the late Bishop of Norwich—and at least Mr. Stan ley's equal in professional attainments." The worthy Archdeacon, being a thorough Church reformer, naturally thought that it was incumbent upon hirn to give a practical exemplification of his prin ciples ; and having been (as he informs us) in diffi culties, the ingenious idea occurred to him that if he could get his twofold preferment exchanged for some one benefice "a little above it in rank," he should be relieved not only from the said difficulties, but from what was doubtless far more distressing to him—the pain of being a pluralist. For a time the accomplish ment of this trifling piece of Church reform was all that he pressed for, at least as far as regards England. But no—the Devil and Lord Melbourne laid their heads together to defeat it. " Your own strange conduct (you know what I mean !) when you were Secretary for the Home Department, has amounted to a neglect and ingratitude as astonishing as they will be proved (from your own written admissions of my father's claims, and of my own deserts and character) to be unjustifiable, denying me in the hour, as you know, of my distress, and greater distress to some of my father's family, even the chance of exchanging a part of my preferment for some other little above it in rank, and such as would enable me to answer the end of Church Reform in my case in haring one piece of preferment, instead of two, and yet help me in my difficulties—which was all that was pressed for in England." What was " pressed for" elsewhere is a wholly dif ferent matter, and constitutes, of course, a separate article of impeachment. " To avoid complying with my father's wishes, when the See of Killaloe fell in 1836, you made a sort of ex post facto law, so as with a show of decency to exclude me, and you declared that no Englishman should go to the Irish Bench, though my father was Ireland's martyr, and I am, on my mother's side, Irish !" This is hard enough, certainly. But the main dif ficulty seems to consist in determining whether the father or the son has been the greater sufferer. The latter, in spite of the Bishop's " wishes," and the A rchdeacon's " deserts," was scurvily refused the bit of Church Reform which he had " pressed for" in Ireland : the former, it seems, has actually been made a martyr of. Of course, the fates of Latimer, Cran trier, and Ridley, whose agonies from fire and fagot endured only for an hour, is not to be compared with the protracted and tormenting ordeal which the late Bishop of Norwich underwent at the hands of his oppressors. For thirty-two years did the venerable Prelate undergo his exquisite torture of a pair of palaces, a peerage, and some thousands per annum, till at last he . sunk under his trials, at the prema ture age of ninety. So much bad usage, heaped upon one family is, we believe, unprecedented. It appears, however, that Lord Melbourne's apo logy for being unable to meet the Archdeacon's views implied the existence of obstacles in a quarter which cannot at this moment be alluded to without the most serious and reverential solicitude. This the Rev. Gentleman treats as a mere unfounded pretext ; and then, proceeding on the supposition of its being true, insinuates very broadly, that if he could not be made a Bishop of, it was the duty of the Whig Premier to re sign. The mortified dignitary asks rather bigly, "If his Majesty (which I will never believe) be my oppo nent, in what terms shall I designate a Minister who would retain office on condition of a proscription worse than any of Augustus, Anthony, and Lepidus ?" Archdeacon Bathurst, to say the truth, is not a whit behind the chiefest apostles of Whiggery who have recently been promoted over his head. His claim to a Bishopric he honestly bases, not on his learning or piety or any of the Clerical qualifications which an upright Government always insists on, but simply on the fact of his having " faithfully served the liberal cause," which he knew would be a more powerful recommen dation to the Whigs than any other. In one point only does he appear to have been wrong in his calcu lations. As far as regards his assumption that politi cal services constitute the only ground on which a pressing parson can expect promotion from the Whigs, he was quite right. But in as far as those services were rendered by him in anticipation of a mitre than in requital of one, he has made an unfortunate mistake. The Whigs, having got out of him all they could, had enough to do with their Church patronage for enlisting the partisanship of other men. The poor Archdeacon, like ~a sucked orange, is therefore flung away. The Tories, after all, are discovered by him to be the only party in the State whose integrity of pur pose can be depended on. According to the admis sions which the Rev. Gentleman puts forth from his locus penitentice, they are the " truest friends." They do do not make, he says, " the pretence of justice the en gine of power and selfishness, nor trample on their prin. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Jrnue 12. ciples by cruelty and insincerity towards those who have most faithfully served them." The late Bishop had many weaknesses, but he was a man of honour, and of most amiable qualities. His son, there is no doubt, inherits the weak qualities of his father, and, we dare say, the other qualities also; we wish, however, that his father had another chronicler.— Times. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'Clock. The ATarquis of WESTMINSTER brought up tho report of the Committee on the Chester and Birkenhead Rail way Bill. Mr. BERNAL and other Members of the House of Com mons brought up several Private Bills, and the Punishment by Pillory Abolition Bill. On the motion of Lord SHAFTESBURY the Pillory Punishment Abolition Bill was read a first time. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from the freemen of Waterford. against the Irish Municipal Bill. On the motion of the Marquis of L ANSDOWNE the committal of the Public Works (Ireland) Bill was postponed until to-morrow. Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from North ampon and Staton against Church-rates ; also a petition from Ipswich, complaining of the mode of electing muni cipal officers, and of the proceedings taken in the Court of King's Bench in consequence, in reference to that borough. Mr. BERNAL then appeared at the Bar of the House, and stated that the Commons desired a Conference with their Lordships, on the amendments made by their Lord ships to the Municipal Act Amendment Bill. On the motion of Viscount MELBOURNE, the Mes senger was informed that Managers for the Lords would meet those of the Commons, presently, in Committee-room, No. 5. On the motion of the Marquis of DO WNSHIRE, the Belfast Harbour Bill was read a second time. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition against the Bill. Lord GLENGALL gave notice, that on Thursday he would present a petition relative to Irish fisheries, and would call the attention of their Lordships' House to it. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice, that on to-morrow he would put questions to the Noble Vis count relative to the war in Spain, which he considered he was justified in doing in consequence of the new features that war had assumed. Lord PORTMAN moved for an address to his Ma jesty for the Nineteenth Report of the Excise Commis sioners. The following Managers were then appointed to meet those of the Commons in the Conference :—The Lord Pre sident, the Lord Privy Seal, the Duke of Richmond, the Bishop of Ely, Lord Hatherton, Lord Strafford, and Lord Portman. The Managers then left the House. On their return, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE informed the House that the Commons had agreed to some of the amendments made by their Lordships to the Municipal Act Amend ment Bill, and had disagreed to others. The Marquis of BUTE presented petitions from Stir ling against travelling on the Lord's Day. The Earl of DEVON moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the laws which regulate the carriage of passen gers for hire on the Thames.—Agreed On the motion of Lord SHAFTESBURY, the Bristol Local Rates' Bill was read a second time, and to be com mitted to-morrow. Also the London and Birmingham Railway Act Amendment was read a third time and passed. The House then adjourned. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1837. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Juprz 12. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock. Mr. Le Blanc, one of the Masters of the King's Bench, presented returns of fees paid by attorneys on their admis sio❑ into the King's Bench, and also the expenses previous to admission. On the motion of Lord CLIVE, Hinde's Estate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. AGRICULTURAL BANK. Mr. LowTHER presented a petition from certain shareholders of the Agricultural Bank against the Bill for dissolving it. Lord STANLEY brought up the report on the Bolton and Presto❑ Railway. Mr. MAHER brought up the report on the Dublin and Kilkenny Railway. Mr. BROTHERTON moved for leave to bring in a Bill, to enable the Manchester Gas Company to extend and improve their works.—Leave given. The HoN. MEMBER also presented a petition from Warrington in favor of the Ministerial plan for the abolition of Church-rates. After a short discussion the petition was withdrawn on account of informality. Mr. WILKS presented petitions from parishes in Kent in favour of the Ministerial plan for the abolition of Church- rates. Sir W. FOLKES and Mr. ALaTON presented petitions to the same effect. Mr. BELL presented a petition against the abolition of Church-rates, and also a petition against the Poor Law Amendment Act. Mr. DOTTIN presented a petition praying that land lords might be compelled to pay the rates on all tenements under 61. General PALMER presented a petition from Bid), praying for the abolition of Church-rates. Mr. FIELDEN presented a petition, of which he had givcn notice, from the West Riding of Yorkshire, praying for the repeal of the Poor-law Amendment Act. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded at some length to state the nature of the petition, and to deprecate the working of the Poor-law Bill, but in so low a tone of voice as to be inaudible in the gallery. He was interrupted by loud cries of " Order." The SPEAKER said, that though notice of this peti tion had been given, still it was impossible that the busi ness could be carried on if Honourable Gentlemen took that opportunity of discussing the merits of any particular measure. The whole question of the Poor-laws would be before the House in a very short time, and it would then be competent to state his own views on the matter, and to refer to any petitions which had been presented on the subject. Sir CHARLES BLUNT presented a numerously signed petition from the Dissenters of Lewes in favour of the Ministerial plan for the abolition of Church-rates. Mr. BAGSH AW presented a petition from the high and low Bailiffs, and other inhabitants of Birmingham, praying for the establishment of Steam Navigation to India, FIRST FRUITS. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from an individual residing in London named Jeremiah Livingstone com plaining of the improper collection and appropriation of First Fruits. The Hon. Member would take that oppor tunity of giving notice that it was his intention on that day sc'nnight (as we understood) to move for leave to bring in a Bill for the better collection and appropriation of First Fruits. Mr. MILES presented a petition from Bristol in favour of the better observance of the Sabbath. Mr. C. FERGUSSON presented a similar petition from Cupar. Mr. FITZROY presented a petition from the Dissen ters of Lewes, against the Bill introduced by his Majesty's Ministers respecting Church-rates. Mr. HU ME presented a petition from certain inhabitants of Whitby, stating that their parish was taxed to the amount of 3,3421. for tithes ; that the curate officiating to 12,000 souls belonging to the parish received only 501. a-year from the tithes, and that within the last forty or fifty years the salary had been made up to 1801. from Q ueen Anne's bounty and other sources ; but the principle thing they complained of was, that the lease of the tithes had been granted in 1835 by the Archbishop of York for 2,6001., and that consequently the lessee would obtain 1,6001. during the seven years' lease. When a Com mittee on this subject should be appointed, the Hon. Mem ber said it would be his duty to move that the petition be referred to the Committee. The Hon. MEMBER then presented a petition from the householders of Chatham, and from 1,842 householders o f Dumfermline, praying for an extension of the suffrage to all Householders. Mr. WIGNEY presented a petition from Brighton in -favour of the Ministerial Church-rate plan. Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Exeter in favour of the equali zation of the land-tax. Mr. FAZAKERLY brought up a farther report from the Poor-law Committee. Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from Worcester, in favour of Sir Andrew Agnew's Sabbath Bill. Mr. W. PATTEN presented a petition from War wick against the abolition of Church-rates. Mr. LYNCH presented a petition from the shareholders of the Agricultural Bank of the county Galway, very nu merously and respectably signed, against the Bill for dissolv ing the Company, and praying to be heard by Counsel against it. Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from Edinburgh, against the Dundee Waterworks' Bill.—Re_ ferred to the Committee. On the motion of Mr. P. STEWART, the Stewart's Estate Bill was read a second time and ordered to be com mitted. Mr.R. STE U ART presented petitions from Kilmarnock, and two other places, in favour of the Scotch Municipal Bill, and one complaining of the facilities afforded in Scot land for clandestine marriages. Colonel WOOD presented a petition from the Guardian; of the Poor-law Union at Staines, in favour of the Small Tenements Rating Bill. Mr. ELLIS presented a petition from Coventry against the Bill for the alteration of the boundaries of cities and boroughs, and praying that Coventry might not be included in the provisions of it. MUNICIPAL (ENGLAND) AMENDMENT BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL brought - up the report of the Committee on the Municipal England Amendment Bill, upon the subject of which, after the report had been read by the Clerk, a conference was agreed on with the Lords. BOUNDARIES OF BOROUGHS BILL. Mr. DIVETT wished to know from the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department when it was his intention to proceed with this Bill. He was de sirous of obtaining an answer from the Noble Lord, as his constituents felt strong objections to some parts of the Bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that at the present mo ment he could not say when he could proceed with the Bill.—(Hear.) He had ao wish to hurry it through ; but as it was a measure difficult to discuss satisfactorily in the House, he trusted the Hon. Member would ascertain what the objections of his constituents were to the Bill, before it went into Committee. BUDGET. Mr. WALLACE seeing the Chancellor of the Exche quer in his place, and this being the 12th of June, wished to ask when they might expect the Budget ?—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could only give the Hon. Gentleman the same answer as had been given on a previous occasion, that if they were called upon to proceed with the least possible delay with the legislative business of the House it was scarcely possible for him to pro pose financial business. He was only anxious in conjunction with his Noble friend (Lord. J. Russell) to take an oppor tunity of bringing it forward when it would not interfere with the course of public business. While on his legs he would take that opportunity of stating to the Hon. Member for Greenock, in anticipation of a question on that sub ject, that he should to-morrow night bring in a Bill on the subject of the Post-office.—(A laugh.) Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that if the Right Hon. Gen tleman had said that in the present state of our commercial affairs there was good reason for postponing the Budget, that he could have understood—(Hear, hear) —but there was not the least pretence for postponing a statement of the financial condition of the country, which generally occupied only one night, on the ground that public business pressed. There could be no business of more importance than that which related to the financial statement. The Right Hon. Gentleman did not ground his delay upon the manufactur ing or commercial prosperity, but merely on the statement that other public business would not permit.—(Hear.) Mr. C. PELHAM said that his constituents had sent him into that House to look particularly after the financial affairs of the country ; but the Right Hon. Gentleman's statement had been so long postponed, that he (Mr. Pel ham) did not know what he was about.—(Cheers and laughter.) CORPORATIONS OF LONDON. Mr. WILKS inquired when it was the intention of the Noble Lord to introduce a Bill for the Reform of the Corporations of London and Southwark, founded on the Report of the Commissioners ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that he should not be able to do so during the present Session. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (ENGLAND) AMENDMENT ACT. Mr. BERNAL appeared at the bar, and informed the House that the Lords had agreed to a Conference with the Commons, to be held in Committee-room, No. 5, with respect to the Lords' Amendments to the above Bill. The Managers on the part of the Commons were Lord John Russell, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Wason, Lord Seymour and Mr. Hawkins. The Managers of the Conference having returned, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re ported that they had been to the Conference, which was ma• caged on the part of their Lordships by the Lord President, and that they had left their reasons and the Bill with their Lordships. ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY.—CHURCH RATES. Lord J. RUSSELL then rose to move for the appoin ment of a Select Committee to enquire into the mode o Oanting and renewing leases on the landed and other pr* perty held by Bishops, Deans, and Chapters, and other Ecclesiastical bodies in England and Wales, and into the probable amount of any increased value which might be obtained by an improved management, with a due consideration to the interests of the Established Church, and the present lessees of Church property. It was but right that the Mouse should know that he had proposed the present motion in consequence of the division that had taken place on the question respecting the abo lition of Church-rates, and the substitution of a plan by which an increased value would be derived from a different mode of managing Church property as proposed by his Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The consequence of that division was to affirm, by a small majority, the resolution that Church-rates were to be abolished, and that other means of repair ing the fabric of the Church were to be provided. That was the resolution as it now stood on the Journals of the House, and which the House had confirmed. It would not, therefore, he thought, be proper, even if his opinion were not so strong as it was, in favour of the plan, that the Government should propose to that House, or consent to the aban donment of that plan.—(Hear, hear.) At the same time, the majority on that question, while, perhaps, it was not smaller than might be expected, considering the obstacles and objections that stood in the way of the introduction of the plan, were not such as would justify the Ministers in the hope or expectation that a Bill founded upon that plan would obtain the assent of such a majority, as to enable it to pass into law during the present session. He repeated the majority was not less that might be expected, considering the objections made ; because it was to be considered that the plan as proposed came upon Par liament and the country altogether as a novelty— that it appeared to be a plan dealing with a vast mass of property, in which a great number of persons, many of them of great_weight and influence ; and there seemed to have been a totally unjust imputation thrown upon the plan that it proposed to abolish the means of keeping in repair the fabric of the Church without sub- - stituting any adequate -means for that purpose.—(Hear.) Considering that objection, and the short time ,the plan had been considered in the country before the adoption of the resolution by the House—considering also that many opi nions had already been made up upon representations of the plan before it was known—considering all these objec tions, the majority, though small, was still considerable tes timony in favour of the plan. lie thought it would not have been astonishing, considering the novelty of the plan, the many interests which were involved in it, and the acti vity with which it had been most grossly misrepresented— (Cheers)—it would not have been wonderful had there been a considerable majority against the plan. The result having been that the introduction of the measure was sanctioned by only a small majority, and it being con sequently deemed unadvisable to proceed with it during the present Session ; and also, as they, on the one hand had resolved not to abandon the plan, and on the other did not mean to proceed with it that year, it remained for them to inquire whether they could not find out some means by which the plan might be put upon another and a better foundation. For that purpose he proposed that the Com mittee should inquire into the latter part of the plan ; for he did not ask for the Committee in order to consider whether Church-rates ought to be abolished or not—that question remained to be decided by the House as a question of sound policy. He proposed that the inquiry should be confined to the present manner of leasing the Church property.—(Hear, hear.) Confining himself, therefore, to that part of the question, he would endeavour to lay before the House some of the reasons which he thought would justify the inquiry. It had been objected on the one hand that there would not be a suffi cient surplus even according to the plan as proposed by the Government ; while on the other it was said that even if there was a sufficient surplus it ought to be devoted to the religious instruction of the people—while the Gentlemen opposite objected to the plan altogether, as being destruc tive of the independence of the Bishops and other holders of Church property, as well as of the interests of the lessees. These were the objections to which he would then confine himself. He believed it was agreed on all hands that they would enter into the inquiry with a prima facie case before them to show that the present management of that property was neither for the interests of the Church, of the lessees, or for the benefit of the public at large. These were the propositions which those who