The Sun. — London, England, 1841-03-19 00:00:00

MORNINu EmTioN. • Ear . e. Ha could not state wily Mr. Earlc's order was not ol.eyed ; he supp-)scd that gentleman had revoked that the House was about to abolish the right of peti tioning altoe7ether.—( Cries of " Oh, oh," and" Chair.") The SPEAKER—Phase to bring them up. Mr. HUME—I will bring them up when I have explained.—(The Hon. Member was met with loud cries of " Oh, oh," upon every attempt to explain, and after several unsuccessful efforts to make himself heard, he brought up the petitions amidst loud laughter. Mr. ARCHDALL presented a_p9tition from the county of Fermanagh, against the Registration B 11 of the Government, and in favour of that introduced by Lord Stanley. Mr. G. W. WOOD presented a petition from a congregation of Protestant Dissenters, praying for the abolition of Church-rates, and Eeclesiasticsl Courts. Mr. GROTE gave notice, that in Committee on the Poor-law Bill, he would move an alteration of the 17th clause, in order to proviee more easy employment for the casual poor in the unions of the City of Lot.don. Mr. HA LFORD gave notice of some amendments he intended to propose in the Committee on the Poor law Bill. Th,- witness was eico ordered to withdraw. Tne Mlrquis of N R OMANBY said, as Mr. Phelan was ordered to attend the House on Monday next, would their Lordships proceed with the examination of Mr. Nicholls to-morrow ? They ha I almost all the beads of the Commission in attendance, and it must lead t o public inconvenience. The Earl of GLENGALL would proceed with the examination of Mr. Nicholls to-morrow. The House then Adjourned at Eight o'clock. ROUSE OF COMMONS, MAltcff 18. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Cloek. The Whitby Inaprovemerit Bill was read a third and passed. Oa the motion of Mr. HINDLEY the British India Sugar Company's Bill was tell a first time. The South Western Railway Bill was read a th:rd time and passed. Lard JAMES STUART hrtuzlA in the A7dros sap Harbour B , F, which was read a firbt time. Mr. PALMER presented a petition against the Medical Bill of Mr. Flawm, FACTORIES. Mr. F. MAULE gave notice that on Monday next he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the employ:neat of persons in fietonts. On the motion of Sir HESKETH FLEETWOOD certain returns were ordered rchtive to the County Court of Lancaitcr. Mr. HOGG moved for leave of absence for Sir Ric'oard Jenkins until after Eater. Mr. PATTISON objected t.; the motion, and sub mitted whetilcr the lion. Mernbcr ought net to state some special reason for his motion. Mr. HOGG said he Killed on the ground of indis position ; and :vhen he stated that Sir Richard Jenkins I ad been for two years Cll:lrreaa of the Court of Directors of the Eist India Company, that he had boon in coostant attendance ainiost every day !rain ten td: superadded to his attendance in tliut House, and tiLat his general by a!th was so impaired that he Ind Leen ordered to go abroad for its restoration, he bad no doubt the House would grant the indulgence asked for. Mr. PATTISON—I saw Sir R;eliard Jenkins at the Opera House on Monday last.—(Great liughter.) I tu,:vt., Sir . , that the application be postpo,:ed for a Mr. EASTEIOPE prescntod th:rty petitions from various places, praying for abolition of Clutch- Ertes, the abolition of EcciesiasticA Courts, anti tlic release of Mr. W. Baines. Also one signed by six thousand inhabitants of Leicester, of all shades of religion and politics ; it was ti.gned by the Mayo:, all the Aldermen, and Commen-Council. They stated that they had seen with indignation end regr.t Blincs, a man every way worthy their esteem and regard, immured in a gaol lor no moral offence, but merely ler conscience stlke. They bf1.„7. , c that such a proceeding was calculated to proditte the grtz.tt.t.'st miseltef, and they prayed for the immediate herd ion of Baitie. , , for the extinction of Cliarch rates, and the abolition of the jai-is:haam of the E,:cle sia teal Courts. _ Mr. H. smurii pr-7.sentNl petitions from the BoArd of Guardians of Li 11::ion in Sointrsetihre o!::ainst cr ttin cl:tuses in the I'o6r-1:tv: Amendment and a petit'ol against any further grel t to the Cillege ol Navnuotl,. _ . Lf )Cl - I preserit 'd a petition from !he Giasgr,r, aid Greenock CumpLiny, pr sag fr,r redo..;::on of !IL, du:y on r4llway passen:crs ; a peCt.f.n from G;asgow prlynig for a rhoWfic,:tion of t e import duties ; from tic Cit<ctribar of Conuncrao of Giasgow to Ana:e ; from tho Prf:vcst and Town Councl of Wic!.. for a r• te d of the Corr:-:awi ; cad fr.otn the fish coreis rf S..;thori;lnn aid CaiAmess pra; . iol; that tie Fshing Biard might nut btt aboliawd. S r. G. CREWE presinica r:titiens from .scytiral pi , ,c(l in 1) :by against certain (I.us:!s in the Poor-lai% 1311. 6 ' reCr. rangcrs then ordered to withdratr, but .Mr. ELLIOT rose and stii(?, that he lioi , cd his Hue. nicrid would not oppose tl:e motion for lea, e of absence. Mr. HOGG oot already stwed to the House that S:r ltichard J:?nkins was ge.icrat y alLcted in his health, and prliai:s the worst of nil illness was that affectng; a man s general heaitit—wlen a roan was ill, and could nut tell wi at was the matte:- with him.— (Rears of laughter.) lie must txprsss his surprise that any lion. Membt-r would ( ffer opposition to the unction under each eireumstivice:. Mr. PATTISON hoped the Hon. Member's mc dieal attevlant would be e xamiaed.—(o'•.) Stranger were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place, and the motion was agreed to. Ttie droi7Fed Orders were then read over, for the ROUND presien'el a petition from tbe B a7l of G , llrtfiarts 4,1 DtLim lii E,sex, praying the conti nuane of tho Pcsor-latv Cuniatisf,ioners for five year:, an,; t it out-door it lid :night be extended in certain two,. M. GRIMSDITCH pr,:•seated five petitio:s agaivst the l':;cr.llv Bi;'. purcioso of bciug rep!Aced on the Books. HARBOURS OF REFUGE. Mr. lIINDLEY prelontca a p , titiun f-ata 6,000 of Asl,ton-tuider is fa.iour Of 0 7etvis- Mr. RICE, in moving the appointment of a SL:ct C„mmittce on t4e state of the harbours on the south sion•of the sente:lce on Fro,t, WiliArnt , , and Jones ; frt:in 800 inhal; ttnts of the stow p'w:e ag.;:itist Lord S anH'6 Irish Itegitr,.fon B 1; a!ld 0130 a petition pravia; for the anon:ion of Cnaren-r4t.s. SCIIULEFIELD prt!sented a petition from li;;Ar.ingth,n) in favour et tae abolition of Church-rates tl:el.h..ratica of 'AI-. Blincn Aa lios. '2,lExlar:a pre:crited a petition from a thee in rouniy O S :rre,y, praying for Church Extensiiml. l'llr. A. \V HITE pro•ciA.“.l p t tions from the alp tists of Neweastic-upoa-Tyne, pray lug for the extinction of the abolit;on of E.:e!ciiastical Coq. ts. Al HON. 'MEMBER pres:lted a petition from Darby, prA:,ing tt at aNerations be made in the Poor-law A :pen drn ea t Bi 1. cistern coast, to whom the Report of the Ccrnmissi:_n of 1810 should be referred, skid that it would be pre surniAuous in Lim to offer any ckpinion as to the merits of the question, but he would state the opinions of those 'Alio were bent r able to form an opinion on tLe subject. lie could assnre Hon. Gzr, - ,t'ecnon that in endeavour iag- to call their attention to the subject, it was his wish to tlivest himself, as far as possill-, of Every considera tion of a I.lca l n tort-. Tk.e question was one of great national importance, affecting the honour, the security, and comm:trei,kl prosperity of this country. When he ;list ventured to propose this inquiry to the House, the only objection urged against it was that it was of too limited a nature—that it ought to be extended to other parts of the coast,—(Hear, hear.) Among those by whom that objection was stated was a Gallant Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a pct Lion from Darsit, cbjeetipg to certain clauses in the Poor-law Anicndwtent lii 1. Officer, then Member for Davonport, who was also of opinior, however, that :he inquiry was, in the first place, immediately necessary to be applied to those narrow seas Mr. P. FRENCH presentol petition; praying for the abolition of the teas on Southwark, Vauxhall, and Waterloo• bridges. M:. BAILEY presented a petition from the che mists and druggists of Sudbury, against the Medical Reform Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Ply mouth, signei by 1,367 persons, praying fur the re lease of Fro,t,_ Williams, and Jones; and another to the same effect from Tavistock ; also a petition from an individual named Moyle, residing in Blsckfriars-road, • praying for the liberation of Mr. Feargus O'Connor ; also a petition from Sheffield in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laws. Col. THOS. WOOD presented a petition from the Guardians of the Holborn Union, praying for certain alterations in the Poor-laws. Also a petition from the Vicar and Churchwardens of Staines, praying the House to adopt measures to stop idolatrous practices where steam navigation was carried on to the greatest ex t nt. Eve! y friend of humanity must hope that peace should be preserved, but still its preservation was very preca ri3us. The present French Government, to whose po licy we were indeLted for peace at the present mo ment, had declared that a defensive policy was the most likely to preserve peAce. M. Guizot, in his speech in the Chamber cf Deputies, in January last, said that what England and Germany were doing, was with a view to preserve peace. But while we were neglecting the state of our harbours, the French Government was engaged in improving theirs. Their estimate for this purpose was 5,100,0001., and in 1639 it was 9.,G00,000/. It was to this subject the attention of our Government should be directed. It had also been long com plained of that our harbours of refuge were ne glected. The great loss of life and property made this a subject oc national consideration, and be could assure the House, from his own experience, in India. ' that it was one which demanded the attention of the Mr. LUDLOW BRUGES presented a petition : Legislature. The present state of our harbours of from Bath,praying for increased Church accommodation. ' refuge