The Sun. — London, England, 1852-04-21 00:00:00

fiftb Vbition+ SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Cloch. IMPERIAL PAIILIAMEN T. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER tuck the Chair a; a few minutes after Twelve o'c►oc:k. NEW MEMBER. Mr. COCHRANE BAILEY took the oaths and his seat for the Nl.rimouth burghs, in the room of the late Mem ber, Mr. Blewitt. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Glasgow Union Arcade Bill was read a third time and passed. The 11 , -dina River N.ivigation Bill and the Rye Im provement Bill were also rand a third and passed. The Sat C.ld Bridges and tree* Bill was considered and agreud to. PETITIONS. Several petitions were previited against the May nooth rani. Mr. FERGgi presented a petition from Fife, praying for the ion ref reliaions houses. Sir CH ARLES BURRELL presented a petition from Sussex ag ainst thA .I(iiiitia sir. FREW EN presented a petition from Sussex against the malt tax. Mr. SL AN EY presented a petition from the metro polis in favour of the Loinstrial Societies' Bill; also similar petitioos from the operative tailors of Glasgow, from the Universal Soeiety f Salford, and from other parts of the c,nintry; also t w o p e titions from the Starewsother - bury, one against calling out the Militia, and against the church-rates. Mr. COCHRANE BAILEY presented two petitions from Abergavenny in favour of retaining the Crystal Palace. Mr. ADDERLEY present ed a petition from the Mu nicipality of Cape Town , complaining that the Legisla tive Conned of the colony had resolved to delay the pas sage of the ordinances which bad been sent out for granting a constitution to the colony, and imploring the House to pass a Bill during the present session for car rying the ordinances into etf.ct. RKENHEAD. THE LOSS OF THE BI Captain SCOBELL said, as the public were particu larly interested in knowing whether it was expedient or otherwise to fit vessels in compartments, he wished to inquire of the Secretary of the Admiralty whether he could inform him if the Birkenhead was built in com partments, and if so in how many? Mr. STAFFORD said he had to inform the Hon. and Galle,et Member that the Birkenhead ass built in five compartments. IRISH FISHERIES BILL. Mr. CONOLLY, to moving the second reading of this Bill, said he was not the advocate of any particular class or interest in Ireland, and would shriek from nringing forward a int ileum of such importance on any hat pub lic grounds. There were three interests connected with salmon fisheries in Ireland, and, though they were anta gonistic to each other, they had enly one common and identical object, viz., keeing up the supply of fish in the best and most approved manner. The public had likewise a great interest in the question, fur it was of importance to them that a good maximum supply of fish should always be maintained. What had been tho state of legislation on this subj-ci.? In 1342 a Bil; was passed which dealt with and conselWated are less than twenty five old statutes respecting fisheries in the sister country, but be felt jineified in seyeng that the mode in which that measure treated existing rtghts was shameful and unconstitutional. From tale time of Magna Charts, up 1. 1842 these fisheries were ViettletlY public property, though vary much drawn upon b 7 pricatedin terests, but since then the public ha d been de p rave om o e f their undoubted right ., and t he fisheries had bec a monopoly in the hands of private indivielu . air. The Bill of 1842 proceeded upon the principle as it Were was no such thing as public right; and be contende d that this was a very serious error. In in fact, este,- lished a monopoly in the landowners egainat the public right, and so the Learned Judge announced from the beach who tried certain persons at Waterford'for ire fringing its provisiene. That learned person, in point of fact, gave it as his opinim that the provisions of the Bill repealed the rights of the people in relation to fisheries as they were explained and conferred in Nltigna Cearte. The law as it now stood went urn the theory of non intetference by Government. It was indeed left to the pub , ic w see that it was properly en forced. and the cones quome was it was never enforced at 51. Now this detect in the law ought to be immediately remedied, tied a Bill pissed to give the upper pro prietors 0 t the Irish streams the same inducement to preserve the fish that were et.joyed by the proprietors on the lower waters. The 11th and 12:h Vic toria, rehting to this branch of th e bu bj, et. he readily admitted had worked exceeiingly: . .well, and all he wanted the House to do was to ex ten d an d enlarge its provisions. The Act of the Hon. Member far Youghall was also an insproiement upon the old sys tem; but still, notwiths , anding 41 these remedial changes in the law, the qaantity of fish in the Irish waters had of late years very a. riously diminished. The Gentleman then procetee 1 to read vestiges from the annual reports of the Iri,h Fisbery C,:mmiasion, with the view of showing that although there bad, since 1842 b en an inerease in the supply of fi,h, yet the in crea%e d d not proceed From the fruitful character of the waters, but from the facilities which the detective stele of t - e- tie -dford (.1 ;o p te me diaries the decrease on the take of salmon had been 50 eer cent , white she Westpo'r district was the only one woich showed any ied c:.t nof an increase. (Thies Hun Gen tleman proceeded e, read an (xtract in order to show that, at present, du lee the tu.oths ui Juce and July, when salmon is m st f,l-ntiful in the Dublin market, the prices had ris• n since the Act 1842. Irons three pence or tourpence per pound t, one shilling.) The amendments and unproven:l.M* on the old law pie po‘; d in the present Bie he could, from practice) knowled e e of the subject, receminend as advantageous in all respects, purticuletly in or.;.ing the mouths of the rivers for the tree ingress of the fish. It was his epieion that it the Guy. rnment thought it their duty to reject this BM without a lair inquiry, they would not be acting in the way • hich he had a tight to exp et, and be would implore all Members, whether Irish or Scotch, to assist in a measure which would bring credit upon themselves and prosperity upon their ellow-crearures. Lorrl NA AS complimented the Hon. Member upon the diligence and in'orma,tion which be brought to bear upon this question. He, himself, would yield to no one in the interest which he felt in the settlement of this very im portant and difficult question. In 1842 an Act on this subject was passed, which repealed tweuty-six former Acts,t and formed a new fishery code. Since that time six new Acts had been p ased on the same subject, and he was not prepared to say thet the prea.nt state of legisletton was saiisfactery. Of late years it we; underned that there had been a great decrease in the value of the se!mori fisheries, which some Perw'fis attributed to the Act w - 1842, some to the increase of draina ge , some to the hillier" of 6.!11 in the spawn bed, a nd Others to the brevity of elute fisheries. Whatever was there had b e n over fishing the cause it was undoubted that the number o' to ii:considereble extent, and rspidly decreasing. Ile admit ed that legisten ve but he Certainly woala'ri 'Telco ight necessary, of legislationtio. give hi s eo nseut to the me thodPrh°,hPc''e3 the Hun. Gentleman, the chief feae are et w aitogetr—the„ the awa one in teresth, 4 * to sweep y & Stake- weir o muere would be undoabtell y m , asure the rY for th e G ; ce r em ent to introduce some terlect, but it would be one to effsct all interests regally, and he could not help ! p l ying th at in his opinion ens ~ f the c hi e f tri , aus to b e atk,rEil must be to le ele h eit season. The Bat of the d i e n, period of the clmie was not cane :o which he could 7. 1 3 v i 1 1e Gentleman ho u ho ;. d re t m h e a nt h had i s iup p or r, card constd.rog t h at the his undivided attention fixed upon the subject, t°r thehe prtet"ent'H". Gentleman wou'd postpone thi s Mr. MONS ELL was glad t hat WS ß ee ill part, Government opposed this Bill, bi cause, for his own Ireland dttrtio bated the We alarm irg decrease of fish legislation. By some mysterious influenc e the fish seemed to retreat before the advances of that House. Mr. SCULLY said that the great want. felt in Ireland was want of lands—(Laughter) — he meant want of funds to improve these tisheries. Scotlaed had a g ea „ t of 14,000/, per annum for the purpose of improving the deep sea fisheries, and the river fisheries were of qu i te e inactivi:y of the as much imp' Trance to Island as the deep sea fie seri es were t) Scet:and. He ecmolained of Fishery Board in ; they h o not only done no good, but in setae instances had even (lane harm, and* considerably injured the ti.shA..es, and thwarted the efforts of privet(' persona. He thought that Ga. vernment alone could successfully legislate on this sub ject, and he hoped chat the Hon. Member for Donegal would withdraw the measure for the present. Mr. H. HERBERT also recommended the with drawal of the Bill, and h o p e d that the Government would turn its attention towards this important subject. He also must bear testimony to the injudicious and arbitrary conduct of the Fishery Commissioners; and not only had they frequently been guilty of local and individual injustice, but they bad failed even at that price to produce any general and universal benefit to the fisheries. C apta i n JONES said that he thought the great reason of the decrease in the Irish fisheries was the shortness of the chose season, and the best means of rem edying the present evil would be t o l e n gt h e n the' close season. If the Hon. Gentleman did nut withdraw the Bill he should move that it be read a second time this day six months. Sir W. SOMERVILLE expressed his hope that the Bill would be weihdrawn. He was rejeiced to hear that it was the intention of the Goverment to bring forward some measure on the subject. The great and continued decrease .n in the Irish fisheries was a point of great irue oe. and it behoved all Irish Members to du their H et to ree ve , H e was _ e the cause which led to their falling off. such g „: l. ° Lbimself so much inclined to believe that tending 0 1 ,7 1 7 0 41 : e tagea would be found to result from ex pert of the e v il ha rm], but be thought that a great p.aceupen the Mr. Weerr Esi aeulted from the legislation of 1842. taken .. to aeght the legislation which had very instructiv e : xt bSeet of Irish fisheries furnished number of Acts had tO the Hous e . A considerable sen t Bill, whi c h wise p r e : d e ?' beenpassed., and the pre statutes, contained to le ss tV an a ' to consolidated former that previous legislation h ad l r 6o denies. Ha admitted ful, but he doubted whether ev e j, b, ' , en. v er y success . Impossible that nature in producing somethin g . /I`..."ltion would assist a measure of such great magnitude -"- discussed and passed in the present 1 , 4 = k1 be perfectly as it did with rights guaranteed by Aa a r ue . rs interfering No doubt it was exedient that an inq uu .,.