The Sun. — London, England, 1849-03-21 00:00:00

El 'l.i.tirti . ilbttion IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. • (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) LANDLORD AND TENANT BILL. Mr. PUSEY said, since the second reading of this Bill improvements had been suggested to him, and as he was anxious to engraft them on the Bill, he would now simply move its pro forma committal. Colonel SIBTHORP objected to the Bill being pro seeded with at all. Some of the highest authorities as land agents were opposed to it, as there was no necessity for any interference between landlord and tenant. There was nothing to be gained by this Bill. He opposed it rom no feelings of animosity against the Hon. Member for Berkshire, and in order that the House might believe that he was sincere in that declara tion, he would only mention that at the last Smithfield dinner he had the honour of proposing the Hon. Member's health, which he was glad to say was drank amidst loud cheers.—(Laughter.) However,he re peated he was decidedly opposed to the principle of the Bill ; and no matter how it might be corrected or re vised, he would use his humble efforts to prevent its passing into a law. Mr. H. HERBERT said the principle of this Bill was so peculiarly applicable to Ireland, that he trusted a clause would be introduced to extend it to that country. Any law that was good between landlord and tenant in England, must be equally good in Ireland, and although he should refrain from moving the amendment of which he had given notice on this subject, he trusted it would not be lost sight of.—(Hear, hear.) Sir G. STRICKLAND was sorry that the Honourable Member for Oxfordshire had announced himself in favour of this measure, because he, for one, was quite con vinced that while it would confer advantages upon land, it would prove seriously detrimental to the tenant farmer. —(Hear.) It would ha►e the effect of involving in doubt what really were tenant rights, and be productive of end less litigation on the subject.—(Hear.) At present those rights were well understood and observed, and he hoped the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire would reconsider the decision he had come to.—(Hear, hear.) The House then went into Committee. CoIoneI'SIBTHORP trusted ample time would be afforded to the country to consider the Bill in its new form. Mr . PUSEY said the improvement wonld not alter the main provisionr of the Bill, and as the amendments would, be immediately printed, he thought he ought not to be precluded from recommitting the Bill o❑ this day week.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel SIBTHORP hoped that some other day than that would be fixed upon. Mr. PUSEY really did not know how to please the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman. On a former occasion, because he introduced the Bill on a Friday, he was charged with having smuggled it in.—(Laughter.) Colonel SIBTHORP denied that he had made such a charge. Mr. PUSEY said if the Hon. and Gallant Member did not, others did.—(Hear.) The. clauses were then agreed to, pro forma, after which the House resumed, and the amendments were ordered to be printed, and the Bill recommitted on Wed nesday next. _ CLERGY RELIEF BILL. Mr. BOUVERIE moved that this Bill should be re ferred 'to a Select Committee, and in doing so referred to a statement which had lately appeared in one of the morning papers, stating that the object of the proceed. ings against Nlr. Shore, whose case was the immediate cause of the Bill being introduced, was not to imprison him, but to depose him, and to divest him of his office as a clergyman of the Church of England. He observed that that statement was not only not the fact but directly contrary to it. Mr. HENLEY said he was glad that the Hon. Mem ber had determined to move that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, and he hoped, if it went there that a provisi v► would be introduced into it, by which a clergyman might be divested of his office by the same authority who had invested him with it. The Bill as it at present stood, almost enabled a clergyma❑ to divest himself of his office with as little trouble as he would take to blow his nose.—(Loud laughter.) and he thought that was far too summary a proceeding for so serious a business. A military officer was obliged to resign his office through the hands of the same autho rities who had appointed him to it, and that principle might very properly be extended to ecclesiastical matters, After a few observations from Mr. R. PALMER, Mr. lIUME 'said he did not concur in the observa tions of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire. He could see no similarity between the rules of war, for the regu lation of the army, and the rules for the regulation of the clergy.—(Hear, hear.) If they put any obstacle in the way of a man leaving the Church, who conscientiously differed from its principles, they forced him to become a hypocrite. Mr. GL ADSTONE said, in order that be might not be supposed by theiHouse to concur in the sentiments of the Honourable Member for Montrose—(Laughter)— he wished to observe that it would not be well to discuss the provisions of the Bill at that stage, but the propriety of sending the Bill to a Committee up stairs.—(Cheers.) Mr. LACY explained that the course he had pur sued was in order to induce discussion, and that he was satisfied _ with the course recommended by the Hon. Member. Mr. ITORSMAN drew attention to the fact that clergyman who had recently been appointed one of the inspectors of schools was Gazetted an " Esquire." If such a person were elected aplember of that House. the House would be placed in an awkward position.—(No, no.) After the passing of the Bill a clergyman might be elected to sit in that House. Mr. STAFFORD thanked the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. (Bouverie),for bringing forward his motion, which was similar to one he had on the paper. All the clergymen with whom he had communicated perfectly assented to the justice of the provisions of the Bill—the only ques tion with him and them was as to the mode of carrying it out—:(Hear)—which they were perfectly satisfied to leave to the judgment of Parliament. Sir W. CLAY said ho understood the Hon. Member (Mr. Horsman) to say that the Committee was to be in structed to restrict seceding clergymen from sitting in the House. Now, he hoped the Committee would - do nothing of the sort, since it was essential to the carrying out of the princi ples of civil and religious liberty which he advo cated, that a person leaving the Church should be placed in the same position as if he were not ordained.—(Hear, hear.) He had a petition to present on the subject, signed by 5,000 persons, which he was anxious to re fer to the Committee. When, he should like to know, would be the proper time to make a motion of that kind? The SPEAKER replied, that the usual course to adopt was not to refer a petition to a Committee until a Com mittee was appointed.— (Laugh ter.) Mr. S. HERBERT presented a petition from the clergy or the 'diocese of Gloucester and Bristol, in cluding all the rural deans who had been able to attend, praying the House to remedy the state of the law with respect to seceding clergymen. Sir W. CLAY presented the petition to which he had referred,.and to the same effect as the last. Mr. HEADLAM presented a petition from the Dis senters of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in favour of the Bill. LIFE POLICIES OF ASSURANCE BILL. The second reading of this Bill was postponed for a week. THE RECOVERY OF WAGES (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill passed through Committee with some amend meats. INSOLVENT MEMBERS BILL. Mr. CARD WELL presented a petition from the Liver pool Society for the Protection of Trade in favour of this Bill. The House then went into Committee. Mr. HENLEY regretted that the Committee had been taken to-day, as the Select Committee had but recently reported to:the" House. In consequence of this, and the belief that it would not be proceeded with to day, many Hon. Members had absented themselves. It was a most important measure, and it had been carried through the House with a great degree of energy. He confessed that, with none of her Majesty's Ministers in the House, he thought that the House was going on at a pace which was hardly discreet or convenient. Mr. MOFFATT said, the Committee up stairs had not made the slightest alteration in the principle or the clauses of the Bill. Clauses 1,2, 3, and 4, were agreed to without any dis cussion. On Clause 5 being read, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY wished to know, in order that the committee should understand the effect - of - this Bill, whether it was not the fact that if any Hon. Member was engaged in a suit at law, or at equity, and W 11,3 called on for payment of costs which he could not pay, the effect of this Bili wo u ld b e th a t th a t Hon. Member would cease to be a Member of that House? The SOLICITOR -GENERAL said, that in the case , put by the Honourable Baronet, the Member would have twenty-one days allowed to pay the costs; then, if he did not pay, an application to the Insolvent Debtor's Court, he would be declared insolvent; then, on that fact being certified to the Speaker, seat of the Member in question would be vacated. Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER could see no justice for a different rule in insolvent and bankruptcy matters. The law should be, at all events, consistent. He could not help feeling strongly the propriety of Placing the M e mbers of both bran c h es o f the Legis lature on the same footing in respect to this matter.— (Heat) It the House were to pass a Bill of this nature, disqualifying —and most properly so—from legislating in that House-in cases of insolvency, it would be but justice to prevent other persons similarly situated from legislat ing in tho- other House of Parliament.—(Hear.) He thought it was not too much to hope that the Govern ment would institute a similar measure in the other House.—(Hear.) Sir WILLIAM CLAY thought the House was proceeding on a principl e wholly Laic in thi s Bill. It was perfectly clear , Iron. the S o li c i tor -General's exP la natit,n, that any ifonuurahle Memb er might be de prived of his seat in that House, for uo moral offence whatever except not paying the costs in a suit at law. A constituency did not elect a man for his wealth, but for his talents ar,d his knowledge of their local want s . If this Bill had been in existence 50 years ago, Ch ar l es Fox, Sheridan, and evon Pitt himself, could not have retained their seats in that House. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL explained that the Bill merely gave nst.. co ; tuencies another oppor tunity of electing a man, it they thought fit, wh o had been declared an insolvent. (Hear, hear.) Now one word with respect to the Bankruptcy Act. It appeared to hi m that the law ought to be more severe against insolvents than against traders. And for this reason, that whereas the person in trade could not get 0 _ free from his engagements; vr.he ro..s. the party who was out of trade, in um, ty-nine cases out of a build, ed, be came insolvent in consequence of his own misconduct.— (Hear, hear.) The only difficulty that had been started, which was of sufficient consequence to be noticed, was that in which it was asserted that it could render the power of representatives to return Members to Parlia ment involuntarily void.—(Hear, hear.) But yet there was this reply to such an objection. The Bill only gave the opportunity to the electors of saying whether they considered any one fit to be a reprsentative or not. He would rather follow the advice of the Hon. Member for Newark, and wait for a short term Act from the House of Lords. After a few words in explanation from Sir W, CLAY, Mr. F. O'CONNOR said that he would agree with the Hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, and not offer any active opposition to the Bill. Yet be felt bound to state what effect this Bill was likely to have on the people at large. The people were striving to obtain a power of returning representatives without any property qualification ; and he would warn the House not to let them suppose that whilst they were advancing their re presentatives were retrograding. The effect of this Bill would be to frighten Members into the payment of debts which they really never owed.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted the Bill would be rejected, for he believed that if it became an Act of Parliament it would be productive of great mischief. Mr. HUME thought that he had opposed no sufficient obstacle to raise any serious objection to his proposal. With regard to the House of Peers, he believed that it was quite as desirous to keep itself pure as that House was, and if the measure worked well as regarded that House, no doubt the principle would be adopted by the other House. He could well conceive the difficulty arising from a long chancery suit, and he did conceive that it would be hard in the extreme that a man who perhaps with 1,0001. a year was embarrassed by the costs of legal proceedings, should be excluded from the House. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that the best plan would be to leave the matter altogether to the de cision of the judges, whose peculiar business it was to discriminate in cases of insolvency. This was a portion of the duty for which they were paid. Mr. HUME had always thought of late that according to the present rate of prices the judges were overpaid. Mr. R. PALMER thought that the Bill would be useful, and he should support the clause. Mr. MULLINGS also supported the clause. After a few words from the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, Sir W. CLAY said the Bill sanctioned the Speaker's declaring the seat of a Member vacant who might re fuse to pay a debt on the order of the Court of Bank ruptcy. Now, suppose, on an appeal to a Superior Court, it was decided that the Member was not liable for the debt, what redress did the Bill give for such an inquiry as it? He still thought the Bill so defective that he should move that the Chair man do report progress.—(Hear.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, in the case put by the Hon. Member the party so agrieved could be re elected. Mr. HENLEY said that was no - redress at all, for the same process might be gone through of obtaining the bankruptcy order, and the unseating of the Member again secured.—(Hear.) He hoped that the discussion upon the Bill would be postponed until a future day, when the House might have the benefit of the attend ance of one Member of the Government. Mr. H. BERKELEY thought that a vast deal of the Bill requiredi much; more consideration on the part of Hon. Members than had as yet been directed to it. There appeared to be a great disposition in that House to legislate against its own Members, and this was par ticularly observed in all measures which were brought !ordward to establish, or rather to create, purity of election. An agent had nothing to do but to give a sovereign to a voter, and an Election Committee could not refuse to turn out the Member on whose behalf it was alleged that the sovereign was give n. He hoped that the further consideration of the Bill would be postponed until a future day. Mr. STAFFORD hoped that no new element of con fusion would be introduced into the Bill, which, on the very face of it had an unsavoury appearance. The So licitor-General bad stated that the Bill would not effect the object which it was sought to accomplish, viz., the exclusion of insolvent Members from the Ilouse ; and when they saw that the title of it was so totally dissimilar to the clauses, he thought the House had a good ground for not sanctioning it. There' was a good deal of oppo sition in the House to it, but Members had a delicacy in speaking upon the subject. When it was under discus-- awn upon the last occasion, Members seemed to take very little interest in the debate, and on enquiring the reason ho was told, but he hoped it was not true, that all the insolvent Members had gone to the Levee.—(Hear.) Mr. MACKINNON said it was impossible in the 19th century that they could remain under the slur of having Members in the House who did not pay their debts, and who took advantage of the privileges of the House in order that they might defraud their creditors. If they wished to raise themselves in the public estimation they ought at once to pass this measure. If it was the wish of the House that Members should be eligible for re-election upon getting a release from the judgments issued against them, the Bill might easily be altered in that respect by the in sertion of two words. He was strongly opposed to any attempt for throwing overboard this measure. Colonel THOM.PSON said it might be extremely improper to afford shelter to any Member who could not, or would not, pay his debts; but it was a work of supererogation to pass a measure for the recovery of debts from Members against whom a process could be successfully carried or out of the House. There was hardly a Member of the Home who was not a president, vice-president, go vernor, or member of some commercial or charitable in stitution; and, in the ;glorious uncertainty of the law which existed in the time of our ancestors, and existed now, they might be called upon to se ttl e c l a i ms aga i nst such institutions, for which they were not equitably responsible. An instance occurred, not many years ago, of two Members of Parliament being fixed upon for the payment of some claret, the club to which they belenged being unable to settle the demands upon it. He should vote against the Bill. Mr. MOFFATT replied. He regretted that he could not accede to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Derbyshire. The Honourable Member for Northamptonshire said that a man might be re-elected; but if he became a fraudulent insolvent, he never could be re-elected . At the present moment directors of public companies were no more liable for the debts of the undertakings with which they were con nected than they would be under this Bill; for if they did not pay their debts they were liable to be ejected from the House under the bankruptcy laws. The House should bear in mind that he did not propose to, introduce any new principle. The mover of the amendment " that the Chairman report progress" had not stated any valid reasons in support of his proposi tion, he had merely objected to the principle of the Bill. Alter a few words from Mr. MU LLINS, The House divided, when there appeared— Fur reporting p rogress 34 Against it Majority ... ..