was a subject of national reproach. When Colonel SALWEY presented a petition from Mr. foreigners visited this country they naturally ex- Hayward, a medical practitioner at Eghare, praying for ; pccted to fi n d t h at t h e state o f our h ar b ours b ore nonce an a!teration in the Poor-laws, as respects the employ- i proportion to our naval and commercial greatness, meat of medical pract tioners. ' but they finned it just the reveNe. On the very coast Se- WILLIAM SOMERVILLE presented a peti- to I.vhkh his motion referred, though, during the Lion from the Ulster Constit u ti ona l A s soci a tion, signed E A e ar, millions were expended in erecting what by the Earl of Charlenioet, and by Mr. Sharman Craw- had been termed useless fortifications, nothing had ford and Mr. Ross, the Secretaries of the Assneietion, been expended upon our harbours. It was true praying the House to reject Lord Stanley's DI, for Mr. Pitt entertained extensive designs upon this amending the Registration of Irish Voters. i subject, which if he had lived he would probably have Mr. Q. DICK presented two petitions from pieces carried into eff:ct. One great difficulty he (Mr. Rice) in Essex, against the continuance of the Poor-law believed was that there was no permanent Board in Commissioners, and for certain other alterations in the the country whose business it was to consider and recom- Poor-laws. mend to the attention of the Government such plans as Mr. W. MILES presented several petitions for I might seem to them would be of national utility. Church Extension, and for certain alterations in the There was one other ground of ebjeetion, that was the Poor.laws, from Kuaresborough, Castle Cray, and other ground of expense. That, in his opinion, was a lcgi places ; also a petition from Durham against the ba3- ternate object for the Government to consider. He tardy clauses, and for ether alterations in the Poor-laws. woul d mere l y o b serve, that no pu bli c money was ever General LYGON presented a petition from the spent with so much willingness as that which went to comity of Worcester, praying for increased Church ac- maintain our naval supremacy. He thought the same commodation. feeling would concede the means necessary for the due METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENTS. protection of our ships. His object in asking for the M r . GROTE brought in a B:11 fur improving the Committee was to lay the question fairly before the Go approaches to London-bridge. The Bill was read vernmeet, for he thought it was a question of too much a first time, and ordered to be engrossed. importance to be dealt with by any individual Member BELFAST HARBOUR, of the House. Considering that the Government had Mr. E. TENNENT obtained leave to bring in a j granted the Commission of Inquiry, he did not think Bill to alter and amend the Act for improving the port he was asking too much when he called upon the House and harbour of Belfast, to grant a Committee to consider the Report of the MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. Commissioners. He would therefore move that a Core- Mr. C. BRUCE presented a petition from the i mittee be appointed to consider the Report of the Corn inhabitants of Elgin against any further grant to the mission of Inquiry into the state of the Harbours on the Colle g e of Maenooth. North-Eastern coast. Mr. SHAW presorted a petition from Dublin Mr. PLANTA seconded the motion with much agamet the sale of spirits in that city on the Sabbath- cordiality. It was no party question, and he trusted it day. would be considered by both sides of the House in a Mr. GILLON pre -caged a petition from a place in Scorland, on spir •it of fairness, and according to its importance. It the sutject of Annuities and Assurances ; but the noise in the House prevented the precise im- was seldom that he troubled the House • he heir ' • for hoped, port of thetherefore, to bo favoured with t attention a Petition; and th designation of the nets- foners, from bein g heard inthe few minutes while he stated his opinion upon gallery. Tne . Hoe - . M mbcr elan presented a petition the subject. It was unnecessary for him to for an alteration of posaloi on railwa s the. rites and taxes im enter into the details of the question, as they Colonel PERCIVAL present Q ed er a petition y s c from the had so ably been laid before the House by his Ho- Slier ff and Grand Jury of the 11 ounty, ciotn- nourable Friend, but he would say that the same pl a ing of the present adrainistrlioliery:sonf reasons existed for inquiry, as were in existence two law in rh land, and in favour of Lord S Registration Bill years ago, when the Commission was appointed. in all its details.He trusted the House would not refuse to accede to Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from the the motion of his Hon. Friend, because he was sorry to parish of Sr. Clement Danes, praying for me di cal re- say that the feeling of those parties most interested in the inquiry was, that the Commission had not very form. resented a petition from Roxburgh, materially promoted their wishes or views. He should Mr. ELLIOT prese d • : be the last man in the world to saything of the praying for the release of Mr. Baines and the extinc ineeestigation that had been going on, but still it must e iv o a a:eril w e r d n , ag non nen had flawed twit of Church-rates. . altowed that so far as any practical result was Mr. FOX MAULE pro-cote,, Sect' ~ 4 petitions from Ar- b Report of r the Commissioners. He was aware that it g3le, and various other places in scotanu, praying t o fb o w cc e a d sion from like the the ße the Abolition of Church Patronage. THE SOCIALISTS. to press forward any particular • •from the Uni- stress on the wishes • interests or to lay Mr. HAWES presented a petition of any particular locality, but he rayingmust be allowed versal Religionists, commonly cel'ed Socialists, p the to say that he considered it to be the for an inquiry into their doctrines, which they statedi duty of . representativ es of the people to arc now misunderstood and misrepresented. I makeknown in that House the wishes of their con- Mr. • ts A meeting of HUME presented a petition signed by se veral . stituen . .._ .. the inhabitants of the thousands of the Universal Rational Religionists of Be.- borough with which he had the honour to be connected mingharn to the same effect ; a petition from the medi- took [ dace, at which the Mayor presided, and at that col practitioners of Kilkenny and its vicinity in favour of meeting resolutions in support of the views they enter the Bill for the improvement of the medical profession in tained en the subject were unani mous l y agreed to. Great Britain and Ircl ind. Also a petition from twenty- He did most sincerely believe that it was a subject of two individuals, members of the National Chartist As- impor tance, n ot only to the place which he had th e soc•arion, complaining of the treatment of Mr. Feargus honou r of representiimg, but to the country at large. O'Connor, and praying the House to address her Ma- He thought further irilormation than . that which was jesty for the purpose of granting him a free pardon, ' fined in the Report of the Commission was required, coot also a petition from a public meeting held at Binning- 1-• u lit a Cormettee of the House would h e and he s ,o hem, complaining that prosecutions for time alleged g further the objects which the House most likely to crirmi of blasphemy bad been renewed by the present Government. Toe petitioners stated, that they consi- ought have in view.—( Hear-) to having been put, t iered the law as it now stands on th e su bj ect o f such The question o f the EXCHEQUER The CHANCELLOR - orlon unjust and anomalous. They complained p, 0.. t.., that they need not that. Mr. Hetherington bad been lately tried and sea- Hon. Gentlemen coul dhave assure the of the House temieed for the publication of' a book ; and they oh- epologised for calling the attention not only as re to a subject of so much •un eor: a ter', served that three part:es had been tried for the sale • l al interests, i but the commercial in garded their local ef a work, the original author of which had given His Hon. Friends hinnelf up, and had. never been prosecuted. They e:ests and safety of the country. adduced 1 ie el tost Mr Hayward, who had published Has comp 4.1 . t :.a. • had di alt with the general subject, and had eh a Committee lairm's Letters, had been brought to trial, and found very few arguments or reasons t y . .. • "ty (Cries of gam . " o r d e -, order.") The Hon. Gentle- should be appointed on the present occasion. If the lad corns forward with some resolution 'mein proceeded to say, that those were tile statements to what ought to be practically done, he (the of tl.e petition ; and if they were not allowed to be , m a ofthe Ex t would have been read the House might as well prevent altogetner . ~c Chancellor . c 2equer) . tile right of petitioning. He would say it was folly-- !able to have de alt with the subject, and he should (Order, order.) He would repeat it.—( Renewed cries I very much like to hear from them on what of " Order.") grounds they thought any further inquiry was : The SPEAKER, said that the lion. Member was necessar y . The House would recollect tha t, in con quo, out of order 1. IC sequence of a discussion last Session, a Committee nma kin these observations. Mr. HUME had a right tostate h• opinions in spite was appointed for the very same purpose as that for which it was of any opposition._ (Renewed cries f is "Order,order.") now proposed to aoint a Committee. p The SPEAKER. said thate Ile would not re' fspeeches,h •ht to ermer or e might Hon. Member in , rote presenting a petition!, should the' ,-, i S:IOtV it was then argued and admitted that it was a sub co ihne himself to • t • 1.11 coil I it. substance. stating jet v• .i c,. - .be nlueh hetter referred to a Commission Mr. HUME had been doing so, than a Committee. Bat whether the choice then made was and, if the H , • , ;cri • had been irregular, he was reg right or e wog the Cotornisiionle a d reported, and the very ttler--(Orde order.) - He bad been about to state the substance ri, the same objects, so far as he could understand, which it tion but he had been prevented ;it appeared o pelt- I was now proposed to investigate before a Committee to him • THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1841 had already been investigated before a Commis sion, composed of . parties whose opinions he thawlit were very likely to have more weight than the Report of any Committee of that House.