opposed his motion would have to make out. The present plan of leasing that property was either for lives or terms of years, and fines were taken at certain periods, as in the case of a 21 years' lease. The usually fixed period was at the end of seven years. In a lease for three lives the fine was sometimes taken in the expiring of a single life ; but up to the present time the fines had been taken on the exchange of a younger for an old life. Now, the operation of this was that the party in whom the property was vested, the lessees, borrowing a sum of money, on condition of receiving which sum of money he sells to the person who had advanced an interest to commence, per haps, at the end of fourteen years, or the expiration of two lives. That sum of money being advanced on reversion— on a species of property that could not be called a desirable species of investment—was advanced some times for five per cent., and in other instances 7; 3 per cent. The description that Adam Stuith I gave of such cases was this ;--Ho said that some laud- lords, instead of taking the rent, took a fine for the renewal of the lease ; this was a practice which was the expedient of the spendthrift, frequently hurtful to the landlord and tenant, and always to the community. Those opinions were so sound, that he believed no gentleman in the House would attempt to combat them. It was clear that no landlord, who lived within his income, would resort to such a mode of obtaining money ; they would let their lands for fines but at a certain period of rent. Such, however, was not the condition of those who held this Church property ; and therefore whatever might: be the case in for mer times they found themselves unable to take the course which a landlord with property would take, viz., letting the leases expire, and renewing them for a certain term of years upon more valuable conditions. The Noble Lord, after adverting to the law upon this subject, observed that the consequence of those acts was, that from time to time lands had been let on leases—some on leases demised and others for terms of years, with a fine taken at a certain period for renewal : of course the result of this was that which he had mentioned, that the landlord did not obtain le full value of the property let. He would just now . . consider what were the effects of it. Supposing the Bishop had come into possession of this property, would his situation be a good one as regarded the possession of that property ? Of course it was very natural to suppose that he would be in rather an advanced period of life, not very much used to the management . of property of this kind, and not aware of the exact manner in which it ought to be managed. When he came into the possession, he would naturally ho anxious to be informed whether such an income was attached to the property as might not be a source of impoverishment to himself, and a ruin to his family. If he were to refuse to renew to the lessee, it was very probable he would obtain a similar value from others for the concurrent lease he was enabled to give. If, for in stance, one life in a lease of three lives was to expire, and he were to offer a concurrent lease to some other person, these persons would not come into the enjoyment of the lease till the other two lives had expired ; and therefore it was a property that would not be of very great value. He was, therefore, placed in a situation of considerable difficulty, if he wished to maintain the income which his predecessors had en joyed. Such were the disadvantages with respect to the lessor. There were other disadvantages with respect to the lessee. The lessee, for instance, who had an expectation of the lease being renewed, but no security that that lease would be renewed, and he was unable to lay out the same amount of capital, unable to. calculate with the same security to his children and his family, as a person in pos session of an estate would be able to do ; therefore, while the lessor would have the full value of the property, the lessee was not enabled to lay out sums on the property with security. The advantages that might be obtained from doing away with this condition, was well stated in a pamphlet written by Mr. Charles Henry Wellesley, and recently published. He would now put the question as regarded the Church in general, and as it regarded the community in general. It depended upon the age and temper of the party, as to how the interest of the Bishop or the lessee lay. He would put the case of a man just taken from the studies of his College or University ; and it was evident that he must be totally ignorant of his interest, and could not avoid being a loser. In the other case of a man of great worldly experi ence, with a large family, the Church might by his selfish proceedings sustain great loss and much injury in its cha racter.—( Hear.) Whatever were the disadvantages of the position in which the Bishops stood in that respect as regarded the lessees, they had been much enhanced by the Act of Parliament that had lately passed, and from the enquiries that had taken place before the Ecclesi astical Commissioners. The Noble Lord here instanced the case of the Bishop of Durham, who had been obliged to pay 11,000/., and to part altogether with 13,0001. per annum. In the case of the Bishop of Ely a sum of 4,0001. had been demanded by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, which they had afterwards reduced to 2,000/., although the Bishop de clared that that was a larger sum than the See could afford to pay. This was the instance of a Bishop who had always been opposed to a fixed income ; he was now anxious for a Parliamentary allowance. The Bishops had agreed to the late change by which all of them were to have a fixed in come. There was another Act passed last year which was