• ••• —43 After a few words from Mr. HENLEY the House agreed to the 4th clause. Mr. HOUNDELL PALMER proposed an amend ment to the sth clause, to the effect that an insolvent Member, whose seat had been vacated, should be put precisely in the same situation as a bankrupt stood in regard to that House, who could not sit again until he had obtained his certificate from the Bankruptcy Court. Mr. MOFFATT did not see any objection to the amendmeu t. The amendment was thereupon agreed to. The House then went through the remaining clauses, making a few verbal amendments, which did not provoke any opposition or discussion, and the House having re sumed the Chairman reported progress. Mr. HENLEY thought that to-morrow would be too soon to report the Bill. Mr. BERNAL said this day week. Mr. HENLEY—There were several Members who wished to take part in the discussion who had been un able to be present to-day. He thought, therefore, that it would be better to postpone the consideration of the report. Mr. HUME conceived that the objections which ho had put were of great force, and ought to be taken into account.—(Hear, hear.) The question of costs in a law suit was a very poor one. Mr. BERNEL was exceedingly surprised that the Hon. Member for Montrose had at all supported the principle of the Bill. The objections which he had urged were altogether fatal to the principle, and he was only astonished at his supporting the Bill, or rather its prin ciple at all. Mr. lIUME was quite oppo se d t o th e Bill. H e should likesome arrangement,certainly, but the prin ciple of the Bill was one which he could not in any wassulptpor t tken ordered that the report should be brought nt T d E a N y AwNeeh AT RACK RENT RELIEF BILL. THE Mr. SOTHERON, on th e motion a being put for the second reading of this Bill, e xpresseddesire that some clause should be introduced to put the rate-payers, w h o had formerly contributed to the erect i on of lun atic asylums, should be put on the same footing as those who had not paid anything towards the fund for such a purpose. He thought the Bill was a very good Bill, and he quite agreed with its principle, but he thought that its details, especially as regarded the point to which he had alluded, might be very much amended. Sir F. LEWIS said that as far as the measure went it bad his decided approbation. He did not, however, think it went far enough. He thyught great advantage would be gained by placing such rates upon the landlord instead of the tenant. _ Mr HODGES doubted whether the provisions of the Bill could be carried out. _ _ Mr BROTHLRTON agreed with the principle of the Bill, but thought there would be great diffieultics in carrying out its details. Mr. d. LEWIS did not object to the second reading of the Bill, but ho thought its provisions might be con siderably improved i❑ Committee. Sir J. DUCKWORTH supported the second reading of the Bill. After a few words from Mr. F. Edgerton, Mr. P. Scrope, and Mr. 11. Palmer, who also supported the . Bill, but suggested improvements t o b e considered in Committee, Mr. SOUTHERLAND replied. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed this day week. Mr. FOX MAULE brought up the report of the Co mmittee of Supply re l a ti ng t o t h e army est i mates, which was considered and agreed to. ECCLESIASTICAL BENEFICES. Upon the motion of Mr. MULLINS, leave was given to bring in a Bill to extend the remedies of sequestrators of ecclesiastical benefices. STTPPT,Y. the rep_tt of the Coututii.tee of 6upp:y was biGug up and agreed co.__ _ PUBLIC ROADS BILL. Colonel LEWIS brought in the Public Roads Bil which was read a first time. After the transaction of some other unimportani business, The House adjourned at five o'clock. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. SIR,—Iu your paper of the 16th, I find my name is placed; as voting in the minority on Mr. Di srae li' s motion for transferring a portion of the poor and other rates to the Consolidated Fund ; whereas I voted in the majority and against Mr. Disraeli's motion. Begging you will correct this error, I am, Sir, your obedient servant, RICHARD HARRIS, NAVAL IN TELLIGENCE. GIBRALTAR, MARCH 9.—The Sidon steam-frigate ar • rived here on the 4th, from the Riff Coast. The Polywhemus steam-sloop was soon after dis patched to Tangier, with negotiations respecting the piracies on the above coast, which, I think, are in a train for satisfactory settlement. The Vanguard, 80, sailed the same day for Plymouth to be paid off. The Polyphemus has not yet returned, but is momen tarily expected to heave in sight, when, it is reported, Sir Charles Napier will leave this for England in the St. Vincent, the Sidon, Plumper, and Renard in com pany-. PLYMOUTH, MARCH 19.—Her Majesty's ship Van guard, 80, Captain George F. Rich, scaled guns, and was inspected this morning in the Sound by Admiral-Super intendent Sir John Louis. She has discharged her powder into boys, preparatory to going up harbour. Her crew are suspected of having a considerable quantity of contraband goods on board. One revenue cutter is moved astern, one is sailing round her, and every boar leaving the Vanguard is minutely rummaged by the revenue officers. Her Majesty's steam-vessel Conflict arrived on Satur. day from Woolwich. Orders were received at the Dockyard on the 17th to prepare for commission her Majesty's 50. gun frigate Indefatigable. Her masts will be put on board this week. The merchant barque Queen, of Greenock, Captain Alexander Hutton, 128 days from China, was off the port this morning, bound to London. Her dates are— Sbanghae, 9th of November, 1848; Cape of Good Hope, 17th of January, 18b9; off St. Helena, 28th of January, and off Ascension Ist of February. The flag-ship of Admiral Dacres, the President, 50, Capt. W. P. Stanley, and two sailing vessels•of-war were at Simon's Bay. At Table Bay, the merchant ships Larkin and Kent, and brig Nautilus, a Dutch bark and a Dutch brig; also the steam-ship Pottinger, three months from Bombay, full of passengers, homeward- bound, with loss of funnel and other damage, and bottom covered with grass 3 inches long; no war vessel at Table Bay. Off St. Helena, the barks Janet and Buenos Ayrean, both homeward bound. At St. Helena the ships Duke of Argyle, John o'Gaunt, and Heigh Walker. At Ascension her Ma jesty's store receiving ship Tortoise, 12, Captain Frede rick Hutton, and a 16-gun brig. Spoke 17th of March the barque Ellen Mary from the Mauritius bound up Channel, and the ship Kent from Table Bay. The Queen is laden with tea and 80 to 100 bales of silk; she landed at the Cape James Johnson, a sick seaman, and at Plymouth Mr. R. R. Parry, and Mr. R. Mocatta, passengers. The only other passenger, Mr. G. J. Syme, is gone on in the Queen. Wind easterly, light breezes, cold and hazy. FIVE P.M.—Her Majesty's brig Ranger, 6, Comman der Charles F. Newland, came in this afternoon, all well, from the coast of Africa; left Sierra Leone on the 10th of February, same day as her Majesty's brig Wanderer, 16, Commander F. B. Montresor. About 20 days since the Ranger spoke the brig Challenger, of Glasgow, out ward bound. her Majesty's ship Vanguard is now under canvas going up Hamoaze. , WOOLWICH, MARCH 30.—The C . ) clops Dutch war steamer went up the river yesterday afternoon to Black - wall, and passed Woolwich sit half-past seven o'clock A. 31. to-day on her return to the Netherlands. The pendant and flags were hoisted half mast high in conse quence of the death of the King of the Netherlands. i a The Niger steam sloop went down the river yesterday morning on trial, under the charge of Lieutenant Robert son. Captain Halstead, Captain Hyde Parker, Captain Spencer, and several of the officers studying steam at the Woolwich factory, Mr. Humphries (chief engineer at Woolwich Dock-yard), Mr. Smith (of' the screw propeller department), and Mr. Field (of the firm of Maudslay, Field, and Son, the conetructor of her engines) were on board, and she proceeded as far as the Mouse Light, and when tried between the Nore and Mouse Light her speed was found to average 9,494 knots, her engines making very nearly 69 revo lutions per minute. She returned to Woolwich shortly after seven o'clock P.m., having made the distance from the Nore to ber moorings at Woolwich Dockyard in 2 hours and 53 minutes. The armament for the Basilisk has been received at the dockyard, and consists of one 10-inch gun of 85 cwt., one 8-inch gun of 94 cwt., and four 32-poundar guns of 42 cwt. each. She is to be ready for trial by the end of the present month. The Monkey steam-vessel, Master Commandant W. Bryant, accompanied the Niger during her trial yester day, and has been taken alongside the sheers to-day to have her funnel taken out and some repairs effected. FRANCE. The trials at Bourges still continued. On Mon day, MM. Ledru•Rollin, Marrast and Vidocq were examined for the prosecution. ITALY. General Chrzanowski, the Commander-in-Chief of the