• -4 „ruliara ent . - a_tituhd to ascertain - OSPlet.9f 7d6, -.4 t, be J in 144194 Ireland, gad ihe liegibir — r 'wow ni . aft, _ TIIE SUN, from the statement of the Secretary for Ireland, that there was a disposition on the part of the Government to do everything that was necessary for that purpose. Hts swprtse was, not that there had been a diminution of s%lmun, but that a single salmon was to be r ttud in Ireland. It was impossible for salmon to grow large when they were killed young, or to multiply before they were married. If any legislative measure could be de vised to remedy the evil, the Government would con sider it their dory to propose it to the House. Mr. FRE WEN thought that a remedy might be found in the props application of the existing law. Mr. CONOLLY replied, and intimated that he would leave the 13111 in the hands of the Government, feeling assured that they would take it up. The Bill was then withdrawn. BUILDING OF CHURCHES, &c., BILL. Mr. FRE WEN moved the second reading of this Bill, the main object of which was to provide for the repairs and erection of churches in parishes where there was a lav population, and a goud endowment for a el,rgyinan in existence, but where no service was per torawd in consequence either of the church being in a ruin )us condition and uninhabitable, or of there being no church at all. Tne SPEAKER intimated that there were certain clauses in the Bill which did not come within its title. The Bill must therefore be withdrawn. Mr. FitEvVELNI said, of course he .must bow to the decision ut the StAltkrr. Mr. GLADS LONE also pointed out other clauses which sv, , re not included in the title. He thought the Hot , . Member, before introducing the Bill, ought to have submittod it to a preliminary itquiry. The Bill was then withdrawn. PARISH CONSTABLES' BILL. Mr. DEEDE' moved the second reading of this Bill. Captain SCOBELL thought the provisions of the Bill would not sufficiently encourage parish constables to remain permanently in their office. Sir JOHN TROLLOPE observed that the Bill would impose a large and entirely new charge on the poor rates for the maintenance of parochial and superinten ding constables. He thought that the fund for the re lief of the poor ought not to be charged With an expense of this nature, which was en tirely foreign to it, and which ought to be met by a special police or parish-constable rate. He did not make these observations with the view of oppo,ing the second reading, but he trusted that when the Bill went before Committee hie objection might.be remedied. Atter a few observations from Mr. AGLIONBY and Mr. FACILE, the Bill was read a second time. ENFRANCHISEMENT OF COPYHOLDS BILL. Tnis Bill went throuKh Committee, INDUS ITLIAL AND PROVIDENT PARTNER- SHIPS BILL. Mr. SLANEY moveti the second reading of this Bill, which he said was to give to persons of small means co operating together the benefit of a cheap tribunal for reference. He should have no objection to the Bill Eteing reforr , d to a Sr:lrct Committee. Mr. HENLEY said be approved of the principle of the Bill, but he thought it would be necessary to refer it to a Select Committee. The B►ll was then read a second time and ordered to be referred to a Select Committee. PROCLAMATION II Al ASSEMBLING PAR- LIMIEST r BILL. This Bill was rend a tase ud time. BURGHS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a 'hied LRime and posed. I Colonel SIBTIIORY gave notice that it was his in tention to move amendments on this Bill, but not to oppose the principle altogether, as had been erroneously supposed. Mr. P ACKE presented a petition against the Militia Bill. _ INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT PARTNER SHIPS BILL Mr. SLANEY presented a number of petitions in favour of this Bill. The Muse then adjourned. YORK SPRING MEETING. (THIS DAY.) (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH). (Continued from our Fourth Edition.) Tba Consolation Scramble. Puritan ... ••• ... ... ... ... ... 1 Agnes Wick field ••• ••• ... ••• ••• 2 Won easy. Yolk Hotel Plate. Cleveland ••• ••• ••• • . ••• ••• 1 Priam the Third ••• ••• ••• ••• eel. 2 CHESTER CUP. Cossack is scratched. HEALTHOF LONDON DURING THE WEEK. (From the Registrar-General's Report.) The mortality of Lmadon again exhibics a alight in crease, the deaths in the prev week (ending the 101 i of April) havtng been . 1,051, those in the week that ended lest Saturday being 1 092. In the ten corres ponding weeks of 1842-51 toe average number of deaths was 944. which, it raiscd in proportion to increase of p pulAtion, becomes 1,038. The mortality 4 - f last week th. r,tore a steeds the cur, ected average by 54 deaths. Ia comparing the returns of the last two weeks, it ap pears that there is a small increase in epidemics, in die ea.es of the nervous system, the heart, and the dige,tive organs, but a dot:ream) in diseases of the organs 4.f re spi t a'ion, and also in the tubercuiar class. Small-pox, which iu the previous week was fatal in 34 cases, turners in the pre-eat return 38, which are those of 31 children and 7 adults, 6 of whom were 20 years of age and upwards. In 6 cases it is sta'ed that vie cioation had Oleo previously pqrformecf, and in these, the patients died at the fullowirg ages:-2, 3,7, 10, 22 27 yesri. M-a,les has incress. din the two weeks fri.in 11 deaths to 18; ty phue, remi•tent fever, &(,.. from 51 1,0 56. It.fluetz. nuusba:rect iu the two weeks respectively 4 and 6 cases; croup S and 10. Last week there were 2 caused by syphilis, and 1 by nt - ma. The wife of a lanour, r, hged 26 years. died suddenly on 31st March, at 21, Goodwai.'s-yard, Whitechapel, from cholera. An if (pest was held oil the body. The class which includes diseases of the respiratory organs mill exhibits a great excess above the ordinary amount at this period; we number of deaths referred to it last week being 214. whilst the average of correrpond ie.,: weeks. corr. cted /or increase of population, is only 165. In th• se weeks the actual nua.bfrs ranged from 107 t. 4 185, which tarter amount is much below what is now experienced. Bronchitis predominates, and, with the exception of phthisis, produces et present a greater mortality than any other disease on the list. It carried riff 102 persons; pneumonia, 77. Phthisis was tuts' to 139; its mortali y, which is always great, is not sensibly ag,ravated by causes that have given additional force to otner &seas , s. STATE' OF THE WEATHER DURING reta PAST WEEK. SUNDAY.—The sky was covered with cloud till 101 a. A.m., and clear during the remainder of the day. Mom:ay.—The sky was overcast till 911. 30m. A.M, and clear afterwards. Tuanay.—Three.fourths of the sky were covered till 9h. A.M.. and clear during the remainder of the day; stratus and haze. EDNESDAY —The sky was cloudless throughout the day. TH u aSDAY.—Three- fourths of the sky were covered till 9:1. A.M. clear until 612. r.m., and overcast afterwards; cirrostratus. FbIDAY.—The sky was covered with cloud till noon, and clear during the remainder of the day; cirrocumulus and cirrostratus. Z•ATUNDAY.—The sky was clear till near noon, three fourths were covered with cloud until 7h. P.M,, and overcast at terwarth ; cumulostratus and cirrostratus. FLECTiticlTY.—April 14, between Oh. and 3h. P M , and on April 17, after noon, positive, with moderate tension. The mean reading of a thermometer placed on the main mast, and read each day at 9h. A A.M. was 45.0 u; and the mean reading at 9h. P.M. was 43.84; the mean readings at the Royal Ooservatory for the same times were 47.6 1 and 43.0 respectively. The reading of the barometer increased from 30 . 013 in. at the beginning of the week to 30'19 in. by 9h. A.M. on the 130, and decreased to 29 72 in. by the end of the week. MORTALITY in the METRO PO LIS. NUMBER OF DEATHS FROM ALL CAUsES REGISTERED IN THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY. APRILL 17, 1552. * ...232 Epidemic, End...rale, and Contagious lea ... 48 Diseases of Uncertain Seat ... *** .. 198 Tubercular Diseases ... ..- ••• ~.. 16 . 1 . 3 . Diseases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses:. Diseases of the Heart and Blood-vessels ... ••,. 4 ' 5 Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs o f Respiration ... ... --- •'' ... 214 Diseases of the ... Stomach, Liver, and other Organs of Digestion,.. ••• ..• -•• ••• Diseases of the Kidneys, &o. •• , .... Childbirth, Diseases of the Uterus, &o. ... Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Muscles Diseases of the Skin, So. ... Malformations... ... ... '" "'Premature Birth ... ... ~. Atrophy ••• .•• ••• ..• Old Age ••• ••• ••• ••• ... 46 Sudden ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ... .. . 3 Vi o lence, Privation, Cold, and Intemperance ... 34 C aus es not specified ••• ... ••• ••• 55 ... 12 DEATHS FROM ALL CAIIBEII --...., ••• „„„, Popnlation 1,092 Deaths In corr.- Enumerated, OPOnding week 1851. Deaths the of 1851. in Week W es t Districts... 376,427 ••• 203 . • • 174 North Districts.. 490,396 .. 204 ... 198 Contra' I Astricts 393,256 ... 182 ... E a st Districts ... 485,522 ... 194 ••• 205 - 220 boo th Districts .. 616,635 ... 244 ••• 266 --- ___ Totals.... ..... 2,362,236 ... 998 1,092 Males ... ••• ..