— (Hear, hear.) But he would state one or two reasons why he thought the appl - ,:ntaicEt of a Committee of that Huse would be a most inexpedient pro ceedirg. One of the objects which it was pro posed to ievestigate was the defence of the coast. He could not see what advantage would be derived from the Committee taking evidence as to the best places for disembarkation, or from the publication of that evidence. There would be upon the Com• mittee a great many Member s w h o w ere con nected with local interests, and who would advocate tae claims or diffe'rent places; extending along the whole coast. He thought that the appoiot went of a Committee would tend greatly to defeat the object. He admitted that there was one part of the Report of the Commissioners upon which there was some doubt, and upon which it rn' ht be necessary to have further information. It was thought that the object might be effected at a smaller expense. If it cculd be done for a quarter of a million iustesd of two millions, all psi tics must desire such a result ; but he thought. that that saving would be much better effected by the proper cflicers. He t-ustcd that his Hoc. Friend, upon the assurance that the informa tion which Le possessed should be referred to the ccrs appoirted by the Treasury, would not reudcr it necessary to go to sz division. M. MAC KINNON wished to Ely a few words in wiser to the RiyAt Honourat)le Gentle man the Chaneaor of the Fellequer. The Right Gentleman o'difete.l to the Committee beeau c only gcr etal reatoes had been given for its appointment. He would beg i e o t.) call ^ the Itght Geofeman's attcttion to one point, which he (Mr. INl‘l(innon) thought should he a cause of his - mitt;ng the Committee to be appointed is the pres. et case. It was wall known that along the coact of Sus,ex shingles coll,c:ed in great quantities at the entrance of Larb,m , s. There were two th , scriptions of harbours—one was called e hack-water harbour, the other a deep-water harbour. Of the former dewription of harbour there were two on the ccae of Kent—Dover and Renr , gate. Tim e harLurs were e;cnescd out by the backwater, which it retired tiwt the shiag!es, aml in consr... (pence a deposit was :mid° «t the entrance of the hArbour, which fo!med what was c.died s bar, which In a fox years would accurnu- I.to to such &ze as to render the harbour utterly uvl?ss. Tiae other clescr;pti:,n of hart-our—the deep water— was such us was found I.t Dul.Lary or li , ngstowo, outside Dublin. :Now, he would leave. it to the R:ght lion. Gentleman what er or not it was worth wi o le to as,ert,in which of these two descrip tions of harbours should be made on the coast of Su, tex. The s,-ttiing of that poiLt migl:t save the country nullious, while the expeas2 of a Committee was nothing. Ile could see no obectien whatever to the aseertainiog of that poiet. They would thereby get the opinions of engineers, who were at variance on the subject, which of the two descriptions of harbours ought to be adopted. He must repeat, that he thought it worth while to ap point a Committee: to inquire into the subject. He did not state his own opinions mertly, on the subject of tl,e difference of harbours ; what he had stated arose from a conversation he had held with persons well acquainted with the subject. Captain PECFIELL thought that the subject was of great importance to the maritime interests of the country. Tile Right lion. Gentleman obj-cted to granting a Committee, because be thought his Hot:. Friend ought to have brought before the House resolu tions conformabie to the Report of the Commission. But he (Captain Pee.hcll) maintained thet that Com mittee would be of the greatest advantage. It would draw from engineers, and others concerned in the sub ject, very important evidence. He was really sur prised that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should oppose the motion, which had met with his cordial support. Mr. DARBY thought the Report of the Commis sioners, which he held in his hand, fully justified the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Dover. The Commissioners reported that Ramsgate Harbour was the best on the south. eastern coast, although they said it had no natural advantage?. It had no backwater, nor was it protected from any• wind but a land-wind. It offered no protection from winds from the sea. Yet that was the only harbour for the protection of the shipping on that coast. It was acknowledged to be wholly inadequate, yet the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the Exchequer refused a Committee. He re fused a Committee—was he prepared to say that the Government would act upon the Report of the Covnmissicncrs? acknowledged that har bours were necessary would be say that the Government would construct them ? If he was not prepared to say so, why refuse inquiryy Could the Hon. Member put his band upon the Report, and show any thing in it so practical that it could be carried into execution, within half a century P And if not, the Commis sioners were at a I , ss to know on what grounds they should report. He (Mr. Darby) thought there could be no stronger reason for assenting to the motion. Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND regretted .that ie Chancellor of the Exchequer had nit expressed himscli more distinctly on this most important subje.t. The question was whether our harbours were to be re paired by public expense or by local exertions. It au idea got abrcad that every case of shipwreck was to be a ground for a grant of pub]. c money for repairing our harbours, from that moment all individual exertion would cease. A few years ago there had be,:n3 a greet contest, in a Committee of the House, whether certain harbours required the assistance of the public purse, but it was at last decided that they had no sufficient c!airn, though a similar claim on the part of two other harbours was allowed. The country ought to know at once whether any aid would be afforded by the Govern ment, or the Government ought to take all harbours of refuge under their especial care. Mr. PLUMPTRE thought his Hon. Friend the Member for Dover was perfectly justified in the course he had adopted. He would have been perfectly willing to have left the matter in the hands of the Goverc ment, if it had been stated that they intended doing anything ; but having heard no such statement, .he must support the motion. Mr. C. WOOD thought the House must see that the question which had been Etirted by the two Hon. Gentlemen who raised the discussion was very different from that which had been discussed. The question argued was that the country ought in some way or other to provide harbours of refuge on different parts of the coast. The Committee now moved for was to in- quire into that which had already been inquired into. The Commissioners had distinctly expressed au opinion upon the subject, and the hest answer to local interests was that they had given a decided opinion against any existing harbour. In their Report they stated, " It is evident thero is no harbour at the present mo ment between Sheerness and Selsey Bell which can be considered an available harbour of re fuge at all times of tide, or which possesses the capability of being rendered efficient for that purpose by any improvement or alteration that can be made." The Commissioners then proceeded to consider how an efficient harbour might be made, and they stated that the most important situations which called for the atten tion of the Government and the country were these— the first was at. Dover, the second at Beachey Head, and the third at the mouth of the Thames. The ques tion, therefore, was, whether the Government were prepared to take up one of these plicei ; but be did not Lee in what respect further or more detailed infor mation coull be obtained. In the same way, if any private company was induced to construe t the harbour, they could employ their own engineer ; but, so far as any general vivws of the subject were concerned, he thought the fullest information was contained in the Re pm t. Sir R. PEEL did not see what advantage would accrue from the appointment of a Committee to revise the Report of the Comtnizsionem It appeared to him a moot able one, and perfect' y satisfactory. If they appointed a Committee, they must either exclude local influence, or admit a large share of it. If it was excluded how could the Committee be better able to judge of the subject than experienced a heta in stance, nautical men ? If local interest was admitted he did not think i C ar o g m h n o tittee would, be a very harmonious o w n o e u , l a d nd w i l t li w ng o l u y ld ad be ini a t battle for * constituents. For in was impossible n h the e ta d tg i pe d reo n tt o ehhs t :ei t to h an i think the lion. Member for Hastings Theye s h u a p d er g io ot rit t y i c o i f hf t o h r e in f t ? o rt u o o f f, the highest Ist authorities ge o f un dertaken b and extensive was e r subject, nme and Oaring the e n G t h o e v they would make this or that harbour. It purpose, 9,14 tailing Y an a y e l i ocal interest. It was of too important such a work could be properly un of these satatraeter, and ail the Government had a right to say atthey were ready to construct one He (Sir 11 .11 of the e4eose w o h c i atit lions for thatharbours, setting apart 1,500,0001. or two mil. sioners to name the best i upon the Commis yi.ils'o r efficient such an c o o n b , j t e r c u t e , re gardlessol give would occasion. i r o th . e contingency of havePtel) thought it would be an immense advantage t oeither ore or two really efficient harbours in time of peace. war as well as to itan ce is t . ually, and If the House determined to eonstrtuent that they would construct them , ff eni, he hoped case at Dover and ~ate, spend 200,000/. or 300,000/. without reaping any advantage. state of the revenues of In the present sta the country, be not, as was the could not press upon her Majesty's Government a hasty adoption of this measure ; but, et the same time, hey hoped that the House would not make a declaration which would imply thatr the object was not a desir able one. Mr. RICE replied. So- ,Lgr;rs were then orderiA to withdraw, and 0 0 i House divided; whet: there appe,tred— ng it the leC,tiOt% .............