for the restriction upon ecclesiastical persons granting leases ; it was rendered necessary by the arrangement which had been entered into with the Bishops ; and if the Chapters were reduced from twelve to four, and the property were diminished accordingly, it was evident that the four would have an interest in making as much as possible of the renewals, when eight parts of the twelve went to general religious purposes. Formerly it was the custom to change the lives, and thus afford a facility to lessees to sell their interests. There was then no difficulty in changing the lives, as there was a power of making over the interest. The Act of last year, however, took away that. Another clause in the Act requires a declaration that there is no abuse in the transaction, and that the lessor and the lessee will consult the interest of the commu nity. It was also enacted by that Bill that any person making a false recital should be considered guilty of a mis demeanour. This clause showed that the House con templated the possibility of a false recital, and that Par liament were not ready to take such transactions on trust. He merely adverted to this to show that the caution was necoosary, as abuses were recognised by the fact of Parliament taking the means to suppress them. He would now endeavour to show to those who held such property that a change was desirable in the mode of leasing out Church lands. In some instances it might be desirable to sell, and in others to grant, building leases for the purpose of improvement ; not to grant for building to the injury of the Church, nor to give up any interest which might be made to bear an improved value. He had in his hand a list of Acts passed with respect to Church property, and he found that sometimes the fee simple was disposed of, and sometimes leases of 99 years were granted. He would not go into the circumstances of any of these cases. It was very fit that a Committee should be appointed to inquire into cases of this kind, for where any thing might be appa rently unfair some explanation might be given which would clear it up, and justify it.—(The Noble Lord here referred to the case of a Prebend in St. Paul's, in which an Act of Parliament was passed making a lease for sixteen years for the Corporation. Ultimately, by an agreement with the Prebend, and by the sanction of another Act of Parlia ment, a lease was passed to the Common Council for 99 years, with the consent of the Dean and Chapter and the Bishop of London, and of this property only one-sixth came to the Church, whilst the rest fell to the Corpora tion and to Dr. Wilson and his descendants.) These cases might be explained satisfactorily before a Committee, but appearances were such as to require an explanation. At the expiration of the lease there would be a profit of 400,0001., and of this only one-sixth would accrue to the Church—(Hear, hear) —and the community in general. Instead of regulating such transactions by private Acts it would be well to have some supervising power ; and though the Hon. Member for Lincoln (Colonel Sibthorp), if he were in his place, might make his usual objection, he (Lord J. Russell) could not help thinking that a Commission on this subject would be of service as well to the Church as to the community in general.—(Ministerial cheers.) There were several other transactions which would show that the re solutions of his Right. Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer were called for. There were several instances where Church property had been made a matter of sale, and the greatest sales took place under the Act for the redemption of the land tax. This was a proof that Par liament was willing to sanction such sales as were made with advantage to the Church and the community. Having stated the objection which existed to the present te nure of Church property, he was of opinion that Honourable Members must see the advantage of some commutation. It would have the effect of permitting Bishops to attend to their episcopal. duties, instead of, on the one hand, entering upon speculations for which they wanted the knowledge of the world ; or, on the other hand, grasping as much as they could from Church property to settle on their own fa milies. The lessees, instead of being, as in the present instance, placed in a state of uncertain and vexatious ex pectation, would be put in a secure condition, and the renewal of leases, so troublesome and expensive—at tended in almost all cases with an expense of 301. or 40/., and in some instances with as much as 300/. or 400/., would be done away with. This would in itself be a great advantage, as amendments were made in cases of the most trifling mistakes. Besides that, the lessee is afraid to build, or plant, or renew a lease, as he may be subjected to some additional charge ; but by such a plan as that proposed he would be allowed the full profit accruing from any change, and great benefit would also accrue to the pablic. Due profit cannot be obtained from the productions of the land, nor can the tenant'culti vete it in a way the most likely to benefit himself. Won der has been expressed that a law may be made by which two parties can be gainers.—(Hear.) Now he thought it might be shown that both sides might be gainers. You might buy a house, or a horse, or a carriage, and gain might be made by both parties.