Piedmontese army, has addressed to it the follow ing proclamation, dated Alexandria, the 14th : ‘• Soldiers,—The days of the truce have passed away, and our wishes are granted. Charles Albert again comes to place himself at the head of your brave ranks. The armistice is renounced, and the days of glory for the arms °Maly are about to recommence. Soldiers 1 This is the supreme moment Soldiers! March to the battle which must be to certain victory. Following the example of your Princes, who fight in your ranks, and the voice of your King, who leads you on, marc h, and prove to Europe,, that you are not only the bulwarks of Italy, but the avengers of her rights. At the approach of your arms the oppressed populations will change their coin plainings into cries of joy, and our brothers, once more saved, will fly into your arms participating in the in toxication of the triumph gained. Soldiers! the greater your alacrity may be more prompt will be your victory. The braver the battle, the sooner you will return into the bosoms of your families, crowned with laurels, and proud of having a free, independent, and happy country." The following order of the day was published at Milan on the 12th : "Soldiers! Your most ardent wishes are fulfilled. The enemy has renounced the armistice. A second time be stretches out his hand to grasp the crown of Italy. But let him be taught that six months have not in any degree lessened your fidelity to your Emperor and King, or your bravery in supporting him. Having come forth from the gates of Verona, flying from victory to victory, and driven the enemy back within his frontiers, you generously granted him an armistice. While declaring that he was preparing to make pacific propositions, he was arming himself for renewing the war. We are all armed, and that peace which we ge nerously offered him, we will gain by force in his own capital. soldiers I The conflict will not be long. It is the same enemy whom we have beaten at Saint Lucia, Somma Campagna, Custozae, Volta, and be fore the grates of Milan. God is with us, for our cause is just ! Up once more, soldiers, follow your chief', who has grown grey in arms, to war and victory. I shall be a witness of your exploits. It will be the last in spring act of my long life, as a soldier, if in the capital of a disloyal enemy I can decorate the breasts of my brave comrades with the insignia of their valour, gained by blood and glory. Let our war-cry then be, Forward, soldiers, to Turin It is there that we shall find the peace for which we fight. Long live the Emperor 1 Our country for ever. " BADETZKY." A letter from Rome of the 9th states that news had just reached that city of the arrival of a French war steamer at Ancona, and that several other vessels, whose flag could not be distinguished, were in sight. The same letter mentions a report of the death of Garibaldi. SALMON FUMING IN THE TAY.—The takes con tinae to be extremely sparse and unremunerating; in deed, a worse week than the last eight days have proved could hardly be conceived. At the North Inch not a fin has been turned over for these ten days, and many other grounds are reported to have been equally unfortunate, while the best luck hardly deserves to be mentioned. Prices still remain the same as last week .—Perth Advertiser. DREADFUL CONFLAGRATION AT MERTON, SURREY. —At a late hour last night (Tuesday) the retired vii lege of Merton presented a most unusual scene of confusion, owing tor.the outbreak of :a fire in some stabling, causing the total destruction of many build ings, farming implements, &c. The scene of destruc tion adjoins the Six Bells public-house. With all possible expedition several engines had been taken to the fire, and fortunately a good supply of water was obtained. The loss is fearful in amount, but happily no lives were lost. Its cause was attributed to carelessness. The following is an official account re turned f u i Merton,l d ing s , s b u l i r c r - e h y o ; u s b e u , ad sd n i ng o u h e x o ti c e s p e s t o n g f p Mr. O b J 1 . e to the vari ous i nsurance-offices:—The farm -Mhoiluleser, roof only damaged) all destroyed and contents therein, of great extent in value. Insured in the Sun Fire-office. GOLD IN FRANCE.—In carrying on works for im proving the bed of the river at Strasbourg, the engineers of the Pouts-et-Chaussees, a few days ago, turned up some stones containing marks of metal. An examina tion having been made by M. Kopp, chemical professor in the Academy. it was found that a piece of freestone contained large incrustrations of a yellow, ductile metal, which turned out to be massive gold, with a little silver, and some other metal, probably iron or copper. The gold was not in thin flakes, like those which gold seekers find in th sun(' of the Rhine, bus in dense massive bits, and in large quantities in proportion to the quarts. CALIFORNIAN GOLD.--MT. T. H. Henry has analysed some samples of this gold, and found in one 88'75 per cent. of pure gold, 8.88 of silver, 0.85 of cop per, with a trace of iron and 1.40 per cent. of silicious residue. In another sample the pure gold was 86.57, the silver, 1 9 .33, the copper 0-29, and the iron 0.54 per cent. It is found that the surface of the gold is purer than the interior, and that before fusion, the metal ap pears nearer the colour of pure gold, and after fusion it assumes the hae of a brassy yellow.—Herapath's Journal. • THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 21, 1849 STATE OF T! AP the Manchoter oi . MANCHESTER, MARCH 20.—The aspect of continental politics having become more threatening since our last report, and other adverse influences remaining undimin ished, all classes of buyers have manifested au increased indisposition for business to-day ; while, on the other hand, many spinners and manufacturers have ;shown a greater anxiety to effect sales. The result has been a still further contraction of operations, and, alto gether, an exceedingly flat market. In the absence of offers, prices have been put to no sufficient test; and in the demands of producers there is much irregularity, arising from differences of position as to contracts, and in other respects; both yarns and goods are, however, undoubtedly lower than they were this day week. In some articles which had previously reached a high level, the fall is considerable. ROCHDALE, MAUCH 19.—We have had a fair average market to-day, at prices much the same as those of the preceding week. There has been very little doing in wool, and the manufacturers have purchased very spar ingly, but prices continue firm. IitiDDERIWIELD, MARCH 20.—There has been a very good and steady trade doing to-day in the hall, and merchants have been obliged to purchase at an advance upon last week's prices. In vesting& there is not much business. Wool goes off steadily, at an advance, and the stocks are likely to realise the prices given at the last sales. HALIFAX, MARCH 17.—The attendance of merchants in the Piece Hall to-day has not been large, and the sale of goods far from brisk. The merchants are un willing to give present prices, and having stocked them selves at the beginning of the rise, are now out of the market. In the warehouses there is a moderate busi ness doing, both in plain and fancy goods, but not, in general, at prices equal to the increased cost of the raw material. Yarns have undergone no alteration. Prices are very firm, and orders are somewhas freely given, where they can be taken a little below the cur rent quotations. There is not much activity in the wool market, and prices are maintained, tdough there is scarcely so much firmness as there was. LEEDS, Mulct( 20.—We had last Saturday a very fair market, but there has been a sensible falling off in the demand to-day, and very few goods changed hands at the cloth halls. The warlike aspectl of things on the Continent creates an un e a s y f ee li ng , an d i m p oses the necessity of acting with double caution; many an operation is on these grounds kept in suspense by the export houses, who generally begin to be busy at this time of the year. Prices continue steady, and stocks low in the manufacturers' hands. MARINERS' FRIEND SOCIET Y A numerously-attended public meeting of the above society was held in the London Tavern on Thursday last. Henry F. Richardson, Esq., F.L.S., being called to the chair, the proceedings of the meeting having been opened by prayer, the chairman stated that the meeting had been convened for the purpose of confirming the formation, constitution, and past proceedings of the society. lie entered into an interesting account of the society's progress, detailing the various objects in view, and showing the great amount of good, both spiritual and temporal, that had been and was likely to be ac complished. He announced that the Duke of Cambridge had become patron, the Duchess of Somerset and the Honourable Miss Vernon patronesses, Lord Nelson pre sident, Sir Admiral Codrington and a long list of noble men and gentlemen vice-presidents. It was ably moved by Mr. KNIGHT, seconded by Mr. BURROWS, and carried unanimously, to the effect that a society having for its object the promotion of the spiri tual, intellectual, and temporal welfare of seamen had long