• ••• 5,51 Femalas ... 541 BlBTlib IN Ilth WEEK. Males ••• ••• ••. ••• .•• 805 Femalas •.. ..• •.• ••• ••• 839 • Total ... 1,644 *ln this number are included 36 by Scarlatina ! 47 by Typhus Fever. and 15 by Diarrhcen. STATISTICS OF STRIA - "• The following statistics of strikes are taken from the various returns published by the various trades unions where the several strikes took puce: — To support the weavers' strike, at Heywood, in 1844 5, the operatives of that district bad to subscribe nearly 5001, which, with the loss of 150 persons' wages for 10 weeks, at 7s. each, will .make the above sum into 1,1201.; this Rum t !tided ko tfie iqwaustalued throusil 411 the Ming stopplOg ID COP' LONDON, (pence of the strike, may be put down at 2,0001. The money subscribed to support Messrs. Jones's weavers, of Oldham, in 1845, amounted to 3.50 e/, which, with the loss of the Wi-aVlira' war s fur 36 weeks, will amount to 7,000/. The weavers' strike at Ropon, in the same year, cost the operatives, in money subscribed and loss of wages for eight weeks, 7001. The turn-out of Messrs. Collinge and Marsden's weavers, Oldham, in 1850, coat, in loss of wages for 20 weeks, 1,0001., and the money subscribed to support them amounted to 7161.; total 1.716/. The strike of the Limefield weavers near Bury, and the weavers and mill hands of Messes. Schofield, near Littleborough, cost in money subscribed 1,3001; loss of wages, for eight weeks, about 1,6001.; total cost of strike, 2 900/. During the strike of Messrs. Ogden's weavers, of Oldham, in 1851, the operatives lost 1,200/. in loss of wages and money subscribed to ,support the turn-onts. The weavers' strike at Staly bridge, in 1850, cost about 1,000/. The weavers' strike at Droylesden, in 1851, cost in money subscribed 1,2001,. which, with the loss of twenty-four weeks' wages, will make a total of 3,2201. The strikes at Hyde have cost the operatives more than 2,000/. To support the Pendleton strike the operatives had to subscribe be t een 7,0001 and 8,0001, which, with the loss of wages durirg the. strike, will not be far short of 20,0001., us the money lost to the operative , ' in that contest. Total cost of the above strikes, 39,736/. During the last few ) ears the weavers within a circle of ten miles around Man che"er have Lst—yes, worse than lost-40,0004.-11.Jan ' el:este Examiner. LOLA MONIES IN BOSTON. Yesterday the Uouutess of Lands&ldt, by invitation, visited the Grand Lodge rooms of the Freemasons at the Masonic Temple. She also visited the Boston Atheneum, at which place she was presented to many of out - tirat eitszne. Today she will visit the prominent public seho )Is, by invitation of the principals. Before_ her departure from the city, she will likewise visit the public institutions at South Boston, as she has expressed a great desire to see these model institivions. At tentions crowd upon her.—Boston Bee, March 25. The largest and most respectable audience ever as sembled within the walls of the Howard, attended last evening on the occasion of the benefit of Lola Monte. Every part of the house was densely packed. A.very striking and commendable feature was the presence of a large number of ladies, who seem at last to have awakened to the necessity of beholding this famed &n -sense. Her career henceforth in the East is settled, for having overcome the sensitiveness of the fairer portion of the inhabitants of this " Cty of the Puritans," as it is sometimes called, nothing further remains to complete her triumpb. The audience was very enthusiastic. The new ballet of Bay was received in the most flattering manner. It is prAuced in the grandest style and ex hibits the artistic powers of the Countess in a highly favourable and gratifying manner. At the conclusion of the performance ehe was called before the curtain. and vociferously cheered. When the applause subsided she advanced to the footlights, and in a voice some what subdued by emotion, delivered the following brief address:— " Ladies and Gentlemen—l beg of you to receive my most sincere and gra.eful thanks for the generous re ception I have met with in your beautiful city of Boston—the cradle of Liberty—the Athens of America. —(Cheers.) May I hope ever to merit your kind pa tronage. Once more, from my heart, I thank you all. Ladies and genth men—good night." She then gracefully kissed her hand to the audience, end retired amidst great cheering. About midnight Lola was serenaded by a splendid band of music. Thy compliment was handsomi ty received by the generous and beautiful Countess.— Boston 7 imes. March 20. WESLEYAN REFORM.-1101-t evening a meeting of the advocates of Wesleyan Reform took place at Exeter Hall, Strand, fur the purpose cf reviewing the proceedings and recommendations of the Conference Memorial Com mittee, and of the President's select laymen. Mr. G. W. Harrison, of Wakefield, occupied the chair, and stated that the main object of the meeting wasto obtain a reform of M e th o dism in its judicial and diciplinary organization, siace the ministers of their connexion had for a long time past teen more anxious to obtain ecclesiastical power than to spread evangelical truth. The secretary then read a " declaration of principles:" which stated that it bad been deemed expedient, in vindication of the rights and liberties of the people called Methodist!, to prepare a document set ting forth their object and intentions, and expressing a belief that the restoration of all preachers, officers, and members, who had been expelled in consequence of the recent proceedings of the Conference, w as e s sential to the future peace and prosperity of the connexion. -The Rev. William F. Griffiths, one of the expelled ministers, pro posed, and the Rev. W. L. Griffiths seconded a resolution protestnig against the claim of the President's select lay.. men to be representatives of the Methodist people, and de nouncing the proceedings.of the Conference Memorial Com mittee and lay Convocation as an insult to the Methodist Societies, and subversive of the true interests of Christianity. The motion was agreed to, and was foLowed by other reso , lurions of a similar tendency, after which the Proceedings terminated with a vote of thanks to the chairman. THE LONDON GAZETTE, April 20. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. Henry Cooke, batter, Leamington Priors, Warwickshire, BANKRUPTS. William John Dsrke and James Porter, builders, Hay fie'd-place, Mile End-road, to surrender, 4, at two, and May 31, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards, official assignee, Sambrook-court, Basinghell street; Surr anti Urinate, Lombard-street. Edmund Spettigne and George Farrance, booksellers, Chancery-lane, April 30 and June 4, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannon, official assignee, Alder manoury ; 'Pilsen, Clarke, and Merice, Colemau-street. John Dawson. surgeon, Tolleshunt Darcy, Essex. April 30, at helt-past eleven. and June 4, at eleven, at the Gay tof 131 kruptcy. Nicholson, official assignee, Basingeeil-street; Abell, Rumney-terrace, Horseferry road and Colchester. Widiarn Hodge, wholesale manufacturing stationer, Great M.rlborough.streer, Westminster, May 5, and June 8. at one, at er a Conrt of Bankruptcy. Stausteld, official assignee; Link!ater, Sise-lane, Bucklersbury. John lilies el.iekins, grocer, Woolwich, April 29 at &ve, and May 27, at eleven, at the Court of Beek ruptcy. 8.-11, official assignee; Baths, America-square. Patrick B irn., provision dealer, Liverpool, Auer 4 and June 2 at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Cez nuve, official assignee. Liverpool; Yates, jan., Li ve, pool. Mary Fouracre, innkeeper, Wigan, Lancashire, May 1 and 17. at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Mackenzie, official assignee, Manchester; Price, Wigan. INSOLVENT DEBTORS. T. Sinfield, General Post-office sorter, Trinity-street, Liverpool road, Islington. Henry Blore, picture dealer, Stanley-street, Chelsea. W. N. Bobinsou, saddler, St. John , street. H. H. Creel, clerk in the House of Commons, Duke street, St. James's. F. R,tbinaem, cheeseraonger, Church-street, Shoreditch. E. 1-1%11, coffee-house keeper, Peter's-bill, Doctors' Cum. E A. Gairn, dentist, Henrietta-street, Covent-garden. John Benton, Acton•ste eet, Gray's Inn-road. Thomas Murray, 'minter, Piinees-square, Kennington. Thomas J. Winter, attorney-at• law, Richrnead, Surrey. N. Daniell, dal ist, ' Upper Gordon-street, Euston-square. G. Ross, cornet 14th Light Dragoons, Brixton-road. E. Irving, tea dealer, Castleowerby, Cumberland. W. Levee, jun., butcher, Gosfortb, Cumberland. T. F. Mills merchant, Stanley-street, Brompton. P. Bishop, licensed victualler, Birmingham. H. Blume, maltster, Birmingham. W. James, provision dealer, Beaufert, Brecknockshire. W. M.obberley. brick make.., Lye Waste. Worcestershire, S. Mitchell, baker, Middlesborough, Yorkshire. E. Collins, brass founder, Birmingham. J. George, motet surveyor. Coventry, Warwickshire. T. L. H. skin, tanner, Werrington, Devonshire. E. Hosmer, leather cutter, Tonhridge Wells. 0. W. Carringtun 9 plumber, Blackneath-hill. C. T. Kirby, linendraper, Fe!mouth. T. Grimmitr, malster, Coventry. I. M. Lindley, currier, Manchester. 