• lug Aga.iht ;L ........................... Majority against the m0ti0n,...---x-64 CASE OF CAPTAIN LA. ROCHE. Mr. ALSTON then rose to move that the petition of Captain La Roche, R.N., be raterre.l to a S.:•lect Committee. After referring to the services of the pe titioner, the Hon. Member stated that Captain La Roche was brought to a court-martial for not having brought to action and engaged a brig and sloop in the port of Cherbourg, and the charge having been, as was al leged, partly proved, he was thsrnissed from bis command. The Hon. Member then read a correspondence which had taken place upon the subject with the Government arid with various officers in the service, the later of whom all bore strong testimony to the high professional character of Mr. La Roche. This gentLiTnan was a very old man, and all he desired was the means of passing his last days in comfort. The Hon. Member concluded by urging the House to support his motion. Captain PECHELL seconded the motion. Sir THOMAS COCHRANE opposed it as one bi E bly prejudicial to the public service. He was sorry to take this course, but he felt it-to be his duty to do so. Sir C. ADAM said it would only be. - cocessary for him tl address the Ilouse very shortly. He deeply regretted this ease had been brought for ward, for was sure that no ecurt-rnartia', and no Court of Aduoralty could act otl - erwise than had been done in this e:.se. In 1507 thin cflie.rr had Leca found guilty by a court•martial, for not pern:itt;ng a frigate under his cornroaA to go i!ito action, and V: consequence dismissed fr;;rn I;i3 er - an:and. Aftr the ccurt-martial Cai.tain La Roche suffered six months to elapse before 1:o made any representation to too Afltnir ly, n 3wthothritf)tker proper r ini t r 7) h ti i i i k, c 3 as s e t , ,y an step swered toot they did in the m a ttlr. He then wrote more t'lan one offensive letter t o th e glen Fir,.;t Lord of the Ad m i ra lty on th e sob . ct‘ Vt 7 l ! ,-,- ; Board ot Almiraltv found the son fence of Cie court-rfa::itial was founded upon cvideace that could not c the smal'e6t degree impu;o , d, they felt they could not place him on the retired list of Captains. Cuptaiu Li Roche sert a me morial to the Board of A‘trniralty in , the year 1838, but the Board thought th ere were su fu e l, nt reasons for refusin..; the prayer ot the memorial. lie thought the application was one to which the House could not consent. The case having buc de cided by tl:e sentence of a Court properly constituted, it would be highly improper for the House to acectle to the motion. " • • • • Captain PECHELL said the G illant Admiral had argued as an Admit al of 1807. He lied (leek(' the eutherity of the Ho:: -e to interfere, contending thet the Government was vested with the administratien of the effeirs of the navy, end the subject shou!il never be dis cuesed ley Parlaenert. There were mangy' things which slesuld l e considered in reletion to this patitien. Ttic cireurns'ences in which Csptain Le Roche was pieced W.7•re very pecudar and ditlicul?. Tee object of ;he French frigate and corvette was to decoy the Eeglisli frieate under very powerful batteries ; and lie had risked the less of his ship tione:,cs“rily he would no doubt have b-en censured as stronely as he was now fe l e, ;ie exercise of prudence. It shuuld also be remem bered' that a frigate of thirty-six 12-pounders was opposed to a French frigate of fifty 18-pounders. It wee not fair to keep baele eny P.ci circumstances which tended to !I'm , : the motion in a favourable It had been said :het Captain La Roche had del tyed his application to Parliament from 1808 to 1830. Why had he done so ? Because he knew thet he could never obtain redress under the old sy,tete. When a Liberal Government come into power he Immediately applied to have his case re-considered. Mr. ALSTON replied. Strangers were ordered to withdraw ; but on our re. turn to the gallery we found thrt the motion had been withdrawn. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL move.l for Returns of each British Colony, Dependency, or Possesiion, in which, since the Legislative Union between Great Bri tain and Ireland, down to the pre eat time, the 'office or offices of Chief or other Justice, or Judge, or Magis trate of any Supreme or District Court of Law', Equity, or Admiralty, or Attorney or Solicitor-General, has or have existed or been created : The name of each such office or offices in each such Colony respec tively, together with the date of creation : The name and salary of each person appointed to each such office, with the dates of each appointment : Whether such person waa.at the time of his appointment, a member of the bar of. England, Ireland, or Scotland, and of which re spectively. The Hon. Member said, in the last ten years only five or six appointments of this nature had been placed at the disposal of the Irish Bar. Within the last year there had been tweety important legal ap pointments made in the colonies, and of these only one. bad been referred to that Bar. Even that one was of an inferior nature, namely, the District Judgeship in Ja maica. He trusted that, under these circumstances, the House would not reject his application. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was quite impos sible to give the information asked for by the Hon. Member. He must, therefore, object to the motion. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL inquired if the Noble Lord would give his consent if the last paragraph were struck out ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had no objection to give similar Returns to those granted in 1832. The motion, omitting the last paragraph, was then ;agreed to. IMPRISONMEN'r OF WILLIAM BAINES. Mr. EASTHOPE said that when he gave notice of his motion with respect to the petition of William Mines, he stated that it was not his intention to go into the general question of the abolition of Church rates, but as much as possible to confine bimeelf to the grievance complained of by the petitioner. Ho was aware, and the House must be aware, that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to state the case of William Baines, who was now immured in prison for- the nonpayment of a Church-rate, without referring generally to the question of Church - rates. He woul b d however,e haadsfar madeat the outset, by adhering as possible, redeem the en gagement strictly and closely to the case of this individual, and avoiding as much as possible the ge nera l question of the propriety or impropriety of such impositions. It would be in the rcoollection of the House that this petitioner stated that on the 17th of May, in the year 1838, the inhabitants of a parish in Leicester, made a Church-rate of sixpence in the pound, which to this petitioner amounted to 21. 55.; that that was demanded of this petitioner in the month of August, and was by him then refused ; that when su mm oned before two of the Magistrates the petitioner dis puted the validity of the rate, and required them to withhold giving judgment in his case, and the case was thereupon dismissed. The petitioner then received a citation from the Arches' Court of Canter bury, dated November 15, 1838, to which be paid no a so le s , e g g al uen p t r i o y ce r e e d ce in iv g e , d o a f attention. He was thereupon pronounced in contempt, ei ce, w a lt n h d wwahsichahfteerstvoaorkdsnosenrovtei monition for the payment of toe rate and costs, amount ing, in all, to 1271. Be. He went on to state that he was arrested in November last by the Sheriff's officer, taken from his family and business, a n d h as ever since that time been a prisoner i n the county gaol of Leices ter. He then proceeded . to state th a t it was un just to make a c:amand upon him for the support of a form of worship which his conscience disapproved ; that it was unjust, inasmuch as he believed that the demand was bad in law to send him for a remedy to an Ecclesiastical Court, and thus to call upon him to recognise the au thority of the dignitaries of a Church of which he was not a member, and to seek, at an enormous expense , a decision involving his rights, at the hands of parties who were interested in giving judgment against him ; that it was unjust to take his person and confine him in gaol, when he had been guilty of no crime against society, and had merely carried out his principles as a dissenter from the Established Church, choosing te obey God rather than man. Now he (Mr. Esstho v e) not mean to argue that this care had been dealt with dic farently from the case which had formerly come under the consideration of the House ; but he did intend to present the case to the House as one which was ill calculated either to serve the interest of the Church, or to aroma? any change of conduct on the part cf those who dissented from i'. —( Hear, b een ) Before the proceeding. cote menced in the Ecclesiastical Court, the churchwardens of the perish called a general meeting or vestry, to take into cons,dcratinn the propriety of ploccellag further in the case, and they were u n an imously of opinio n that. it wis in expedient to do so, on the ground tha t Parlour:ant in tended to make an alteration in the law t egardieg Church rates. He had the honour of presenting to the House that day a pe , it;on fr om Leicester, signed ey 6 000 mita bi'arite of all sects and paitL.s. An a ddress had also gone up to the Throne, signed by 7,000 females of Leicester; and he could safay 5537 that no ques tion had ev:r excited more g eneral , interest They sympathy in that b orou gh than Mr. W 7 in es s case. hey . felt that the means taken to enfor ce the payment of Church-rates in the case of an honourable and indep . enclent minded man, was a violation of all the principles of ji.rt . ice, and was not calculated to advance the interests of religio n. How could such scenes and such occurrences possibly be nefit religion in any way ?