been needed. Mr. WILLIAM BRADFORD, superintendent of the so ciety, then addressed the meeting, and in a speech re plete with evidence of comprehensive and practical jthudegsmoceinetty in inmiatrsivtiamrieoauffsadirespaarntdmheneats, showing the largertfelt interest in th e cause fully explain e d th e o perations and intentions of amount of good it had already accomplished, especially in the religious and educational departments; and explain ing the various means that were in course of preparation for preventing loss of life at sea and on our rivers, he remarked, that the recent loss of life in the emigrant ship Floridian might have been prevented, had this society been in full operation. Captain SMITH, R.N., entered into a spirited detail in behalf of the society, remarking on the seaman's reluc tance in providing any means to save life in case of wreck—warmly confirming the observations of the super intendent, and concluded by a resolution approving of the society and its past proceedings. Mr. BEATTIE seconded the resolution, which was car ried unanimously. Several other gentlemen then addressed the meeting, great interest and satisfaction being displayed by all persons. A vote of thanks to Mr. Bradford, the founder and superintendent of the society, was proposed and carried unanimously; also to Mr. Arnold. the secretary, and to the Chairman. Captain Light, R.N., exhibited some improved life belts referred to by the superintendent, and explained their great utility. The meeting then concluded with prayer by Mr. R. Holder, one of the missionaries of the society. FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE OF TUESDAY. DIVIDENDS. At the Court, Basinghall-street. F. W. E. Barcndon, Philpot-lane, merchant, April 12, at eleven. In the Country. J. Matthews and C. D. Matthews, Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, and Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire, bankers and grocers, April 17, at ten, at the Court, Bir mingham—J. Wilkins, Bridport, Gloucestershire, marble mason, April 18, at eleven, at the Court, Exeter—T. Symes, Bridgewater, Somersetshire, scrivener, April 19, at one, at the Court, Exeter —J. J. Kingdon, Ridgway, Devonshire, saddler, April 18, at el even , a t t h e C ourt, Exeter—A. Blumenthal, Birmingh am , wine merchant, April 18, at twelve, at the Court, Birmingham—W. Maury, Liverpool, merchant, April 10, at eleven, at the Court, Liverpool—R. Kay, Tottington Lower End, Lan cashire, corn and flour dealer, April 12, at eleven, at the Court, Manchester—E. Arrowsmith, Burnley, Lanca shire, mercer, tailor, and undertaker, April 12, at twelve, at the Court, Manchester. ___-PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS. T. C. Stanbrough, Berner's-street, Oxford-street, wine merchant, ls. any Wednesday, between eleven and three, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Basinghall-street. I. Denning, Titchbourne street, Westminster, watch maker, sd. any Wednesday, between eleven and three, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Basinghall-street. J. Ba!eigh and S. Goode, Manchester, merchants, ad., on Tuesday, March 27, or any subsequent Tuesday, be tween eleven and one, at the offic e of Mr. Pot, Man chester. Manchester, sh awl and fringe manufac turer, Callam,id. , on Tuesday, March 27, or any subsequent Tuesday, between eleven and one, at the office of Mr. Port, Manchester. G. E. Dinsdale, Middleham, solicitor, Is. lid. any day on and after March 22, between eleven and two, at the of of Mr. Young, Leeds. J. Eovesy, Cheltenham, librarian, second dividend of dividend T r : Wednesday, e 7 g s a . Wednesday, March 21, between on ° . n works,m te o n nm an o d ut t h w sh el i v re e : Mr. Miller, Bristol. ao l tr s .. . ot , a hb fi . eyr Hughes,s subsequent office of grocer, 25 n da ten and t we l ve, at t h e o ff ice 3', March 21, or any subse • • -, on of Mr. Miller, Bristol. J. StockhaEn, Post Office Taver n , B r i stol, licensed vic quent Wednesday,. sd W mlid., dwnee iller, Ss. on Wednesday, b e e t e s March 21, or an y sub sequent Wednesday, between ten and twelve, at the office of Mr. Acraman, Bristol. W. Insall, Shipton. upon-Sto ur, W orcestershire, auc tioneer, second dividend of 6d.,_ any Friday, b e t ween eleven and three, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Basing hall-street. NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES. At the Court, Basinghall-street. C. J. Knapping, Eastwood, Esser, cattle-dealer, April 11, at twelve—G. Streeter, Lisson-grove, Middlesex, draper, April 19, at eleven—J. Willis, Osborne -street, Whitechapel, ale and porter merchant, April 12, at eleven—ld. E. Stevens, Grays, Essex, grocer, April 12, at one. TY''OLVENT PETTTT'NF.ps .•ilAl*`i 13,LZ' :C.:ough, Lac, field- ,t, bout. and sii.e maker. Thomas Keyworth, Laneham, Nottinghamshire, inn keeper. Thomas Homer, 'West Bromwich, Staffordshire, baker. William Hewett, Tilfuton, Devonshire, dairyman. Peter Leach, Silvertnn, Devonshire. Richard Witty, Great liriffield, Yorkshire, tailor. John Nelson, Bury, Lancashire, cotton spinner. John William Benbow, Hanley Castle, Worcestershire, farmer. Joseph Yeend, Ledbury, Worcestershire, farmer. William Vaughan, Great Malvern, Worcestershire, plumber, &c. Samuel Smith, St. Margaret, Leicestershire, joiner. John Dancaster, Exeter. John White, Stockland, Devonshire. James Shaw, Liverpool, lodginghouse keeper. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. J. Cameron, Glasgow, wine and spirit merchant, to meet within the Black Bull Hotel, Glasgow, March 26 and April 16, at twelve. J. Higgins, Glasgow, baker, to meet within the Albert Tavern, Glasgow, March 26 and April 23, at one. J. Cuthill, Paisley, manufacturer, to meet within the Saracen's Head Inn, Paisley, March 29 and April 19, at two. W. Taylor and J. Muir, Kilmarnock, grocers, to meet within the George Hotel, Kilmarnock, March 27 and April 17, at one. J. Nicoll, Dundce, tea merchant, to meet within the British Hotel, Dundee, March 26 and April 16, at one. A. Gillon, Glasgow, storekeeper, to meet within the Black Bull Inn, Glasgow, March 27 and April 17, at two. J. Browning, Glasgow, saddler and harness maker, to meet within the Globe Hotel. Glasgow, March 24 and April 14, at twelve. In the Country. Bristol —E, H o ! paper maker, , J. Wintle, Shirehampton, Gloucestershire, icnnokgesewpeelrl. April 10, at eleven, at the Court, B Hewitt, at te n, at the Co ur t, Kingstonßristol—H,rrst,h Lincoln,AW o r o i l t t l o 2 n u dlt miller, April at the l o u c Court, s o t u e upon-Hull—W. Parrott, Leicester, stone mason, April 13, at ten, at the Court, N o ttingham—W. Bedells, Lei cester, paper dealer, April 13, at eleven, at the Court, Nottingham —T. Core, Stamford , Lincolnshire, inn keeper, April 13, at t en , a t the Court, Nottingham. At the Caurt of Review, April 10. F.Thompkins, Sydney-street, Fulham-road, bili broker Artus, Pall•mall, Opera-colonnade, ci gar im porter—G. T. Saltm ars h, Houndschth, City, wine and spirit merchant—J. H. Howard, Cheltenham, oil mer chant—J. Hignell, Colchester, grocer—W. Abbott and W. Abbott, jun., Bermondsey-street, Southwark, patent hair felt manufacturers—W. Corns, jun., Wolverhamp ton, builder—W. Lindley, Conisbrough, Yorkshi re , scythe and sickl e manufactu rer--G. F. Widnall, Edge ware-road, Paddington, stationer —J. Ransferd, Leam ington Priors, Warwickshire, coal merchant—T. F Beales, William street, Knightsbridge, wine merchant. farmers —G. tG a a s e. a Ta n ne d geig H T, . s. L eun o a m ,rd a as s nt , ac A i Stamford ! PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. Nottinghamshire, a LG n i c .n h b e y s , ter, corn-dealers— hill, farriers—W. Cornish and C. L. Cornish, Birming ham, booksellers —J. Collins and H. A. Rigley, Crescent place, Bridge-staeet, Blackfriars, solicitors — J , Hollis, I. Hollis, W. Tranter, and I. B. Sheath, Birmingham. gun and pistol - manufacturer s (so far as regards J. Hollis and W. Tranter)—T. Lawrence and T. Casson, Aigburth, cannibus p ro prietors—Susannah Brown and Jane Daniel Queen's-terrace, Queen's-road, St. John's Woed, fancy stationers—R. Robson and C. Theakston, Claypath, Durham, grocers—T. Robinson and D. Robinson, Ar thuret, Cumberland, grocers—J. Hartley and W. Perks, Bishop Wearmouth, Durham, glass manufacturers —R. Bainbridge and R. M. Pearson, Liverpool, export sta tioners—F. J. Hall and W. Jenkins, Newport, Mon mouthshire, solicitors —F. T. Atkins and J. Atkins, Deptford, chemists and druggists—J. Holmes and A. L. Holmes, Liverpool, stockbrukers—E. Benn and A. W. Lyon, Bahia, merchants—W. Wigiall,: H. Beauvoisin, and H. G. Hammond, Sheffield, brush manufacturers (so far as regards 11. G. Hammond) —T. Crook and J. Swarbrick, Preston, Lancashire, cotton manufacturers-- W. Clegg, J. Clegg, jun., and J. Clegg, Rochdale, Lan. cashire, machine makers—J. Toplis and T. Crooke, Derby, cordwainers—R. Edwards and J. B. Loader, Sudbury, Suffolk, linen and woollen drapers—J. John stone and J. Johnstone, Norwich, drapers. NEW AUSTRIAN CONSTITUTION. (From the Weekly Dispatch.) Mr. Editor,—What have the people of England to do with the Austrian Constitution? I should reply that, full of an anxious desire for reform here, determined