'V. Marelaaet, shepunan, Ramsgate. J. March, screw bolt maker, Chowbent. Lancashire. J. Wrigglesworth, licensed victualler, Liverpool. J. N. Clark', ship chandler, Liverpool. W. Donbavand, journeyman (logger, Manchester. J. Hornsby, bookbinder, Blandford Forum, Dorchester. R. Green, innkeeper, Northampton. N. Kantrowitz, cigar dealer, Manchester. DIVIDENDS. At the Court, Basinghall.street. K. Dinedale, Oxford-street, saddler, May 14, at half past eleven—T. F. Piper, Lawrence-lane, Bishopsgate, and Victoria-road, Pimlico, and Landport, Hampshire, wholesale stay-maker, May 14, at eleven. In the Country. W. Foster, Great Bolton, Lancashire, confectioner, May 13, at eleven, at the Court, Manchester — T. U. Anderson, Wellington, Shropshire, mercer, May 12, at half past eleven, at the Court, Birmingham. PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS. N. B. French, Broad-street, City, merchant, Is. 50., on Thursday next, and three following Thursdays, be tween eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Graham, Cole man-stre et. G. Small, Folkestone, tailor, ss. 4d., on Thursday next, and three following Thursdays, between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street. Be Selby, Burleigh-street, Strand, wine merchant, 6d., on Thursday ne xt, and three following Thursdays, be tween eleven a nd two, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman ,street. Stepney-green, iron and coal merchant, G. Barlow , Is. id on Thursday next, and three following Thurs ., day s , between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Gra ham, Coleman - stre et. ta ilor, 63.,0n Wednesday, April 21, and and two, on any subsequent Wed nesday, between eleven E. Wilkinson, at the office of Mr. Morgan, Liverpool. eel, I Liverpool, coffee-house keeper, Bs., Mary- Ann K r on Wedne s day, April 21 , (-) any subsequent Weduesday , between eleven and two , at the office of Mr. Morgan, Liverpool_ WilkinsonJ. , Birkenhead , C heshire, builder, Is. 2d., on Wedn e sday, April 21, or any subs; qte..nt Wednesday, between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Morgan, Liverpool. J. Kaye, Pimlico, coal merchant, 411., any Wednesday, between eleven and three, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Beeinebell-etreet e S. Dixon, Leed s Yorkshire,draper, ss. lide any Wed- S. b ete , ' o ffice of Mr. aim eleven and three, at the Whitmore, R ie —" —Rhsll.street. • NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES. (At the Court, Baeinghall-street.) G. Haines, Northampton,l2, at grocer. May half past one-11. Billin g , see., and R. Billing, jun., Read ing, brickinakers -21., 12, at half - alt son, York . buildings , e lphi , coal merchant, 'May 14, at twelve---A. Dean, Br Abton, clothier, May 15, at half- I past one. . = ln the Country. G . Hopkinson, L ice spool,:. each b u ilder , May 13 , at 43Tev, ot the WWI, Liyorp oc) 64...geogy rEelecite Lancashire, builder, May 11, at eleven, at the Court, I Liverpool—J. Heywood and J. Heywood, Liverpool, provision merchants, May 12. at eleven, at the Court, Liverpool--R. Wells, Brigg, Lincolnshire, draper, June 2, at twelve, at the Tosvn-hall, Kingston-upon-Hull— H, Hayling, jun., Hereford, grocer, May 13, at half past eleven, at the Court, Birmingham—J. Clark, Willenhall, Staffordshire, bolt manufacturer, May 12, at half-past eleven, at the Court, Birmingham—J. James, Netherton, Worcestershire, tailor, May 13, at half-past eleven, at the Court, Birmingham. CERTIFICATES GRANTED . R. Billing, jun., Reading, briektnaker, certificate of the second class—C. Sims, Dtinmack's-wharf, Upper Ground street, Surrey, wh • rfinger—J. W. Dawson, New Bridge street, Blackfriars, wine merchant, certificate of the se cond class—T. E. Williams, New Bridge-street, Black friars, wine merchant, certificate of the second class — W. L o ckyer, Old-street, St. Luke's, and King-street, St. Giles's-in-the•Fields , baker , certificate of the second 01 thirdss—j class—W NVhitmore, Hackney, d ra p er , ce rtificate of the Benniug, Fleet-street, City; law book seller ant publisher, certificate of the second class—W. Taylor, Lock's-fields, Walworth, and Wood-street, City, flock manufacturer, certificate of the - third class—W. W. King, Liverpool, chemist and druggist, certificate of the second class.— U. MlColl, South Shields, bookseller, certificate of the second class. - -T. Harris, Caaaburne, Cornwall, grocer, certificate of the third class.—T. Fray, Wigan and Manchester, check manufacturer, certificate of the seconki class.—T. Ranssden, Liverpool, timber merchant, certificate of the first clams, twenty•one days after April 8 —S. Mayor, Liverpool, ship chandler, cer tificate of the second class, twenty-one days after April 16 . —T. Cottiugham, West Barkwith, Lincolnshire, ourn merchant certificate of the third class. PARTNERSHIPS DIS . OLVED. J. Wilkinsonand spinners—A. W. Wilkins:ni, Manchester, c Halsey and h Halsey,mi c hemists—D. ts— P. B Sa l ter t o n, Devonshire, linen-drapers—J. Spreechley and B. t A S pal d in g, l e e t i e g r h s and J. W. Purves, Baleen Heath, Wor c estershire, rail way con tractors —A. Shand, S. W. Shand, and F. Shand, Li ve rpool, merchants—T. Daniel,' and G.R. F. Had d g.,Lincolnshire, S dersley, Kingston-upon-R o n, auctioneers—T. Brown and J. T. Nottle, Sunderland, ship brokers—J. M`Queen and J. B. M Queen, Southampton, drapers—T. Gallo way and R. Brown, Newosstle-upon-Tyne, pro vision dealers—W. Lewis and A. Lewis, King William-street, City--W. G. Watson and H. S. Davis, Leadenhall-street, City, export oilmen—W. J. Warner and H. Armstrong, Upper North-place, Gray's-inn - roa d,eaa e-- meter manufacturers—J. Whaley, T. Turnbull, and J. Stead, Bradford, Yorkshire, plumbers (as far as regards J, Stead) —W. Fletcher and T. Lockett, Lnnguor, Staffird,hire, woollen drapers—T. Smith and W. C. Keswick, Liverpool, sailmakers—F. Bernard and A. Lemon, Manchester, importers of fo reign goods—J. Haigh, J. Barrowelough, B. Edmond son, J. Green, E. Lee, J. Haigh, and J. Green, Ports mouth, Lancashire, cotton spinners (as tar as regards J. Barrowclough)—EL Daniel, R. Ovvtram. and J. S. Buckle, Blanchester, commission agents—T. Powell and J. Warburton. Warrington, L a ncashire, grocers—B. Crabtree and J. France, G ro mersel. Yorkshire, dyers— J. Moss and W. L. Hatton, Featherstone-street, St. Luke's, linendrapers—J. Harrison and J. Hardeestle, Eastcheap. City, colonial aglents—C. Peverill e a n d W. Skidmore, Birmin g h am, dea.4l in Sheffield goods—C. Scaife, G. Scaife, and J. Scaife, Barton, Yorkshire, tailors (so for as retard. G. Scaife) INSOLVENT PETITIONERS. H. Wearing, Manchester, tailor. J. Jackson, Gorton, Lancashire. J. Shaw, Manchester, farmer. J. Shaw, Manchester, carter. E. Wharton, Wintringham, Lincolnshire, pig jobber. A. Clapson, East Grinstead, s u pcx, licensed victualler. J. Sanders, Bideford, Devonshire, farmer. C. Cuss, Gainshorough, Lincolnshire, licensed hawker. B. Eddison, Worksop, Nottinghamshire, surgeon. R. B. Polden, Ringwood', Hants, butcher. WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 21, 1862. investigation of the subject by a Committee. The ob ject of the endowment was to ensure a loyal- Roman Catholic priesthood for Ireland. The question in the first place was, had Maynooth pro- ciuced a loyal priesthood for Ireland, or was it breeding up a priesthood, not only for Ireland, but for the colo nies and England also?—(Hear.) If that was so the question would be materially altered. The withdrawal of the grant would be a grave step, and he did not say that it would not be better still to continue it, but he required investigation. He believed that several wisre prerentations had been made at the time when the Bill of 1845 was proposed. He did not believe that the po verty of the college was such as it had been represented. He did not believe that the students were suffering from the privations stated by Sir Robert Peel, and he had con siderable doubts whether the funds for the education of Roman Catholic priests for Ireland were appropriated solely for that purpose.—(Hear.) Earl GREY thought the Noble Lord bad taken a somewhat unusual course.—(A. laugh) He was not aware that he had ever expressed an opinion as to the results of the Act of 1815. At, that period be was a Member of the other House, and be had no recollection of ever having made any speech on the subject. He had supported the measure certainly not so much from any expectation of immediate results, but from its being held out as a conciliatory measure to the 11- , man Ca tholics of Ireland, and which he believed would be accepted by them in that spirit. He had always thought, and still thought, that the state of things with reference to the endowments of the Church of Ireland, was one which could not, and ought not permanently, to remain. The great body of the people were Roman Catholics, and the Church established was one of ex treme wealth—(oll) —he would not say extreme, but of great wealth, derived in a great measure from the en dowments possessed by the Roman Catholic Church 300, or 400 years ago, and which the Raman Catholics thought they ought still to possess. That wealth had, however, been transferred to the Church of the minority, and formed the means for providing religious instruction fot that minority, composed of the more wealthy classes There were at the same time Parliamentary endow ments for various classes of Protestant dissenters in Ire land, but except the annual grant to Maynooth no pro vision was made for the spiritual instruction of the great mass of the people. It appeared to him then, and it still appeared to him, that this anomalous state of things ought not to continue. If the situation of matters were reversed, and Ireland had not a majority of Roman Ca tholics, he, as an English Protestant, would not rest con tent until he procured the establishment of a different state of things. It was with such views that he had sup ported the measure; but to say he had any confident opinion that any good • system of education would be se cured by the establishment of Maynooth, or that he had any confident opinion the measure would work any marvellous good, was quite contrary to fact. It was tendered in that form and he accepted it.—(dear, hear.) Now, he hoped his Noble Friend would admit he bad pretty clearly explained his opinions. Those opinions might be right or wrong; but if wrong he had not shrunk from fairly and honestly explaining them. If wrong he had held them in the other Howie of Parlia ment, and the same opinions had uniformly guided him , since he had a seat in their Lordship's House.