—( Hear, hear.) The question had been already dis.cuseed in OA House, and they were aware what the sentiments t f the Noble Lord (J. Rui se'l) were on the subject. He bedeved it teas geaerally acknowledged that these occurrences ywere itt-aoripted to promote the cause of ieligiore or the interests of the Es tablished Church. He thought it eas extremelyinjudi cious to continue the enforcement cf a law which acted against all the feelings of reli:;ioa and buinanity. Hedid not think the stifle:jogs and imp risonment of Mr. Baines were required for the maintenance of an y religieas worship, nor could not advance the it,tere4ts of any reagents ceme muriity. If be entered at any ;eiigth i Ito the subject or Church-rates generalh, he felt ilia' he should be offe, adieg against the pledge he - had given to the 1-I.:use, but ne.R gretted much to find that there e xisted in the minds of some parties on that subject much . b.tterness and uncharitableness, instead of t h e kindly fsel inga which should prompt them to devise a remedy for tic grievance. He would remind the House that no Church-rates were levied in Leicest -r, except in that one parish, and no individual bad more honestly and sincerely lamented the effeete produced by that . li:filet:on than the clergyman who presided. Mr. Ersteme, a name veer, rateU (en , ' of bee Gir. hope) that of the fr; .. eit'''''• of his lif e ts-td tLet noth:e - es Ise ee. tboi, eee end put to suChseenes, The question v. as not confined to the loyalty of Leicester, for already twenty-six indivi- duals in differeat parts of the country had been served with Ti c question eas not what were the personal opinions of monitions, and were liable to be immured in piten. Ten Mr. W. Baines ; the question was what:her he occupied a persons ante, actually summoned for the next day—( Hear, teserncre in tee parish of St. Martin's, in the borough d hear)—and it was impossible that, such a state of subject to a Churelegate, and which, whether things, producing strife and ill will, could be allowed to go it were occupied by Mr. David Selomotia, Mr. Joieph on. What ilia Innings of Mr. Baines's fellow townemen Homo, Sir Robert Inglis, or Mr. William Btinos would be were, might b e idol-Add from the fact that, although he stbjet t it. The question had net the lea t reference to had been four of the inclement months of vieter immured the present opinions of the individual, but to the value cf in a gaol, he had been unanimously el seted a town coun- the tenement he occupied. It that tenement remained un cellor of his native borough, for one of the largest wards occupied it ;said nothing—hut if occupied, whether by in it, containing a populte hail of 20 000.—( Hear, hear.) Jaw, Turls, hereec, or infitel, it paid the same sum. Mr. Nothing could exhibit mere stroegly that there was no Baines ocouyi2d this tenement, knowing that it was liable sympathy with such a law. Whatever might be raid of Ito this imposition, and knowing that on this account he his obstinacy and contumacy in other quarters, it was felt paid. so much leas rent fur it, or if he bought it, that he is Leicester that Mr. Brines was a martyr—a man of paid a gross arum so much the less ttan if it had not been high courage and williechieg honesty. He hoped the subject to this imposition. The resolution on the table of Noble Lord and the House would feel that the enforce- the House was that Mr. Baines had been sued for went of such a law in a community where such fceliegs a sum of 21. ss. for Church-rates Would the Hon. prevailed, could be of no advantage ; but was, on the Member (Mr. Easthope) deny that this tenement contrary, almost a scandal to the Church—was rather was subject to pay this sum long before Mr. Baines occu adapted to work its decline, and to retard the great ob- pied it, perhaps long Moro Mr. Baines was lorrn, and j eta which it was the duty of the Church to aim at, and would be deny that it would pay the same sum if he • Lim hich religion, when 1. ft to its own genial influence., self (Me Easthope) should occupy it to-morrow ? Over would be sure to produce —( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and over again he (Sir R. H. Inglis) bad said that this Member c o n c luded by mov4ig a resolution, to the effect, was oat a question of creed but cf propeity. It was the that the puni.hment of Mr. Baines, for refusing to pay ; roperty which paid and not the creed; and if they re- Church-rates, was to punish him for acting in accordance leased the property from this impesition. they would give with what he regarded as are igioue duty, end was a vio- a premium to a'l persons to dissent from the Estabsiihed lotion of the principles 01 religion a:sd justice. Ceurch. The only ground d ntfonality in the Church Lord J. RUSSELL said his Hon. Friend bad was that the nation paid in this way for its support. The brought forward the present motion, havieg given notice nation paid nothing in respect of tithe. Tithes were of a motion to take the petition of Mr. Bsines into cot:- ' given anie:e!eetly to the possession of any lion. Member sideration. He was not aware, till it had beer, in his property. The only act by which the nation cense read from the Chair, of the nature of the motion, I crated its substance in any decree, small as that degree which, consilering no notice had been given, was of a was, to the support of the Church, was that by which the soniewl,at wi is an e swee pi ng character. Althoueh the 'a-id was made liable to repair and maintain the fabric of particular grievance of Mr..Bei/es was made the ground- the Established Church. The Hon. Member (Dr. Nichol) work of the motion, the caus-a of the " iavauee was one appeared to deny such enactment ;he (Sir R. H. highs) affecting the gentral questi o n of l a w, and the resolution wool I hardly presume to contradict any statement made did net go so much to release Mr. Baines as to denounce so authoritatively, but all his (Sir Robert H. Inglis') tee existine law, as one under which the subiect should no re seliett led him to the conclusion tht the fact, that, from longer suffer. U.-in, that argument, and not saying that the earlies: Sixen times, Church scot teas distinctly bind the resolution was not a proper one under certain eircum- lag upon all property in England to maintaia the fab.ia stances, he must soy that the notice should have been some- cf the Churco. was as clear as any fact connected with what longer then the lion. Member had thought proper to our history. The oldest landed proprietor in England did give.—( Hear, hear.) Woh respect to the particular case not inherit his broad acres or his castellated mansion on of Mr. Seiner, he dii nut mean to elves any opieion as to any ottror tenure thaa this, and, in stating this, he (Sir whether the parties were justified in the course they had R. Inglis) was only serving whet i.e was sure every lawyer permed ; but with regard to that House, the question, as lie the it nee was prepared to maintain. The law might the Hon. Gentleman had put it, was, whetbe- it was a be a bad oee ;if so, alter it ; but while it remained un violation of conscience to criforce the law of the land with altered eve:y acre cf land and every tenement in England regard to the payment of Church-rates?--( Heir, hear.) , was held subject to this impmilon, varyiog, it might be, He had no hesitation is tinswetimg thi,t questi.ari directly accordiag to the incidents and necessities of each parish, in the ceaative. Ha (teed coecerve very well text it was ' but sell ttdajeet to such, and, as lie again repeated, having intpest as Itch it was not desiraele to maintaire and that it no na re reference to the creed cf the oceul wit than it had might bar expedirret to adopt sonic othm plan. Various to the colour of Isis skin or the height of his stature. grouods had, been stare! by tire 11 , noursbie Gehtleman, Fur these reasons he (Sir R. H. Inglis) hoped that the on which it ought he rionsidared advisable to alter tee late; des pion of the House would be on the present occasion, hut it was a totally did'erent question, as to whether Mr. and hereefter on further discussions on this subject, to re- Baines was to set LID stars-lard as to what was to be the jam t prepoei.ion which the Hon. Member (Mr. East law for himself, and that what he thought oppressive to hoes!) hid advanced in defence, perhape, of his friend and his conscieuce was no longer to be tilerated.—(ll. ar, of the township with which he was connt cted, but still in hear.) Mr Baines hod stare I i,i. own case in his mad- defence of a proposition which was ueerly untenable by lion. He did net de ry that the inhoietteta had made at him er by any other person.—( Hear, heir.) Church -,ate, pad teerafor e it was clear that a rate had Dr. NICHOL L stud he did tot ag-e with his lime been mace isy the paridi,ners, of which ilia legality Lad Friend ( Sir R. 11. 