—( A laugh.) He could easily conceive this ; the one party getting rid of what be did not want, and the other gaining the commodity of which he stood in need. He would not go into particular cases to show that fraud might be practised under the exist ing arrangement, but satisfy himself with expressing a con viction that a general;plan might be adopted by which both par ties might gain—the one obtain a secure title, and the other have a certainty of his income. With respect to the manner in which changes of this kind were effected he certainly remained of the same opinion, that the proposition of his Right Hon. Friend was one founded on fairness and jus tice, and conducive to the interests of both parties. No doubt there might be cases which would form an exception to the general law. There might be cases of a complicated nature, smelt as pt., , perty in wines anci ollwr prop,rty; .wt he was convinced that by the plan proposed great gain would accrue to the lessees as well as to others, by which the title of the property would be more secure, and both parties would have a more certain object in view. lie did not know on what grounds the proposition could be opposed. Hc could see if the present mode of letting Church lands was not objectionable that the lessees might require a pro bable amount for the increase of the value ; but he w ould_ not go into the proposition if there would be any increase of value, because the matter was so evident that attempting to discuss it would only throw a doubt on the resolutions to which the House had already given its consent. He wished to call the attention of the House to the probable am ount that the value of Church lands might be increased to, and to the mismanagement of the property. Many persons ob jected to the measure, because the interests of the dignitaries of the Church would be injured by it. But he thought that no such result would be the consequence ; on the contrary, that by the change the property would be greatly improved and better secured. It had been urged against him that the proposition of his Right Hon. Friend had been proposed and unanimously negatived in the Church Com mission. He certainly was one who negatived the plan , and did it on the ground that large sums might be ad vanced to make up private incomes and let the leases expire. It was stated as an objection that those who ad vanced the money would be gainers ; and that though there would be an increased value of the whole property no advantage, no portion of that increase, would go to the Church by the adoption of such a plan. He owned that these appeared to him well-founded objections ; but, on consideration, be could see no inconsistency in opposing and supporting the resolutions agreed to by the House. If they said the State should advance the sums, and the State should have all the advantage, the State or the parties ad vancing the money should be the gainers ; but if by an Act of Parliament the State alone was to advance the amount re quired, and to receive the amount of the increased value, then he said Parliament might dispose as it pleased of the surplus. Objection had also been made on the part of the lessees, but he thought that was owing rather to the particular plan p1:0- posed ; because no lessee denied that there would be an in owased value, though it might not be so large as the increase in the rent which the lessor might be disposed to ask. lie did not, therefore, see why some plan might not be adopted by which the lessees might be gainers with the rest of the community. He could not sec how any one could object to inquiry, unless they knew of something which they did not wish to meet the public eye.—(Hear.) He was willing to resort to that test of the proposition made by his Right Hon. Friend.—(Hear.) " We are not afraid," said the Noble Lord, " of any light that can be thrown on the ques tion by inquiry.—( Hear.) We think there should be in quiry, and accordingly have taken care that all papers and documents relating to the subject should be ready to be laid before the Committee, should the inquiry be gone into. I do not think any blame can be imputed to those who pro pose to submit a great plan to the test of inquiry. It will be for the House to say, after the Committee have reported , what plan they will adopt, and what will be the applica tion of the surplus, which must be considerable. I consider the best application of it will be a substitute for Church rates, in accordance with the resolutions of the House. cannot see any possible better application. Others say, is there is a surplus, it ought to be devoted to religious instrue, tion ; and those who say so ought to strengthen themselves by supporting the motion for inquiry—(Hear)—for if they can prove that the surplus that may arise from the increased value of the land should be set apart for religious instruc tion, in preference to the abolition of Church-rates, then we ought to have their support. I therefore do not see what objection can be made to the measure. It is for the interests of the Church, it is for the interests of the cow. munity ; and those who object to it only betray their un willingness to have facts exposed to public view ; and although some object to it, I think unnecessarily, because it may lower the pride and dignity of the heads of the Church, I prefer rather the good of the Church, the har mony of the community, and the religious instruction of the people."