—(llear.) The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was, like his Noblit Friend (Earl Grey), about taking an unusual course— he was about to answer a queivion which bad not been put to him. His Noble Friend opposite had said his question was put to those who supported Sir R. Peel in his Maynooth policy as to their motives and expecta tions iu giving that statesman their support. Having been one of those who had strenuously supported the measure he felt bound to state, though he did not ex elude from his consideration the hope the Noble Lord adverted to, that it would produce a favourable effect on the conduct of the Roman Catholic clergy, it was not in the hope of producing that eff,ot that he gave his support to the measure. He looked to no such bargain as the Noble Lord seemed to think was the case. He did not adopt from the Noble Lord that ground assigned for the measure, but he adopted the ground assigned by Sir R. Peel, that it was important to the Protestant people of England that the Roman Ca tholic clergy should have a good education. Tnis was an object not dear to Roman Catholics only, but dear to every member of the community composing the country at large, who, not being able to ignore or to prevent the existence of the Catholic religion in Ireland, had a deep, common, and lasting interest in educstton being con ducted according to the approved forms of the Catholic Church, and subject to the inspection and observation of the Government authorities. That was the ground on which he supported the measure—that was the ground of that statesman—and he should be glad to know if his Noble Friend (Lord Harrowby) saw any reason for changing his opinion in that respect. He also supported the measure on a ground not adverted to by the Noble Lord, but which he thought important at the time — namely, that it had been found necessary for a period of 30 years, by every Minister, and by every Government, to come down to Parliament, and year after year to raise the question, and to place themselves under the neces sity of calling upon Parliament to do that which Parliament had always been reluctant to do, and which had always created strife and opts )sition; that he saw in the measure a provision for a standing grievance and inconvenience which excited strife, political disputes, and irritation, and that therefore he for one felt obliged to the Government of the day, headed by Sir R. Peel, and supported by the Noble Lord opposite, for the means they took, as far as lay in their power, to put an end for ever to these circumstances, calculated as they were perpetually to renew and keep open the sense of grievance, which it was the object of all wise Governments to cover over, to palliate, and, if possible, to obliterate. Ho supported the measure on those grounds, and seeing as he did the immense import ance of avoiding the constant recurrence of mischievous discussions on the subject in or out of Parliament, he ad jured the Noble Lord and Government not to ha.tily adopt a course calculated to lay the foundation once more for a perpetual renewal of those annual votes and discus sions, as must be the case if the old policy was resumed. If this vote was annually proposed, it would renew and perpetuate all the evils to which he had alluded. Ile had thought it right to state these Matters to the House.' He had supported the measure on the grounds he had stated, and he was prepared to support it again, not because be thought it would have the effect of augmenting the 'loyalty of the Roman Catholic priesthood, but because it was best for the public at large. f this ho was sure, The Bishop of CASEIE L p rotested against the itnhcartetalredlobyyalatywoitfhtdhreaCwaalthooflitel'ieprvioestetO this h old not be state ment made by the Noble Earl (Earl Grey), that the Church property was ie h s fi th ve oo i d t obtained at the Reformation, and handed over to the P rotestant hierarchy. No such thing happened. Of the Roman Catholic Bishops at the Reformation the great er number embraced the Reformed taith, and co ntinued in their sees. It was no more the fact that the Roman C atholic priesthood in Ireland were robbed of their prope rt y to be handed over to the Pro. d, r t o h b a b n ed the or ßo th m e a ir n propr Catholic ety priesthood handed over to Protestants. The property in both c as e s i t n es Etanagtlpanrides were thoo passed the same way. The Church property in both countries was not given to the Roman Catholic clergy because they were R Allan Catholics, but given for the maintenance of religious truth. The Church of England and the Church of Ireland stood on the same ground, and any Noble Lord who stood up and accused the Protestants of Ireland of robbing the R man Catholics of Ireland. made the same accusation against the sPro testants of England. N o doubt, as ! he Noble Lord had sa id, there was a lar g er number of Roma n Catholics in Ireland tha n there were Protestants; but the Pr ot e s tant Ch u rch of Ireland had been endeavourin g, not without suecee s, to brieg the light of a purer religion to the Irish o f liberty—Amertua — t o be freed fr om the persecutions of priests and neighbours, conformed t o t h e P rotestant Ch u rch. From the Quarterly Review ha colle c ted th ese facts:—The population of Am eri ca was 23 . 0 00,000; ltom o afathCeat people of Ireland who went t o th e l an d Catholics. . It was a sing u l ar f act t h at the majority 3,000.000 of that number were Irishmen born in Ireland; 4,500,000 were of Irish descent; and of the whole num ber of 7,500,000 Irish in America, the annals of the Propaganda only claimed 1,663,000; thus showing how many Irishmen received the truth through the instruc tion given by Protestant ministers. Earl GREY asserted his statement was correct respect ing the Roman Catholic Church property in Ireland. The case of England and Ireland was certainly alike, but with this difference, that in England the flocks and prelates went over to the Reformed religion ; but in Ireland it was only the prelates who went over. He was one who conceived that Church property was held, not for the benefit of the priesthood, but for the benefit of their flocks; and he could not therefore conceive that the pre sent arrangement of matters was beneficial to the mass Protestant in e. A H m e eri b c believed who ed of the people of Ireland. It "was a str a nge st a tement, that which had been made by the Right R e v. Prelate large number rotes tan o t f Irish religion. con formedabou h t t t e o the statement was correct, and the o n ly reas o n why the same lithe effect did not occur in Ireland was in consequence of the injustice of the arrangement which had prevailed for three or four centuries, and which had proved the ob stacle to the spread of the iaherent truths of Protes tantism among the people of Ireland. The subject then dropped, and their Lordships ad journed. HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 20. THE CHURCH AND MR. BENNETT. Mr. HORSMAN then rose to move, that whereas by the constitu ions and canons ecclesiastical of the Church a m n e d e s tn ea es l, s h o a f t h g e of England it is decreed \and ordained, that "no bishop shall institute any to a benefice who bath been ordained by any other bishop, except be first show unto him his letters of orders, and bring him a sufficient testimony of his former good life and behaviour, if the bishop shall his care h hand d d require it; and lastly, shall app:ar, ou due examination, to be worthy of his ministry' (Owlet:132); also, that "no curate or minister shall be permitted to serve in any place without examination and admission of the bishop of the diocese, or ordinary of the place, having epis co p a l e i ngr w e r a i t t n in e g ss u o n f de th r e party. And the said curates and ministers, ifthey move from one diocese to another, shall not ' be by re v . means admitted to serve without testimony i r u e r sp i tt e' t i rth of the diocese, or ordinary of the p l ace of the bishop whence they came, in writing, of their as aforesaid, and conformity to the ecclesiastical honesty. ability, England'? (Canon 48)—an h laws of the Church of vented to her Majesty, r h umble address be pre - graciously pleased to directp. praying that she will be due respect was paid t) the inquiry to be made, whether and canons decrees of the constitutions ,ecclesiastical o f the recent institution of the Church of England in Frome. This case , t h e Mr. Bennett to the vicarage of brought so Touch ' not despair of hid scandal upon the Church that he did He had, acing the House to adopt this motion. however, no charge to make against Mr. Bennett , upon hi d reli - • ens because as long as be re iious convict' the Reverend Vain _ violate d no law --2--• VU/194 " 4 lig 11 Att w 000 Wall -Kw,'" IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS. April 20. THE MAYNOOTH GRANT. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE rose to put a question to th e N o bl e E ar l at the head of her Majesty's Government as to his intention rela tive to an y f uture grant to Maynooth. After ring , into the history of the original endowment, the Noble :Marquis said that the answer given by the Noble Earl opposite to the question put by a Noble Lord not now present (Albe marle), had been materially disturbed by the speech of the Solicitor-General (Sir F. Icily), delivered only a few days ago, in which that Learned Gentleman stated that he was ready to concur with the Government, of which he was a Member, in any step to put an end to the College of Maynootb, if such a step should be found necessary upon inquiry, and if the existing contract and engagements could be got rid of with honour. With regard to any inquiry', no notice of an y intention of movi ng for a Committee on the subject had le:en given by the Government in either House. There certainly was a notice of motion for a Committee on the subject standing on the order-book of the limo of Commons, in the name of Mr. Spooner, but the proposed object of that Committee was not to inquire into the existing contracts and engage ments with the College of Maynooth, but to inquire into the nature of the education given at that college. That was a motion which when made by a Noble Earl (Riden) not now present. in 1845, the Noble Earl, uow at the head of her Majesty's Government, had op posed. This was a subject of such great importance that the Government ought not to leave this country and Ireland in the dark as to their real intentions ; and if they had any intention of making an alteration in the present settlement of the question, it was not on the hustings but before Parliament that they ought to deliver them. 