1,0.) that this imposition was OD9 not hem, qeettioae h He refused to pay ttie rate, aad was imposed by any positive statute, lucause it was one estab cited bd. re the Msp,isoetes. If he Ermaie to dispute the listed by the mutant m law of the land, anti not by that rate, if he meant to say that that rate was not litgally authority only, but also by teat of the Court of Exchequer posed, he could lievt had remurse to the Court cste- in the Braintree case, in which a Court, computed of Mght blished by the law in such cases, a - rd endeavour to of the most diatingutdied Judges that ever adorned the show thet it was not le g ally laid on. If he was proceed. bench, laid down the law in tl e following manner : int; faely, such would nattrally be his course. There "We arc all of opinion that the ualigaitra by with regard to the late, he (Lord John Russell) neeri which tl.e parishioners, that is the actual residents not argue whether it was a wise or a politic one. within, or the owners of lands or tet ements in, every pa- The place kr disputing the legality of the rite waa the risk, are bound to repair both the paii-h church, when( ver Arches' Court at Canterbury, to the citation of which the it may be necessary, and to provide all things essential to petitioner gave no atm.:thin. Nos', was that a justifiable the stivice therein, is an obligation imposed upon them cause? Were they, the House, of Commons, to raj that, by the c o mmon law of the Lind." He supposed, therefore, so long as there was a Court eapointed to try that care the Hum Gentleman (Mr. Easthope) would not dispute and that that Court proceeded in the regal- course to berm the law of the Court of Exchequer, though he had thought what the pea Lite; had to €aw, and Lim to appear—he- lit to dispute that of the Hon. Member for Oxford. But cause of his disputieg t' e legality of the rate, the yeti- in this case the sum being under 101. the Ecclesiastical tioner was himself to decide that that was a late which was Courts had no jurisdiction, and Mr. Baines was summoned not to be obeyed? lie refu eel to pay any attention to the before the Magistrates. He did riot appea", but was re citation, and, therefore, Hen. Members wore to adopt a re- pre eisted by a geittleman Lamed Davis, who declared solution that the law was a most oppressive and unjust oze, that he appeared for him, and that the Magistrates Could they keep up any law by that means? William had no power to proceed in the matter, inasmuch Barnet thought that the existence of Church rates to s up- as Mr Baines objected to the validity of the rate, and in port the Established Church—that decisi :n with respect to tended to do so in the Ece:esiasecal Court, .and that it Church-rates according to the law of the land by the Ec- was on the ground of this allt•gad invalidity that the pay clesiastical Court, was unjust and oppressive, and a viola ion meat of the rate was refused. The House would lecol of the rights of conscience-. But another man might think lect that under the 53d George HI., a person who used the sam e thing with regard to any other law—another this plea (mated the jurisdiction of the Magistrates, and might hav e just the same opinion, that it was a called into exercise that of the Spiritual Courts. These violation of the rights of conscience, to ask him to con- being the facts of the case, let Mr. Baines reconcile it if he tribute anything to the payment of the army and navy, could to his ()an sense of honour ,and duty, and plain deal which wer e used, as they sometimes must 100, to produce ing to plead the invalidity of the ra ein the Ecclesiastical bloodshed, Any paym en t that might be required to sup- Courts, when he had determined never to appear to con port the l et e o r th e State might be refused, on the ground test its validity. He was sure the Hon. Mernb,r for Leices that the particular individual refusing felt that it was a ter would not vindicate such conduct. He (Dr. N.) was violation of conscience to contribute to its existence, sure that lie was a man of too high honour and too high Where was the distinctioa to be drawn ? How could they principle to say that any man was justified in throwiag cuff say that Mr. Baines had the sight of deciding for himself ? by false pretences the jurisdiction which properly aeathed Was he to lay down what was lawful, or what was unlaw- to hid case. He (Dr. Niehell) might respect a man who ful? Ought not every individual in the United Kingdom to resisted a law which he thought to be unjust, if he did so have the seine power and right as Mr. Baines to apply to boldly and openly, but he could feel no respect or sympa that Howe t o m a k e a resolution in his favour, that such thy for a man who put forward an intention to dis and such laws were oppressive, and a violation of con- mite the validity of a rate in the Ecclesiastical science ? It was not, therefore, on the ground merely Court which he afterwards said he had never entertained. of Church -rates, but upon the general qu e stion as t o The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then recited the facts the suppcat of the law?, that hile (Lord John Russell) of the case, and traced the proceedings againat Mr. thought it impossible that that House could give its Baines through their several stages, as they have been sanction, to the resolution o f hi s Honourable Friend. frequently before the public, and proceeded :—Now, again. With regard to the general question of Church -rates, he did not know that his Hon. Ft iend had entered much into it; and he (Lord J. Russell) did not conceive that it was necessary for him to enter into it now. He certainly regretted that there was not a mode for providing for the support of the Church Establishment iii a less objection able way than the present mode was. It was very different, however, to establish by any resolution, or by any Bill that might be brought iato that House, to give countenance to the opinion stated by several assenters, both with re Acct to that case and Church-t . aees geoe ray, that is was act proper to contribute to the support cif the EA,ashed Church. He would be sorry that, by. any commutation or any other mode, they shoul.l give any support to that opinion—air optaiora wh•en, though held by many respectable persons, was, however, incom patible with the existence of the Established Church, and could not he defended by any sound argument. The early Christi.tns were commanded to pay tri bute to the Roman Emperors, which were applied to such purposes as ihe erection of temples to Jupit 'r and the otter heathen gods, where their superstitious and abominable rites were performed Yet those early Christians were told by the highest authority to pay taxes. Now he could not really understand that it was a violation of the lights of conscience to pay sums of money which wee to go to the support of places of worship equally Christian with the form of Christianity which the ifirlivi dual paying felt I - itnaelf bound solely to believe. That did not seem to him ( Lord John Russell) sufficient grounds to say that they had a conscientious repug nance and feeling against such a contribution. He wished as far as possible to respect all conscientious feelings. but they should not allow en unlimited decision to every iadividual in that respect, and that they bad merely to pronounce the word " conscience" in order to relieve their elves from. the pay ins ut deraanded. it was irapossibe that the State could adopt such a principle. The pe itioner said that it was unjust to confine him is gaol when guilty cf no crime against society, but he merely carried out the principle of dissenting from the Church, wishing to obey God rather than ma'. lie (Lord J. Russell) had no doubt that the latter portion of the statement was true, but he could not completely exonerate the petitioner from any crime, for he was giving a bad example. It was a mode of act ing which would go to shake confidence in the law, and therefore it was in itself a crime against soci , ty to act in that manner. With respect to another mode of contri buting to the Church-rates it was totally, a different ques tion. `rids was one alteration in the law which he had before spoken of, namely, to make the enforcing of the law take place in a Civil and not in an Ecclesiastical Court. if a Church-rate were levied and enforced at the Quarter Sessions, from which there was an appeal to a superior Court, such a tribunal must be a competent one, he thought, to decide either upon Church-rates or upon tabu. With regard to altering the law in that or in any other respect it was quite a different question from an individual assuming, at a sacrifice to himself, but assuming the responsibility ef deciding what law ought to be obeyed, and ghat rates and taxes ought to be enforced. He thought the House would cot sanction that each . indivi should decide for himself. If the House thought it better to abolish Church-rates altogether, let them decide so on general grounds, but let them not agree to a resolution which was in favour of refusing the Church-rates that were legally claimed—a resolution which might be also ' used in favour of disobeying- any law whatever. Mr. HUME was opposed to the sentiments uttered by the Noble Lord who had just sat down. The claim for Church-rates with respect to Dissenters was an unjust olio. The Noble Lord complained of any man taking the law into his own hands. The Noble Lord well knew that that was the mode in which oppression dad been met in all ages. He ( Mr. Hume) was sorry to hear the Noble Lord refer to the Roman Emperors to support his argu ments. The other night the Hon. Member for the Ulft verrity of Oxford, said that no man could be an honest man eh° would pay for the support of a religion in which he did i of believe. He (Mr. Hume) wished the Hon. Ba ronet was now present to hear what was advanced in the present instance. He ( Mr. Hume) would call the Noble L(rd's recollection to what he did in 1833, when Lord Althorp brought forward the ques tion of abolishing Church-rates a together. Did not the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) support that measure, and did not the House decide by a large majority-266 he thought—that assentors ought not to pay Church-rates? The Noble Lord then took off 55,0001., and left the sum of 265,0001. to support the fabric of the Church, and that sum, the Noble Lord deelared,he purposed, on a future ocea mon, to propose to be paid out of the Consolidated Fund. The Rernari Catholics of Ireland were alsoat the same period • relieved of the payment cif 76 0001. Aft r such votes had been given in that House—.such decisions cone to—after the declarations of the present Ministers on this heaal— was it not fair to expect that Government would not allow any longer period to claieoe without proposing some remedy for the abuse ? After a few further observations on the great importance of a meeting at which he was present in Leicester, convened for the purpose of opposing the impost of Cherch-rateQ, the Hon. Member concluded by seconding !he motion. Sir ROBERT ING LIS would not enter at leng h into the subject of Church-rates, as the lion. Member ( Mr. Eastliope) said he would postpone the consideration of the general question. The distinction which he ( Sir It. Inglis) made on the subject to which the Honourable Member opposite ( Mr. H.) referred, was that a man ought not voluntarily to contribute to the support of a Church which he did net believe to be the true one according to the Word of God, yet that he ought. to submit to the ka.v; ; are ! • cc fer as he ( Sir Po leglia) 00 01c1 be il.oold rnaa all I , ,ii i'llow subject; bul.;c2it to tti, lass whicll liour , :c: oat,.;!,czy st:lveB boa t:,. i .. ill'c,T,riic:..i to ?le '..,1T(,,rt 'l i•f c . ' , :.