not to remain the serfs of a few hundred families possessing landed property, they will look into the manifesto of a despot Emperor to see what are the essentials of liberty and justice proclaimed even by such an authority. Whether the offer be another lie, intended to be coun teracted by fraud, as the concessions of the late Emperor have been by force, or whether they shall be honestly carried out for the benefit of the Austrian people, is no thing to the question. If it is considered necessary by the worst and meanest of all Governments, excepting possibly those of Naples and Spain, to put forth certain principles as the only ones that can be professed with decency, as the only pretences compatible with a show of sense and justice, we are fully entitled to the benefit of the admission, and have a right to work out its full conclusions against our own Egyptian taskmasters. The undisputed abolition of the worst oppressions throughout the Austrian empire is, in itself, a matter of congratulation to all freemen. It is something that, in so immense a domain, inhabited in parts by tribes utterly barbarous and habitually servile, there should be pro mulgated such a law as this, " Serfdom, no matter of what kind or description, is abolished. A slave becomes free by touching Austrian ground, or going on board of an Austrian ship." We may felicitate ourselves that the freedom of the press is acknowledged, and all censorship abolished, that judges are made irrremovable, except for proved offences in office, that great crimes and all politi cal offences, including libel, must be tried by a jury, that a Habeas Corpus Act is established, by which a prisoner must be brought within 48 hours before the judge of his district, that Ministers are made responsible, and that the Emperor cannot pardon their crimes against the State; that property cannot be confiscated; that all Aus trians are equal before the tribunals; and that a man's house is to be invaded only by the authority of recog nized law. All these are concessions to the general spirit of established truth. All these are answers to the pernicious appeals to our English egotism, when we are told to be content, for that no nation is so free as our own. Such liberties as we have are proclaimed, for all his subjects, by the autocrat of Austria, in one of the strongholds of the Holy Alliance. We may brag as much as we please about the adoption of these great foundations of liberty from our example—that, in shed ding their blood to lay them, our ancestors established the basis of European as well as of British freedom; but we can no longer boast of a monopoly, and, moreover, we shall find that our dullest scholars have gone beyond us, and that, among them, these great charters of popular rights are not frittered and explained away by other conditions, such as make us hold them only at the will of an oligarchy. The security of all freedom is the right of suffrage. Give the people—really the people—the power to elect their own representatives, and give to those representa tives the control of the taxes, and nothing short of armed revolution, a conspiracy between a Sovereign and an army brought to a successful end, can establish a permanent slavery. This suffrage is, by the Austrian constitution now proclaimed, vested in every one who pays a certain sum in direct taxes. In the country, and in towns of less than 10,000 souls, nine shillings so paid qualify both voter and candidate. In towns of greater size the qua lifications will vary from eighteen to thirty-six shillings. This, be it remembered is the proposition of a Govern ment fighting against Universal Suffrage, a Government that claims to have pnt down all resistance or opposition by force of arms. What sort of comparison will the franchise here bear with it? Call our poor-rate, as it would,be in Austria, a Government tax, and would such a law be anything short, of Household Suffrage here? But, if we are told to mark the difference of the value ct money in the two countries, I should reply by demanding that the difference of the method of taxation should also be taken into account—that our indirect taxation should be considered against the simple method of Austrian col lection—and then I should say that there is scarcely an adult peasant in this realm who does not, by his own con sumption and that of those who depend upon him, con tribute the highest amount, the 365., to the income of the country; and this is the qualification for the party to be elected, as well as for the elector. Besides this, the Austrians are offered equal electoral districts, one representative for every 100,000 in popu lation. There is no parcelling out of serf-voting terri tories; there is no Thetford, with 160 voters sending the same number of Members to Parliament as the Tower Hamlets, with 18,000. There are none of those precious " anomalies" which make the very same man, with the same means, a freeman in one district and a mute, voice less serf in another. There are no double, treble, ten times repeated votes, by which a great landholder: can be represented in ten places at once, while a respectable responsible householder may be represented nowhere at all. At all events, the new Austrian constitution does not openly profess itself to be a farce, so full of ab surdities, that while every tyro in figures can raise a laugh by contrasting one set of constituencies with an other, no man breathing can find a respectable apology for the tyrannous inequalities by which the populous, intelligent, incorruptible districts are sold to the paltry boroughs, scarcely known to exist but by their cor • ruptions. So much for the proposed Austrian Commons. Their House of Lords, too, is to be constituted on a plan quite as superior in liberality to ours. There is no lack in Austria of a proud, rich, territorial nobility, out of which au hereditary aristocracy might be chosen. But either the Government feels that it cannot shock the understandings of its subjects with such an institution, or is so wise as not to desire it. The number of the Uppor House is to be but half that of the Lower one. Each crown land, that is, each separate state of the empire, is to elect two members, and these are again to fill up their body from persons paying 441. a year direct taxes, say from the class which, is England, would receive and expend about 800!. a year. While we permit a privileged class not only to have a house of its own, co-equal with that which we call ours, and also suffer this class to nominate, by intimidation, influence, or purchase, a majority in that which should represent us, the Ministry of despotic Austria is willing, by its own act, that the people, rich and poor, shall fairly and equally speak for themselves, and shall settle, with the Crown, the affairs of the Commonwealth. This seems clear, at least, that the Austrian Government has no intention that a few hundred people, waft their rela tives, friends, and dependents, forming a privileged body of a few thousands, shall suck the marrow of the land— control the Sovereign, on the one hand, and vitiate, as well as enslave, the people on the other. Education, too, is provided for—education, public and universal--and the clergy, in this bigotted, Catholic Austria, are only to interfere with it so far as to teach their own mysteries to the children of their adherents. The statesmen of the Empire, Catholic par excellence, do not understand, and will not permit, that dominant churches should play their freaks, and keep the people in ignorance, or dole out instruction through their own media of priestcraft only, to the exclusion of that ge neral and needful instruction which enables men to la bour successfully, and keeps them from idleness and crime. If there be M'Hales and Plumptres in Austria, they must be content to chew the cud of their intole rance, and to mind their own business; and, moreover, as no religion disqualifies for civil or politi ca l r i g h ts, Austria has no need of a Lord John Russell, with his double sophistries, to humbug fanatics into half justice, and Liberals into the acceptance of the half, as a com plete satisfaction of right. I have scarcely, Sir, touched upon the circumstances of this edict as they effect the Austrian territories them selves. I have not alluded to the absolute tyranny of dissolving the Diet at Kremsier for doing nothing when, in fact, it was doing too wisely and too well for those who feared it. I have not alluded to the gross oppres sion which may lurk in the seemingly freest institutions by blending kingdoms together which have nothing in commoa but their monarch, and crushing the enlight ened races under a body of barbarians. The " Case of Hungary," by Count L. Teleki, published by Effing ham Wilson, is a proof of atrocious violation of long guaranteed independence, of perjury and unjustifiable aggression, which casts the wrongs of Northern Italy itself into the shade. Hungary is ruled by the Aus trian Emperor, only on the very condition of its being maintained as a separate kingdom, such as it was when it first elected a Sovereign from that House, and the Austrian race have no more the right to govern it than they have to govern England, Nor have I said a