'fhe Earl of DERBY said that he thought that the difficulties of tnaintaluing the endowment to May nooth to which he had alluded on a previous occasion, would be greatly increased by the apeech of the Noble Merquis. The Noble Marquis had more leisure than he had to rea t newspaper re ports, but he must protest against her Majesty Government being made responsible for any newspaper reports of any speech whatever upon the hustings; and' sell more for the accuracy of any comments which the Noble Marquis might make upon that report. From what he c Aid learn from the Noble Mar quis of the speech in question, the Solicitor- General appeared to be of opinion that the set tlement of the Maynooth question in 1845 had not pro duced all the good effects which had been anti cipated from it. In that particular point he could only say that the Solicitor-General shared the feeling of a large number of people He quite agreed with the Noble Marquis that any in tention of any alteration ought to be proclaimed before Parliament, and not on the hustiogs, and he could only repeat his former statement that her Majesty's Govern ment had no present intention of making any alteration in the present grant to Maynooth; but should circumstances arise to make any such alter ation necessary, ample notice would be given in both Houses, and the Noble Marquis would have fall oppor tunity of taking any steps which he might think neces sary for the purpose of opposing it. Earl GREY thought that his Noble Friend 'was en titled to a distinct answer to the question which he had put relative to a most important matter. The Noble Earl opposite was a Member of the Government which had brought forward the Bill of 1845, and in that House had appealed to their Lordships, as statesmen and as Christians, not to reject that Bill. If there was a respon sibility i n re jecting the measure when introduced, surely the responsibility was greater of rej. , cting it of er it had been the law of the land for seven years. The Noble Earl had stated that the Government had no present intention of proposing an alteration, and had laid great titres.; ou the word "present." Now he did not ask the Noble Earl to pledge himself never to repeal the Act of 1845; but he thought he had a right to ask the Noble Earl whether the views which he expressed on the question in 1845 were now altered. Upon tha point their Lordships were entitled ti an explicit de claration. Reference had been made to a speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject of the prin ciple which ought to guide Parliamentary government. Without saying that the Right Hon. Gentleman was right is the application which he had made of those principles, he must say that the Right Hon. Gentleman had stated them with singular ability,-and, abstractedly considered, with singular correctness. Their Lordships were all aware of the efforts now making to excite the feelings of the electors on the Maynooth question. Go vernment were not juitified in adding to and stimulating the agitation going on among the different religious bbdies by refusing to express their views on the question which was exciting them. The Noble Esti was mis taken in supposing that his Noble Friend who had asked the question had gone the length of giving up altogether the ground of good faith and adherence to a contract, expressed or implied, as a reason for continuing the grant. There was certainly an implied promise that the college would not be allowed to be put down. He hoped the 'Government were not going to adopt the same course on this subject as they had on the question of a duty on foreign corn. He hope d the y were not going to av o id the responsibility of expressing a de cided opinion on the subject, and that they were not going to allow officials connected with the Government to go fishing for a few anti-Catholic votes, while they themselves avoided committing themselves on the ques tion. Such a position would be a most unworthy one for the Government to stand in, and before the conversa tion ended, he hoped the Noble Earl would give them some clear explanation on the subject. The Mar I qu's of CLANRICARDE wished to know whether there was to be an inquiry on the subject? The Earl of DERBY—AII I said was, that the con struction ti be put on the speech of the Solicitor Gene ral was, that an inquir y be moved for, not by Government, but by a private Member. Earl GREY —Dues the Noble Earl adhere to the epinions he expressed in 1845? The Earl of DERBY—I do not think the question is one which the Noble Earl has a right to ask or any other p e rson.—(Cbeers ) I can only say that I have been greatly d' • isaepotnted with the results of the mea sure of 1845—(Renewed cheers.) The Earl o f MI NTO—The Noble Earl h as sa id that )to had no intention, as at present advised, to alter the arrangement with respect to Maynooth. Supposing that the Noble E ar l spoke for himself, I should like to know whether, in the event of such a proposal coming from quarter, some other the Noble Earl will be prepared on the part of the Government to resist it? ives no ti c The Earl o f DERBY—If the Noble Earl g 4 1 5 e il of an intenti on to move for the rep e a l of the Ac t of 18 , I will be prepared to s t a t e the course which Government would pursue.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Earl of HARROWBY said he might ask the Noble Earl (E arl of Minty) if he entertained the amt,_ opinio n ,, now wh i c h ho did itt 1145 Peet (10000 It s 11'4E 41910 C If figr p!es he thought fit; but it was with the acts of Mr. Bennett ►hat be had to deal with, and the c nduct of one of the dignitaries of the Church in connexion with Mr. Bennett. The Houie wss uware that in 1843 Mr. Bennett was appointed by the Bishop of London to tho living of St. Paul's, and from that period down to 1850 a system prcvai:ed at St. Paul's which eventually excited the indignation of the public, and led to his removal. Ac cording to a letter which the Rev. Gentleman himself had ptiblished it apPOa;edtbathis proceeding 3 had so ex .sperated the public miA that a large police force was rt gaited to keep tho nPighb ,, urnood of the cburch in orrier, and on one occasion some of the people who at tended the church were carried before the police magistrate and punished. The magistrate, how ever, in sentencing the accused parties, strongly censured the conduct of Mr Bennett and his followers, and the subject afterwards so breed itself upon the at• tentiou of the press that the Bishop of London was at length induced to remove the IZev Gentleman from his living. The letter of the Bishop at companyiug the dis taigas! was familiar to the House, as must also be the reply of the Rev. Gentleman to it. It would be re memberud that the Bt,hop's letter reehmtnended Mr. Bennett to resign, or legal measures would be taken to remove him; and in accordance with that recom- mendition Mr. Bennett did reedgn, and his resig nation was accepted by the Bishop; not, however, before the Rev. Gentleman had made a format protest that be had violated no rules of the Protestant Church, and the Bishop had declared that ho had not only been unfaithful to the Church but insubordinate to his diocesan. It was then publicly re ported that Mr. 11-nnett had either gone to Reme or in tended to go there; but at all events, however that might be, the people of Engllnd fancied ho had left their church for ever. Imagine, however, their surprise. after what he had said and written, that it should come to pass that he should again be appointed to a living in the Protestant Church. It was a matter of surprise that any patron could present him, but a still greater matter of surprise that any prelate could be found hardy enough to institute him. When Mr. Bennett left St. Paul's be declared that his religious convictions were unchanged and unchangeable, and it was right that the House should know what church be attended during the twelve wont ha which intervened between his resignation and his appointment to the living of Frome. It had been stated in a public print that Mr. Bennett had spent the interval in Bavaria, where, instead of at tending the English Protestant Church, he was a constant attendaut at mass, and upon subsequent inquiry being instituted into the truth of this statement it was found to be substanally correct. The fact was notorious to all English residents, and it might be considered as proved that Mr. Bennett ass, to all intents and purposes, out wardly at least, a Roman Catholic, end had lost all sympathy for the Church in which he had been brought up. Notwithstanding these circumstances he was appointed Prot-stant minister of a Protestant congregation at Frottm—(Llear ) The people of Frome were in en agony of apprehension, and dreaded that what had occurred in London might take place in Fromm; and they sent a very strong but must respectful memorial to the patroness of the living to cancel the appointment. This memorial was signed by five clergymen, and the most influential part of the people in the town, but the only reply they received was that the appointment was already made, and could not be reversed Now, he did not complain of the appointment, because in making it the patroness only exercised •an undoubted and legal right, according to her conscientious views and convictions. - che writings and preachinga of the Rev. Gentleman since his appoiremeut to the living of Frown, proved beyond all doubt that his views and .principles bad under gone no change, and he appeared to Libour under the impression that, within ten years, Protestantism would have ceased to exist, and the Bible be found to be a fiction, so far as it was of use in pro moting and extending Christianity. He passtd no opinion upon - such doctrines, but he simply mentioned them as having been propounded within the parish church of Frome and remonstrated avinst by his own parishioners The Bishop of L indon hid long ago been made scqaainted with all these recent proceedings, but he had taken no notice of them, and .the Reverend Gentleasan was : left at full liberty to go on preaching those principles which he (Mr. Hotelman) had faintly introduced to the House as they were explained by the Rev.. Gentleman