-:c , 14: nr,,l 1 places of worship b e longing to a creed in whia, 1 as individuals, they might nut believe.—(Hear.) he aske i, was there any hardship, was there any "gross pet sont.l wrong," a. it had been termed, inflicted upon Mr. Baines? There was a sum which by the common law of the land was binding upon all the property of this country, and there was a summary remedy fur enforcing payment of it. But Mr. Baines had thought paoper to throw it off and to say ihat he would appear in tin. Ecele siastieal Court ; yet when eised there he had refused to appear, and consequently having thrown up the remedy provided by law against his property, a remedy neces sarily winched itself egaiest his person. It might be a cenvertient thing ta remain a martyr. The lion. Member fir Leicester se, reed surprised, but he (Mr. E.) could net be made a martyr of, fur, being a pr vile god person, he would come under the operation of Lord Brougham's Act. Tie Noble Lord (J. Russell) had alluded to an alteration in the law and to the expediency of removing these matters from the Ecclesiastical to the Civil Courts. If the Noble Lord should think fit to pre pose such en alteration, Le ( Dr. Nicholl) would give it his best attention, but be thought in this particular caeca to which he had strictly confined himself, and not as he thought the Hon. islembcr for Leicester had done "kept the word c i f promise to the ear and broke it to the 'ease," that he had shown that Mr. Baines was not entitled to the respect or sympathy of the Home, and he trusted, there fore, the House would without hesitation negative the motion.—( Hear, hear.) Sir R. INGLIS explained. His Hon. Friend (Dr. Nichol') had misunderstood him. He had not referred to the statute law at all, but had said that the right of the Church of England was an antecedent right. But al though he did not say it was created, he believed the right was confirmed by statute. Mr. HAWES said it was difficult to make any observa tions on this question without alluding to the general ques tion of Church-rates. He would, however, in what he tees about to address to the House, endeavour to keep strictly to the question of the allegations in Mr. Baines' petition, without diverging into the question of Church rates generally. If he had wished any argument in sup port of the general allegation of that petition, that the petitioner bad been subjected to great injustice and hard ships, be could not have found one more powerful or more conclusive in support of the truth of that allegation than the statement of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had last addressed the Howe, because, without raising the question of conscientious scruples at all, the descrip tion of the legal steps which had been taken, and which had been detailed by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman with such minuteness, was one of the strongest grounds of the truth of the allegation in the petition, that the peti tioner bad been treated with harshness and injustice. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, that if his Bill of last year had bean assented to, this could not have hap pened. He (Mr. Hawes) would admit, that if the Hoe. and Learned Gentleman's Bill had passed, Mr. Baines would not have been in gaol, but he would have had his goods se , zed, which would have been as great a violence against him as the incarc ration of his person. Undoubt-Ally that Bill would have mitigated the expenses; but when he re erred to his own efforts, he should have recollected the recommendations of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners ten years ago, which were infinitely better than the Bill of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman ; and although, since that report. had been made the Hon. and Learned Member had been in office, and had, be believed, been a Member of the House of Commons, and was, if he recollected arigkt, a Member of that Commission, yet, with the ex ception of his abortive effort of last Session, he had made no an empt whatever to mitigate the enormous expenses in flicted by those Courts upon those who opposed Church rates. Dr. NIC H OLL referred the Hon. Member to the Bill cf 1835. Mr. HAWES wished to refer to:an Act of Parliament and not a Bill.—(Cheers.) What would all the B:118 in the world do to remedy the sufferings thus inflicted ? Let them only look to the Statute Book, and see whether there was one Government or other measure on the subject. It was a reproach to the House tat no steps had been taken to early their recommendations into effect. As a . general maxim, he perfectly agreed with what had fallen from the Noble Lord, that conscientious scruples could not be attended to when they interfered with the exe cution of the law; and that if they were attended to it would be in many cases impossible to carry any law into effect; but he thought a clear distinction might be drawn between cases in which the maintenance of good order in society was concerned, and those which were fur the suppert of a religion from which the majority dissented, and eou:d not conscientiously contribute to the maiete eance cf a sectarian church. With r. Bard to bridges and h;ghsvays, the people, e ithout refereace to religion, derived benefit from thorn, but not so from the Church ; and with regard to the high authority to which the Noble Lord re ferred, he would remind them that the contribution so levied was not applied to maintenance of the Pagan reli. gion, but to the support of the State generally. He must say, that on all occasions, he preferred the statute to the common law, regarding as be did the common law to be nothing more than what any Judge at any time might de clare to be his interpretation el' tcrater uses and customs. But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had never told them how the common law, which required ell parties to aid in the sustentation of the Church, was to be carried into effect.—( Loud cheers.) That was the difficulty.--(Cheers.) Was the majority of the parish to decide the question, and that questionthecLelad therned Judges had left totally untouched. Again, how could Ecclesiastical Courts enforce the common law ? They had no means of enforcing it: Mr. Baines was not in prison as c o i E t h e e c r i e i n s a p s t a n i for a violation of the commofnorlacwos;ts,haenwd for contempt or as a debto r Courts genersliy seize there sectun b running of. an reense bill of costs; that was 2 gross end crying abuse, land it was a disgrace to the House that no means had been taken to remedy it. The Hon. Member for Oxford had MORNING EDITION_ said that Church-rates were a necessary incident of pro perty ;. if . so how came it that parish vestries had the po.wc.r of deciding whether prope, ty should pay or not ? and if it was a necessary incident then he must contend the Church rates must last as long es property lasted,—(Hear, bear) Th.. , feet was that Church-rate' was a ki.nd of contri . btPi. n in aid of the tithes for the stipp3rt of b e r.. 1), to be paid or withheld as might seam withheld to t;,e in6jori:y of the parish ; and if they were e.. - e was no means of enforcing them liy means of the ford Statute or Common Law. He regretted the Noble had not taken that opportunity of throwing some BO)! 013 the views of the Government as to the general quesso?' Were Church-rates to be allowed to be continued- in tliFn . present state? \Vaa the law, according to the recomme" dation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, to be mad e mere slrigent ? Tire Hon. and Learned Gentleman knew that the law, as it stood at present, was a scandal; and with his legel and ecclesiastical subtlety proposed t? sunpl,fy the law, to cheapen the process, but to make best . mere ringent, and that he thought would pleasC tb e , Dissenting body. Why that was the rccommenthtion tie Ecclesiastical Commission, and the re ason why it itselfbac! not Leon ad. pied, - was that the Government , calling . Liber,l, dared not to introduce a measure so severe in fla operat;on. Did they target that Church-rates were abolished in Ireland, and did not exist in Scotland? Was the peaCe of the Church in every parish in the I‘ to bc diAtirbed, and the House coni:antly to receivert. , t wn9 complaining of their vexations for the paltry consi fur dere tion of what might be levied from the pelale fort he port of the wealthiest Establishment in the world? In L . , r ; cer to Fett:e the goes:Lin of Church rater, iro tb"g,", that all parties must concede a little to the genera l read of society. lie did not believe that the Diss.enting b° entertained those hostile feelings to the Church, burre, that jealousy of the property actuated by or the anxiety to possess it tl.ems(lv2s, which urns times ciibed to them. They knew that the princ:97 by which they were upheld was a strongcr one, end till, as . the Church adopted the voluntary plilciple, $o walla bomr it would become more strong and powerful likewise. e uf the Ce: bagged pardon if he had trespa.sed on the House, ilur. fat strongly on the subject ; and, wit'iout wishirg to roll, the Church, he could not consent to force the conscia'" of those who dissentel from it. D NICHOLL exilained. to Si' ROBERT PELL iai 1 the question was not : the any ae:ation of the law as to our jurisdiction 0 ' ',„ • ch u rcici Ecelesiastiea Courts, cr as to any aeration in rates, but it was whether the House of Commons weu•r, lend its sanction to the ptinciple th.t there were ce ta d ! . exceptions to tl,e duty, addeli every mar) owed, cf °he 1 0 ence to the law of the land ; and that provided men could al:ege conscientious scruples, that man sho ll ". o .. allowed to violate the la w.