word to those wiseacres who declare that a strong Aus tria is a needful ally for us, when it is clear as day that a strong, free, united Germany would be an infinitely more congenial friend and au incomparably surer gua rantee of peace and p• ogress. The object of this letter is merely to show what the basest and most tyrannical of Governments allows as the minimum of freedom. The more depraved and unjust that Government is, the stronger is my case, and the m ore i nto l era bl e i s t h e comparison bet ween the electoral and religious rights of England as they stand, and those which even the pro teges of Windischgratz, Jellachich, and Radetzky, allow that we ought to possess, by proclaiming a freer char ter for debased and brutalized Austria. CAUSTIC. I - I'4 P E L 7 , ; - HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 20. DISTRIBUTION OF CHURCH REVENUES. (Continued from our Third Edition of last night.) Lord J. RUSSELL said he had laid down no such doctrine as that attributed to him by the Hon. GI nt Leman as regarded episcopal resposibility; on the contrary he had always mentained, and still maintained, that the Bishops of the Church having an important public trust to perform, were bound to exercise it so as to benefit that church, and promote the best interests of religion, Of that there could be no doubt; but the re was a doubt whether the policy sought to be introduced by the Hon. Gentleman was a sound policy, that policy being that in each case in which the patron of a living had exercised his right, and appointed a rector, the House of Commons might be called upon to interfere, and to pronounce its opinion whether that patronage had been rightly exer cised or nut. Such a course would make that House a court of appeal, and would result in the greatest incon • venience, as with respect to the present case of the Bishop of Durham, or the case of any other Bishop, which might be brought before the House ' there was no one in that House authori se d t o spea k with respect to the facts of the case. The Hon. Gentlemon, who had pro posed this inquiry, had not hesitated to confirm one por tion of the petition he had presented from the inhabitants of Bishop Wearmouth, which stated that they had no complaint to make as to the appointment of the rector to that parish, who they considered in all respects fitting for his office, and he should have thought that such being the case, the strongest grounds for an appeal to the House of Commons would have been altogether done away with. If he had been a bad clergyman the Bishop had appointed, there might have been grounds of com plaint; but as he was admitted to be good, in his opinion there were none. In speaking of episcopal patronage, he must oppose the doctrine laid down by the Hon. Gen tleman that whilst the patronage put into the hands of bishops was a public trust, and they were bound to exer cise it for the public benefit, individuals holding private patronage could exercise it in any manner they chose. He considered that individuals holding the right of pa tronage to church livings had imposed upon them a solemn duty in the bestowal of that patronage, and what ever might be their private rights in regard to it, if they exercised it for their individual advantage and not for the interests of the residents of the district compre hended in it, they laid themselves open to much and to I just censure.—(Hear, hear.) If, then, that charge with respect to the Bishop of Durham had been done away with, what other charges were brought against the Right Rev. Prelate? It was said that the spiritual wants of the district were not sufficiently provided for by the dis tribution of those revenues ; but in relation to this there was a remarkable circumstance of which the Honourable Gentleman took some notice, but did not give it that prominence which it was entitled to,, and that was, that while Bishop Wearmouth was connected with the town of Sunderland, yet the parish of Bishop Wearmouth and the parish of Sunderland were two distinct parishes. The Honourable Gentleman said that the streets of Sunderland were miserably bad; that the population was destitute; that there was a great lack of religious instruction. That he believed to be the case, for he understood from parties not in any way connected with the Bishop of Durham, that while there were parties in Sunderland who give high interest for money to be laid out in the building of houses, yet that the occupiers of those houses were kept in the most abject and miserable condition. But the petition from the parish of Sunderland prayed that a portion of the surplus revenue of the parish of Bishop Wearmouth might be given to it for the endowment of additional chapels in Sunderland. That he conceived was a matter the House could not interfere with. Any poor parish in the metropolis might in the same way demand that a portion of the revenues of its richer neighbours might be given to it for a similar purpose. This, however, was not the law, and if it was so it would be attended with great injustice. If there was a surplus, let it be applied for the benefit of the Church at large, but not for the benefit of any particular parish. What he understood the Bishop of Durham to have done was this:--The late rector of Bishop Wearmouth had an income of about 3,0001. a year. On his dying, the Bishop of Durham in appointing the new rector only allowed him 1,2001 a year, aeal applied the surplus for the benefit of the chapels erected in the diStrict. There were some other funds arising from land and coals which were mixed up with it, and appropriated for the same purpose, the whole being placed in the hands of trus tees, for the purpose he had mentioned ; and whether that was a proper arrangement was not, in his opi nion, a case that the House could go into, as all that could be said was, that the arrangement had been made with a view to give a large portion of the re venue of the former rector for the purpose of supply ing the spiritual wants of the district. But then the Hon. Gentleman said it was illegal to make any such arrangement with the present rector; but that certainly was a case for the proper courts to decide, and, upon the whole case, he thought it would be better that Parliament should make some general arrangement ra ther than fix upon one particular case; and he could with safety generally assert iu regard to the present case, that he believed the Bishop of Durham to have acted in the full consciousness of the responsibility which rested on him, and that in so acting he had had in view the best interest of the Church in his district. He had known that Right Rev. Prelate long, and his belief was, that since his appointment to the see of Durham, which, since his elevation to it, had been reduced from 21,000/. to 8,0001. a year, by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, he had always acted with great propriety and generosity, and was ever disposed to exercise the patronage com mitted to him in such a way as to benefit the Church and the community. As to the reforms in the Church, which the lion. Gentleman had alluded to, he had no doubt that some of these—most necessary—would ema nate from the Commission on the subject now sitting, and to those which from time to time were found neces sary, he would be prepared to give his cordial support. He, therefore, must oppose the motion submitted to the House.—(Hear.) Mr. Alderman THOMPSON supported the motion. It was not many years since the parishes of Bishop Wearmouth and Sunderland were divided, and, therefore, he conceived that it was but justice a portion of the sur plus funds of the former should be given to the latter, which was in a very poor condition. The salary of the rector of Sunderland was very limited—only 2001. a year —and it was, in his opinion, but fair that a portion of the funds of the other parish, of which it once formed a part, should be appropriated for its benefit. The best plan to do that would be for the Bishop of Durham, or the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, to intro duce a Bill for having such appropriation affirmed. Lord HARRY VANE thought it would have been better had the Bishop of Durham introduced a Bill on the subject, but he could not agree to the motion of the Hon. Member for Cockermouth. He could speak &urn personal knowledge of the generosity and liberality of the Bishop of Durham, and of his attention to the inte rest of his diocese, and he did not think that the animad versions of the Hon. Gentleman were merited. Mr. DISRAELI said he agreed with the Noble Lord, that inquiries of the kind proposed were very injurious, but without entering into any personal details, he wished to know why the Bishop of Durham should not be the party to introduce a Bill to settle the question, which it was agreed on both sides of the House was necessary.— (Hear.) If the Right Rev. Prelate did not choose to do so, what was to hinder her Majesty's Government from doing it ? and if they promised to do so, he should be most happy to be spared the vote he otherwise should feel bound to give.