—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord concluded by moving for the appointment of a " Select Committee to inquire into the mode of granting and renewing leases of the landed and other property of the Bishops, Deans, and Chapters, and Ecclesiastical bodies of England and Wales, and into the probable amount of any increased value which m ight be obtained by an improved management, with a due consi deration of the interests of the Established Church, and of the present lessees of such property." Mr. G. PALMER objected to the motion, because the consequence of it would be to alienate Church property and make the heads of the Church stipendiaries. It was for the advantage of the Church that it should possess real pro perty, and that property, according to all the ancient laws of the country, ought not to be sold. By destroying Church property they destroyed every species of property held in the country ; because no tenures were so anciei t as the tenures of Church lands, and if they were destroYed what security was there for any property whatsoever ? support of these arguments he would quote a passage from • an eminent political writer, who, in the early part of his life , espoused the opinions of the other side of the H ouse , he meant Edmund Burke. The Hon. Gentleman here read • the passage in question, which adverted to a proposition of that day similar to the present. The House had been told that the dignitaries of the Church should no longer have real property, but that their emoluments should as sume the shape of stipends. Once let them become sti pendiaries, and they would soon cease to be Bishops. Sir HARRY VERNEY wished to ask the Hon. Gen" tleman who had just sat down, whether his Majesty's Go vernment had injured the property of the Church by toe Tithe Bill of last year. So far from it, that the Bill ba d very much improved Church property. Receivers had been greatly benefited by it, and payers had been greatly e ased. He (Sir H. Verney) should vote for the proposition of th e Noble Lord certainly, but he should not consent to apply any surplus to any but an ecclesiastical purpose while th e Church remained so inadequately provided for. Mr. GOULBURN, to the Noble Lord's m otion , should give all the opposition in his power, because he eon' ecived, notwithstanding the Noble Lord's statement, en d indeed in consequence of that statement, that it wa d fraught with danger to the property of the Church, a f r with danger to every other description of property. P e (Mr. Goulbourn) did not stand there to maintain what the Noble Lord called the pride and dignity of the Church but he did stand there to maintain the right of the Char' to enjoy in security the property assigned to it by the lag' and to enjoy the power of employing it in the disseminv tion of religious instruction. It was impossible to li sten to the Nobl Lord's speech without feeling that the fleu s ; were again called upon 'to pronounce upon the sanly question so recently under their consideration. The Noble Lord had indeed told them that he had abandoned al Church-rates Bill for the present session ; but he 80" that the smallness of the majority gave him great satisfaefi tion, as it afforded a proof of the approbation of the 0 1 1 sure by the country. He (Mr. G.) hoped that this kin. of proof would always be given whenever such a propoc tion was made. If the Noble Lord was satisfied with hie small majority, how much more so would he be wb e° b found himself in a minority ? Why, he would be the 1 1 ' , 1 1 3 ; piest man in the country ; and he could assure the N° do Lord that he (Mr. Goulburn) and his friends would u everything in their power to secure for him so high a g a ; tification. tification. He (Mr. Goulburn) did not deny that impsc ments might be made in the management of Church p r ,, perty consistently with the Church keeping that Pr o p s a s in its own hands. He had always said that the pl:ec ee re , of such employment ought to be employed in diffusing the ligious instruction. He was of that opinion still. If Noble Lord wished for an improvement in the in ti r' re mcnt of Church lands, it was his duty to bring a mel h i s for that purpose into the House on the responsibility °g the Majesty's Government. When an improvement inf,oo, management of the Crown lands was proposed, was a , oils mittee first appointed to consider the subject ? The Lle as Lord had at his own disposal means of inquiry as ar °l) , s any that such a Committee could possess. H e de. member of a Commission appointed for the purpose o the rising the bust means of employing the revenues nt Church to forward the pastoral instruction of the people.e.lo that Commission the Noble Lord would find the best ni of ascertaining the fact which he was desirous of kt ° ! ni t ij y l is and without danger. Had the Members of his Ide.lesdal Government no voice in that Commission ? They "%olio in number the Ecclesiastical Members of the C e ,, /o als sion. It was clear, however, that the object of the r ; " Lord was not to have the subject fully investigated' had other objects in view. When a Committee on . t o h o d taxation was proposed in that House the propoag e ' Right been very wisely resisted by the Noble Lord and the very ver y Hon. Gentleman opposite, on the ground that ,n lio ere appointment of such a Committee would injure tr P e n: se _ aoctf i et a h s; dit, and interfere with private pecuniary The Noble Lord ought now to bear in mind s rth e c arlY arguments which he used on that occasion. that one o part of the Noble Lord's speech he had said nsider the t the objects of the Committee would be to en,,,ch might best means of applying any surplus revenue of Chu rc h accrue from an improvement in the manageam I %one' in % l e t property to the abolition of Church-rates, _t a pol_ r. latter part of the speech he admitted that thal ti w," he ( . n Goulburn ) it might be expedient to postpone. -i n s o ," mo de: Goulburn) would ask the House if it was any s uch that the great object still in view was t ° a m P PI L naYn' e ,.. ‘ soufrcplhuusrctoh-trhaeterse?liefsoefethheolwandloendginttherisest fro rate on the interests of the Church. H i e n q c_ uu t ui n : :E q as ' it u e e ' s 6:l :: o ll : positive fact, that already the agitation w of Ch urch pew perty. Tenants of Church property had considerably affected the stabilihty d c ;anee d m°neY ° f their leases ; and persons who had a r thcir loans' t Pro citated t° re els Church property were anxious to recovern.,,,,e t ha t A a course, the appointment of spe . h a Comm ` , a U t ch CO I,LI .i'e : ~, „ 0 0 1. yr. present 260,0001. per annum of the 4av v