—( Loud cheer=.) If this r t ? cipte acre once as ented to, where would thy ? Who would eecide what was a conscientious scrulS . e l ia The Hon. Mernb,r fur Kilkenny said, if any gr am , go to prison rather than pay, his scruple was A :'re t•ous oae; and another Hoe. Member had stated thavoo lie ions scruples were conscientious Cites. But support di-approved of them, aid prefered goirg to prison T°?, than pry /axe-, how would they act in that OT-eei4 (Cheers.) 'I he Hon Mealier sari that Scotland no C=hurch-rates. Now he apprehended that if the °IN Gentleman or any member of the Episcopa l Chur Ld purchased or inherited a large estate in Scotland, be e° of be celled upon to pay 1 - rs quota to the suPe rt ta d the Ptesbyterian Cetech established, and if he objeetbo on the ground of his being an Episcopalian, tha t would be no cxemptioa from the peyn.ent of Ch u rch- t T°'y or from the consequences of the violation of the law. ed this resolution were assented to, they might hoe cl o o wealthy Episcopalian in Scotland alleging cons cienu td scruple; as an excuse for the payment of their due t ' . ha d coming to the House for relief. Suppose Mr. 13ai"e've objected to pay tithes, would they relieve him there ? r t o Hon. Gentleman had said Church-rateswere ancillaY tee tithes, and certainly if he was entitled to relief rs et‘ one case he was in the other. But where would teey" the limit as to religious scruples ? He found petitionsp, sented against the New Poor-law on the ground t hBt e ioe' teeters were deprived of their religious rights in i tl y oief • workhouses ; and others stating that the system o f and under the Poor-law was contrary to humanity, jus tir % Christianity. Again, in Scotland there were petii ° , o ple scribing patronage as a lording of it over God Ps' c .r' contrary to Scripture, and he rather thought that tat, on tain persons in Scotland alleged conscientious ec ru Po o that subject, he had heard it acid on the benche s opP tbo that if the law were wrong it ought to he altered , h e u l t e bed while it existed no one belonging to a Church ests o ''" f pa ' by the State ought to he permitted to act in violation% te Supposing that parties in Scotland were ready to goo , • prison for their disobedience to the law, would th e the . Member for Kilkenny then say, in a resolution of House of Commons, that they were justified by t hei i r true gious scruples? He (Sir R. Peel) thought th e on ice is ptiaciple was, that whilst the law remained in fe i it should be obeyed.—( Hear, hear.) If it was wrong' s be altered. It would be an utter violation of all r3OO. for the authority of the Legislature if the House ato ms °c mons, which was only one branch of that Leesmbee should sanction a violation of laws which the eiaiio branches in concurrence with itself had enacted• obo rev pect to the Poor-laws, were there not many n ie n n ocel had conscientious scruples respecting that, and de n , A " 000- it as a violation of the laws of God ? How c ot sc ion Gentlemen presume to determine whether their alle4 00 1 ' were true or not ?—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Baines woof ask the House to pass such a re-solution as the r f l e s)", All he asked for was an alteration of the laW.' t e f th e ` hear.) He (Sir R. Peel) thought the question " pre .. policy or justice of the law was quite foreign from t be oder sent question. He asked the House of Commons toedteols% that if it took upon itself to determine in what c sse , t shoo d be respected, its own authority would v e ,, tbo demned. The Uourts of Law were bound to eefor r : o ol 4- law, and if this resolution were agreed to, the lad • not be altered, and Mr Baines would not be liberate u 1 ., Mr. ELLIOT said, without giving any onin iee fe solv your of Church -rates, he would not vote for th's," lases ' lion, which would go to sanction an opposition tot uts core Mr. EASTHOPE in reply said that Mr. 1 3 ' illee ,abic b before the House on the authority of a resolutios to t tie House had come in a similar case. He had ° D orf misty or violently resistel the law; but on the be pe" had patiettly suba itted to its penalties, although its de tiently, though firmly, declined to comply wi th a uff sr mends. He was suppotted in Lis determination t o Sol rather than yield to demands which his conscie nce re/‘ by 30,000 inhalatents of Leicestershire. of Lei Mr. HALFORD denied that the inhabitants cist irshire. would countenance a resistance to the I °i I,eil Mr. EASTHOPE said that 20,000 inhal-ritantecewocii center had elected Mr. Baines a Member of the %oven whilst he was in prison—( /leer, bear)-7 ,o° A ° la b s ) signed the petition for his liberation—(Hear, anu re - scriu ti°- —and 4,000 signed a petition in favour of the ' now before the House. The House then divided. The numbers were"' For the resolution Against it 46 Majority against tie resolution • eery at The announcement was received airh loud ebe-fore se On the motion of ntjor CH ETW YND a L r e j e ordered in detail of the number of cases which e r a t ' h dal red, from the sth day of January 1837 to the J `f r aolt a ,, January 84 1, in each year, of letters franked or . I tir gb,: addressed to persons in London, Dublin, or Ed ° ra t P< which have been applied for, through the Ge is n a e n . k..o ol4 ? offices of those cities, containing money, bills , - 0 101 6 or other property, which have been secreted or P aroo ee by any person in the employ of the Post-offic e de P ao O de ; or been demanded therefron by private part iee ' ea eh l e a s ; livered, with the amount thereof in each ca se, iti"f a ll P_.,"3 respectively; also, of the natre3 and situations ° nor taur sons dismissed or removed from the Post-office u r e rd o r as above, under the allegation of having PuTl °jl3 , o oce r° 4 , creted letters franked or urfranked, or be o ther P d 'io therein, containing money, bills, bank - notes , e t st oon 6 :4o perty belonging to private parties, with the rsone each instance; also, a Return as above of a ll P - iit of the have actually d&auded the revenue departrne:atioge, Post-o ffi ce, and been dismissed therefrom; 6 ' oo /P jo either case, if the first offence was visited with reebeieglai dismissal, or if repeated previous thereto k aot h v!", continuation of Return No. 265, ordered mso pI of March and 6th day of April 183 8 ) . o ffice ia r i t o return of the names of the colonels and other the '3-130 the different regiments of militia in Seotland;Aose I t ei t of their several commissions; distinguisbieg lord 'save served in the household brigade, the lines,o sup navy, together with the rank obtained by then: ' th i s the above services, and whether on half-pay 3 . 00 0 t ; l oo el or holding commissions in any yeomanry OW b e a o f the date of such commission. These returns t? c ocot te by the Colonel or fief'-officer, or other sent o f ea ch the different regiments, and by the Adjutant se tter be giment. _ er ree Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that to.tMote would move that the House resolve itself into tdu .0 on the subject of the South Australian Lean' Mr. H. DRUMMOND obtained leave se. seoti° Bill to a tothe close time in salmon fishing le 11 from the 15th to the Ist of September. to The House then Adjourned at a Quart°. o'Clock. ----------_ 36s s 40 ,, PA RLIAMENTAR Y .13 US ° 1. Preston and Report'Lon;isdogNeEßsnarw,ayM,lnctsl ivarc •„ .. 1 14 9. 00 42,. ! . . p. NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE 2. Preston and Lormidge Railway; Third Reading:c 0 air' 3. Eccicshill Inclosure,—Committee on Bill, March -''' ter before afC h 19. 4. Manchester and three. Salford Waterworks,—ReP° —rt ' M ' 5. Winwick Rectory,— Report, March 19. Derby. It % ini e ; _____'''!",--''.-..-- . c A CANINE POST-BEARER' -..-.t> • er i r ro ati t ; morning at ten by a dog from an extens ive resting scene may be witnessed auy day on • 6 : e t eve r . i g waiting-. appears that the Derby mail i 5 a ks ~7, lf, howev,. , r iron. 5 _ pr v. Worksop, waiting to be the bearer of the letter guardbgoitholo master, which is regularly dropped by the not s ota e ; where about at the hour of ten, _, the oe.. ine Messenger 1 ! ' so ead; and the dog is immediately observed i r , the ,b , t as_ . l t he her is dis taec i m eet • v coming along the road with all speed to the ea e,, , .at the lane end ; but this is very seldom tu d•eii o . l ' w alls a i a il. the dog usually scat; itself upon the ~ the to. ii , the Works, listening for the approach or re, co t When th e bag is thrown down, the ta;thful cree in t u e t hront a out delay, invariably takes the nearest way. borne day, t_.,„ the heige, and over the fields. Laier on In .' t the Poir ot empty bog is brought b, ck by the dog, to o' h ' e e gua rd d e b mail to Derby ; but, in comequence of t „ c oon f_i, getting off his seat, it is necessary to send. ~ ;_i t i s geP a e r the hog, who can throw it upon the mail wi'i,i_uecieeep „ The dog, feeling his inability to supply this W ith t his c e s c, notes his anxiety by balking and howling. _, a psi b• cei.tion, the animal performs all the duties,°'dispeteb• rier for his master " with punctuality an u r id Manchester Guardian. fr e rwr , • U Her Majesty the fonn a , z li ght coil aoJ In enns,Lie:';;c,, sur''''' . ia i,r Pi` ,‘; Nobility madw cans at Nl4rlborougla liot.:6' • _ a, .ice fpg ii.as in hash had. a dia:ler pariy cn oincsa4 Marlborough House, which was pustp_oncd. Queen Dowager c it i s , , lc; ja,,,,,,i 111 ' rara of tk, e tist, rc hicit O r d ( sitranj to TT- [lp, fan l~ Pire Vitt Uni of Wit!: DN B , will sir • mkthe p„,l tue.„ A t „, tie • 0 Tr, k~~ ,4 1