himself. Now the Howe was fully conversant of the immense powers exercised by a bishop. He was a dignitary at large, enjoying great wealth, and being responsible to no one; he could live where he liksd, or do as he liked. If the Bishop were a bad man, his power could be used fur the purpose of inflicting injury upon the people ; while, on the other hand, if he were well disposed and gifted with a nice conscience, his office was capable of much good. The ecclesias tical law, however, regulating the appointment of beneficed clergyman was exceeding l y strict. The bisho p could not ordain any one coming tram another diocese, unless' he first brought sufficient testimony of his former good life and behaviour from the bishop of the diocese from which he came; and brought, in writing, testimony of ability, honesty. end centorwity to the ecclesiastical laws of the Church of England; and, secondly, after that, the clergyman must tiedsrgo examination by the bishop. Now, as to the menner in which the certificate was given; it was signed by three beneficed clergyman; and it they were not resident in the second diocese, it mist be countersigned by the bishop of the diocese from which ho came. The form of the certificate was, "We whose names are hereunto subscribed, being three bene ficed c ergymen of the Church of England, do declare that the presentee bath been personally known to us for the space of the last three years, and that we have had opportunities of observing his conduct; and that during the whole of that time we verily believe that he bath lived wisely, soberly, and honestly; nor have we at any time heard anything to the contrary thereof; nor hath he at any time, so far as we are aware, written or taught anything contrary to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England." Now this certificate required that three beneficed cler gymen shouli state that during the three last years they had opportunities of observing Mr. Bennett's conduct, and that they could testily that he had done nothing con trary to the doctrine or discipline of the Church of Eng land. Had any three beneficed clergymen of the diocese of London signed that certificate in this case, stating that during the last three years they had an opportunity of observing Mr. Bennett, when (Leine, the last of those three years he had been on the Continent; and that they Could testify that during that time he had done nothing contrary to the doctrine or discipline of the Church of England, when during the summer of 1851 he had been habitually worshipping in the Roman Catholic Church? Incredible as it might appear, the certificate had been signed by three clergy men of the Church of England in the diocese of London ! —(lear.) But this'was not all. Those clergy Men not being resident •in the diocese to which the presentee was removing, it must be counter signed by the b3shoo Of the diocese from which he was going.. Had the Bishop of London countersigned the testi monial? Had the Bishop of London, who bad pressed for the resignation of Mr. Bennett, as guil , y of unfaithful ness to the Church of England and insubordinate to his bishop, had he signed a certificate to the effect that dating the last three years he was a ftithtul minister of the Establishment? Why, incredible as it might seem, he hed beard that the Bishop of London had actually s i gn! d the memortal—(flear, hear) —though he had signed it with a qualification.—(Hear, hear.) Th. re was no qualification in the canon. The presentee could not be admitted without testimony in writing from the bishop to his honesty and conformity. The law, therefore, was clear that the bishop must give the testi mony. The practice had been, however, that three cler gymen of the Church of England should sign the certi ficate, but that the bishop countersigned it merely to the effect of saying that he attests that the clergymen who signed it were resident in his diocese, and not as testify ing to what they stated. There had been this deviation from the practice, however, in the present case, that the Bishop of London had written in the margin of the cer tificate that he was only to be understood as attesting that these were genuine signatures, and was not a party to the statements of the certificate. At least he pre sumed that this was so, and that the Bishop had so sought to save his consistency. so, there had been thrown additional responsibility on the Bishop of Bath and Wells; and, as he received a certificate from the Bishop of London with an unusual qualification, it was a reason for unusual prucl4nce and preceution.---(Elear, hear.) And surely, under such circumstances, such a certificate, with such qualification, required explanation and elucidation.'-(Hear, hear.) Either there had been three clergymen of the diocese of London who bad signed the certificate with such a qualification on the part of the Bishop, or the certificate had not been signed by the Bishop, in which case the Bishop of Bath and Wells had deliberately dispensed with the precautions which were established by law for the security of the Church.—(Hear.) And there was this fu r th er po i nt, that, even after the certificate was received, duly signed, the Bishop was bound to examine the presentee. By the 39th canon, the presentee must appear on such exa mination worthy of his ministry ; and, by the 48th canon, no minister was to be permitted to servo in any place without examination by the bishop of the diocese. This examination was not mere matter of form. There was no point on which the law was more explicit. There was a judgment of Lord Ellenborough on this question, in which he stated that, in all cases, .‘ there was to be an examination by the bishops - that was to precede admission. The duty of examination was cast upon him by the express terms of the canon ; and, therefor e , if either the bishop would not examine at all, or only in a mode ineffectual, the court could interfere by mandamus to compel each an na tion to be made au pertained to his du must exercise that statute is approve,' and the bishop ty. The word ofhe approval according to his that can pro - information as he can obtain coiiscierirthoinrgsuch means of eiion or di,ap Per)) , minister to his eonseicnttiErmelasestio.Ypnparbiti}b probation, and may fairly and assist his con. consideration. On these grounds elusions, though not formally admissible court of law, may be taken into cons circumstances, and institute the exa mination t therefore, the parishihnertsoofooFnariodmere th h e ad memorialised the Bishop, prayi n g required otthe f b ac y tg law an . d T ce h r e . I ;a m , i Bishop, who could i ati . n ot be gri.irtin tainlY was not igoorant of the law, tans not condescsnd even to notice any one t of f the 'circumes laid before but' simply said, Rev. and him by the memorialists; dear Sir, --I have read the memorial signed by 'y u. Had I not been (I can a ssure you) satisfied that Mr. Bennett e was not attached to, or likely to be influenced in favour of, the Church 'of Rome, or likely to iuflaence others in that direction, I should have declined . to institute him from whatever quarter the nomination might have come. But I am so fully satisfied that he has a firm and deep rooted attachment to our own-Church, and - repudiates Romish doctrines, that I feel I should be acting unjustly by bin?, and uneourteously to the Marchioness-of Bath, tiud I - 111110114bere 6atly-v say -uonsioa • , vf .iusituag him." The. Bishop, without noticing any of the facts placed liceere him by the memorialists, assumed the ' ' gift of intallioility, and, declaring he was satisfied Mr. tiennett was attached to the Church of England, decided contrary to the evidence and against the law ; and determined to institute him with out further examination. The memorialists were disapirited, but did not despair. They wrote to the Bishop again, and meths another request. They had" already received one answer, which was not particularly' courteous or conciliat'ry; tint it was a model of episcopal kindness es compared with the second. This second lets ter wasee" I am ri cows ed by those clergymen . and - laye men who presented the memorial requesung your Lord ship not to itsiitute Mr. Bennett, to express their deep 11 regret tbot you still intend to proneed with the institua tion, though he has not retracted any of those doctrines and opinions cited in their memorial; and which have created so much alarm. At the same time we 'thank your Lordship fir giving us the credit of objecting 'to him only from a sense of duty. And on the recogni tion of ibis principle we now trust your Lordship will so tar oblige us as to stay institution for the short period • of a fortnight, in order that we may deliberate caltatY on a matter ot such great importauce, and consider ther or not we may take further steps." Was that 'an, unreasonable request—coming, as it did from a congree, gation under the Bishop's spiritual charge, deeply' moved upon a religious qeestian, and showing a degree ," 30, of solicitude upon it for which a b ishop might have been expected to feel some sympathy ? What was the:.4 reply ? Some days elapsed bef ,re it was received, and then.{; way as follows:—" Rev. Sir,—l beg to acknowledge.;..,.;; the receipt of your letter, and remain your faithful ser vsnt, BATE{ and WELLS. "--(Hear, hear, and, a laugh.) Be (Mr. Elorsonatt) would net eumment upon that reply. Le w —(Hear. hear.) These gentlemen had presumed to es: ercise the right of private judgment, which he presumea was distasteful to their Bishop; and they received their, reward. He recollected reading that Archbishop Laud ;le had said on one occasion that he hoped "to live to see 1 the day when the proudest gentleman of England would , S, l*: .A stand uncoverei before the meanest prie s t." H e thouget this reply of the Bishop breathed the spirit of Laud; though he hope] the gentlemen of England would not bend to it.—(Hear. hear.) The Bishop, however, bad instituted Mr. Bennett, vitae was inducted into the vicar' age of Frome, v.there e h o e f htehredae liningslargeincatzethpesidapbpyotinble State, withpatroneg went of several curates; with those opportunities of e , using his influence which were given to ministers of the Established Church in a position of authority. And what was the first public act of Mr. Bennett after his in duction? The House would rem( mber that when he had resigned St. Paul's, Knightehridge, and St. Bernabas* Pimlico, three curates of the latter church sent in their re: signation in a public letter, addressed to the Bishop df ' London," in which they said, " Having heard that it I ,t, „e your Lordship's desire that the services in the chtiroo: should be performed in a manner different from that i re" which we have hitherto had the privilege of enjoying .as them, we beg to resign our cures into your Lordship s ties e hands." Signed, first, by the ft-v. Mr. De GeZ; the first act of Mr. Bennett, as vicar of Frome, was to sak dismiss the popular curate whom he found established there, and to put in his place that reverend gentlernaue Mr. De Gex. Now, in what position did the parishion ers of Peonies stand? The place was excited; the clergfeee had memorialised; the laity had protested; the NoneelL'e t e tormisis bad held a public meeting—(A. langle) -- ln-e4) which they had raised their voice on behalf of Protest-;A antism against what they considered a new " Papal age 'ee gression. '-a(Rear, and a laugh.) This was a question a 3, l e in which the Dissenters bad as strong an interest as thi i l e e members of the Establishment.—(Loud cries of" Beare from the Liberal side.) They might not be amenele lo ,se to the discipline of the Established Church; but wir_ ° ,l 4l ift) would deny that Protestantism had been deeplti °7 debted to them, and he believed that they would fortiv s e. the best bulwark against encroachments upon the Protestantism of the country.—(Cheers from the • conformist Members.) It was not then to be sneered at that the Dissenters had protested against Mr. Bennett's' ae appointment. Men of most respectable character and position in Frome had absented themselves from the', r7 i:i church, and the trustees of a Church school, twelve number, had resolved that the children should 'not attend i e . the church. The people ot Frome knew what had hap" peeled in London. They knew that two of Mr. Beneasit nett's curates had gone over to the Church of Romee'and; e ie while ministers in the Church of England had madell 6 l,4o of every opportunity their position in it might afford .& • them to make co nverts to the Chu r ch to which they 10 11 °,,,;;? , • t h e mselves haeteuieg, Th e y k new t h at i n the pitfall' St. Barnabas Mr. Bennett had established a convent Sisters of Mercy (as it was called), and that every one y of those ladies had gone over to the Church of Rofne: e .ter. They knew also, that among the members of his con - e Fe gregation many had gone over, not obscure in station; •ot and they naturally dreaded the same results ott Promo. They knew also that the evil bad ne e ! rested with th e sece d ers t h emse l ves; that thoug h -- many had by leaving one church and entering another found rest, o t h ers h a d no t b een so h a ppy. He spoke le the hearing of those who could bear testimony to th e truth of the statements he now made—of those W 1 1,2 knew the family afflictions, the domestic sorrows W hich had been occasioned, and the social distrust which tbell abuses had generated. They bad heard of paree e r4 ag ba onies—they had heard even of broken hearts; an such things d occurred in London, why shoud the? nut occur in Frome? And where was to be , found the remedy? The Bishop of Bath and Wells told them that the parties were satisfied, but were the people of Vg: land satisfied? Were the peelic and the Protestants o f England satisfied? Was Parliament satisfied? 14° would rather ask, was there to be no redress for three things, and where etas it to be found? Not certainly ill the morality of our clergy—not in the consciences of ou; prelates. Our clergy, alas! were too much mistrusten, and our prelates were too deeply tainted, The lait y ,h t England, thank God, were yet sound.—(Hear, beef' ) The laity of England were the Church of Englenetj they constituted its soundness and its hope; and it en for the laity of the Church of England to bestir tees selves on the present uccasion.—(Hear, hear.) Al 3, how could they so legitimately bestir theniselresee,", through their repress ntativee in Parliament? •°`'Z prop. sad, therefore. that the House of Commons, ! rePr°, • senting the laity of England, should•lay the petition .11, the foot of the Throne, and pray of the Quee n that he eei would add one more to the many claims she had alresei, , se, estahliehea upon the love and admiratio n of her faithittl. subj, cts by becoming the protec t o r of her people a nd Or ~ their religion, by ass isting them, not against aseaultS from without, but against treachery from within—not e tt g w ei c ris b t u t r ti b e w a s vo b w . e n d u e n il w e u r i le s y o f s o t n h s e — C ( bhluereerh, t' V r a ) g — a t in ha st t even when those enemies were found in high plateese,„: and though they might be dignitaries of the Church, shei would compel them to obedience of that law which tli,eelit Bi s hop of Bath and Wells had so wantonly repudiated on this occasion—that she would evince her sense of t he• great scandal done to the Church of which she west': head, and show herself the true defender of that fo';: ' and that liberty by which her throne had been es"" - . blished.—(Hear.) The Hon. and Le arne d M e mber co ne eluded by moving that "An humble address be Or e. septed to her Majesty, praying that she will be gr a ; 4 cloudy pleased to direct inquiry to be made whether respect was paid to the de crees t h e c o nstitutions en : canons ecclesiastical of the Church of England in the .; recent institution of Mr. Bennett to the vicarag e ' a:: r' y Frown." e After a slight pause, , roe. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER and said—Sir, I do not think it possible to ex the impartance of the question which the Hoc. Learned Gentleman has brought under the censiderat. h's; of the House. And, Sir, when I think to what a Our of discussion the present 'debate may give rise if P e i House sanctions the motion of the Hon. and Lear n _ Gentleman, I confess I look to the future of Fatal:ore, tary duty as one rife with elements of no slight inti rest—with elements of discussion which may prodtlol.. aggerant; very important effect, and one not anticipated, upon p o t .` Lion out of doors.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I myself sP i ee - 0 3- prepared now to offer any opinion upon the e' r— t eee stances to which the Honourable and Learned Gen- n -a • man has called our attention this evening. I feel, rkr . I have never felt more acutely, t 4 the inconvenience o ' popular assembly like thi s being eag ed in diseust ian , such as that to whi c h we h ave near listened—(ll°l%ft hear.) But, Sir, I must confess that as I listened totite4 address of the Hon. and Learned' Gent l e man, I. wai,.o 4 much struck with t h e i na d equ acy of the Proposal heiel has made for d ea li ng w i t h t h e subject - t o Which he hags , referred. According to the lion. a nd man, a very grea t gib-Tow° has Learned Gentle been experienced and that too ° some of her Majesty ' s subjects* " their.' spect to matters which are calculateu to interest_ t feelings in a matter the ;poet acute.—(Hear, hear.) 1 :! I do not understand that the flon. d atid f Learned Gentle'. t man has really propoeed "Yrrme yr or the griever) he_ that aAn humble address e . preeen ed to her Maje he has alleged. The propositionb before t the Hanoi:11:1 praying that she will begraciously pleased to direct h_n_ s e e whether doe respect was quiry to be in dons arid ea ecclesiastics] 0 ' e decrees of the constitutions canons ar • e England in the recent institution 0 1 °' the Church oLot, Bennett to the vicarage 01 Frome." Now, I thinke atz° ne w." to this address, the House would do W i „ . , before lose _ 'der 'whether, by agreeing to it they will etifor - e;# to consider oee able to cope • - aid to tne, !Ash any authority with the circumsten r one, for hear.) t hi s motion, and that haquiry is made referred.--(fe; made in accordoe7;l the H ouse as sents t..*+. l with it. Suppose, in fact, that her Stleie s ": to whichstuhpep issues this Commission of inquiry, it will bo accoug: i f a no n gu y lt do o noneffoettro have_m u e es on e ruy! hexer"pco The d en ic b c ayotminoo; he h omn o a r oy i t f y bien t to inquiry unwilling q th u e i s v oi t e in r o y nthteh e individuals stiantf(omr me t na h tt e i y oonf m tt i h : ee b y t t ri n r eo e gn a ti t . . l i ." o " ep d a * ; . hear)rtoe m i n to b obtainae—(Hear, subject Learned Gentleman If, that • s o f =self, it appears to me • os' of these two alternatives must occur—either there 111 present ex;sting a remedy for these • alleged i evalica or there is not.—(Hear, hear.) I epeak, of course , see such a eubjeet with a d ference which must best beeer tsi el any Mealiter of' this House who has not the panic t ''' learning which applies to these questions. I eall isl i ' but believe, however—l have alwa d rstood—et 0 .4 ys un e titer e must be an appeal from a prelate who seT er e contravention of the c an oes of the Church —that .r.)Tel must be an appeal to the Archbishop.—( ll 'a r, And if the coohduct, of a prelate is so subject to t ; i i superior revi s i on , I thi n k an appeal ought ,t ° place before there is any interference on the pa , WA the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) I think de g such an app ea l s h o uld be had in preference to 11 61 P o io t a tribunal which is confessedly i nad e q uate to tos w the desimd result.—(llear, hear.) SJ, I 1 00 _ 4 . a many persons are of opinion that th e re is too gr 0:,,,.. Newt .) , ,rded in the institution of clergymete tO ro te fives; but I do not wish to give an opinion or ehfer....,.00. any controversy an that subject on the present_ tje Oo e It could shown that d anion s hat such an ry 6 I litthje C ' and thit menY are of p o noon that this Is a proper ape atisd to legislate °n e in order that some check mat giUd-01124.40X14Wattaliiitblithedr .Datikfaorw' do thi a j 11 0 la! It( an Pel no