—(Hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he thought that the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Horsman) and other Honourable Members should see that it was not in the power of the Government justly and fairly to interfere with that question by the introduc tion of a Bill, because the incumbent had a right to have whatever was promised to him at the time of his ap pointment; and therefore if a Bill were introduced by Government, it would be an act of spoliation to take any from the incumbent of %hat the Bishop of Durham had previously given him. He should add that he did not think that justice had been done to the Bishop of Durham,' because he knew, on good authority, inde pendent of that of the Noble Lord (Lord Harry Vane) that he was most liberal and munificent, even out of his own private money, to the poor of his diocese,—(Hear, hear) And that irrespective of any such donations, or any losses he may sustain, he had agreed to give 2,0001. per annum to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. He thought that the House should not deal with one parti cular portion of those ecclesiastical matters, but that a Bill applying generally would be far preferable. Sir R. PEEL said that he did not wish that any mea sure that would be disrespectful to the Bishop of Dur ham should be supported by the House, because from the manner in which he discharges his duties as a pious prelate, and as a most refined and erudite scholar, he considered that such a resolution of the House would be dealing very severely with him, as it would betray a want of confidence in him. In 1844, when the Ecclesi astical Commissioners were appointed, he, as First Mi nister of the Crown, from his confidence in the Bishop of Durham, left that incumbency to him, to be arranged as he thought proper; and he felt happy to state that his subsequent arrangement fully confirmed his (Sir R. Peel's) opinion of him. Yet he should say that he could not refrain from expressing his concurrence in the main object of the motion, for he thought it would be a good example for the Church to make a proper distribution, by the Right Rev. Prelate assenting to such a plan, now that the opportunity presents itself; and particularly as many bad already come forward to divest themselves of a pas tronaee of 5,0001. p er annum . H e d i d not agree with the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) when he stated that the Crown should not interfere with Bishop Wearmouth; for, when they considered how the spiritual interests of the poor population of those districts, both Sunderland and Bishop Wearmouth, had suffered since they were disunited, Sunderland had more claim on the distribu tion than had any other place; he thought it became the Government to attend to the spiritual wants of the people. He thought that it would be very advantageous if the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) would give advice to the Bishop of Durham to set the example by an Act of Parliament, so as to appropriate the suplus funds to the spiritual wants of that people who have the best claim on their notice. Mr. MANGLES said that he did not think that the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) did justice to the Hon. Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Horsman) when he at tacked his (Mr. Horsman's) motives. Instead of being the enemy of the Church, he believed him to be the firmest and most st a un c h supporter it had in that House. The Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) said that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Horsman) had failed in making out a charge of simoniacal practices against the Bishop of Durham. Such were not his motives, but rather to pro tect the Bishop's character against any such charges, by laying the groundwork for an Act of Parliament, which was essentially necessary. He considered that it would be a great relief to him and other members of the Church, if the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) would give n assurance that he would bring in such a 4)td a 5 v. ouid obviate the present motion.—(Hear,) Lord ASHLEY said that he regretted that a differ, nt course had not been adopted, so as to preclude the ne cessity of such a motion. He was fully convinced that the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Ilorsman) did not ob ject to a distribution, for he knew that it was a proper , iistribution he (Mr. Horsman) sought for. He ad mitted also that the purpose for which the Bishop of Durham deposited this yearly accumulation of money in the hands of trustees was not known, and that it should be known, as that revenue was intended by the pious donors for the spiritual wants of the poor, to which pur pose it was not applied, and such a system was highly ur,satisfactory. He perfectly agree d with the principle of the motion, and from hi s p r i vate k now l edge of the Honourable entleman (Mr. Horsman) he was ready on all occasions to bear his testimony to his zeal and in tegrity, and was fully assured that ho (Mr. Horsman) was actuated by no other desire than to promote the interest of the Church. He, however, hoped that he would allow him to make a suggestion to him to withdraw his motion on the present occasion, as all were agreed that it was right that the matter should be settled by an Act of Parliament, in which the Noble Lord (Lord .J. Russell) and the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) coincided; and he hoped that he (Mr. Horsman) would trust to the good feeling of the Bishop of Durham, that he would introduce a measure in correspondence with the conscientious feelings of Parliament. Mr. STUART WORTLEY said that he joined with every Member who had spoken on that subject, that there was a necessity for some legislative measure for the arrane - elnent of that questi on . H e did not mean to charge the Bishop or the incumbent, no more than any other Hon. Member who had spoken, because he believed that the money was laid aside for some good purpose; yet he did not think that the very act of laying it aside would stand the test of an inquiry. He trusted, that as the House was unanimous in their opinion, that that feeling would be communicated to the Bishop, and that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Horsman) would not press his motion.—(Hear.) Mr. J. A. SMITH said that he fully concurred with the Honourable Gentleman (Mr: foramen), yet he hoped that he would not press his motion, and that, if he did, he should move fbr an adjournment of the debate. Mr. J. T. WAWN said that as his Hon. - Friend Mr. foreman would not comply with the suggestion of the Noble Lord (Lord Ashley), he felt bound to . , give the motion his support. Mr. HORSMAN said that as the House had agreed in the justice of his proposition, he was placed in a, very difficult position, in being obliged to appeal to the kind ness of the House, in refusing the withdrawal of his mo tion, because the whole responsitility of the matter rested upon him, while others had only to vote on the question. His was not an isolated case; it was one of a series, and in consequence o having withdrawn four different motions last year, at the request of the House, and on the yet unredeemed pledge of the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), he re gretted that he could not comply with the request of the Noble Lord (Lord Ashley).—(Here the Honourable Gentleman referred to his having with drawn a motion respecting the fusion of eccle siastical and common funds, and another respecting cathedrals, on the pledge that lull and comprehensive measures would be introduced by Government, which was never redeemed.) He said that as. many of his friends looked upon his motions, in consequence of his having withdrawn them, as mere sham motions, that he should persist in the present one. It was for the inte rest of the Church and of Christianity that he had brought them on, and he should to the last support that cause b) every means in his power, for the interests of the Established Church could not succeed while four curates, whose superiors were not in the whole Church, were to be found in that diocese, each respectively twenty years, at an annual income of only 901. He felt that his cause of supporting the working clergy was a just and holy cause, and should, therefore, press for a division. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that, having been ac cused of what would be deemed a dereliction of goad faith, and of having broken pledges he had given to the Hon. Gentleman, he proposed to give a short explana tion of the subject to the House.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the motion of providing for the union of the episcopal fund and of the common fund, he had pro mised to consult the Archbishop of Canterbury, al though his Lordship had only been recently appointed. He had seen the Archbishop, and had conversed with him on the subject, and the result of the interview was,' his being confirmed in the opinion he before held, that there was no valid objection to the arrangement. From that time he stated to his colleagues that the Arch bishop was of opinion that a measure, having this .; object in view, might be introduced.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman further proposed a dif ferent arrangement as to cathedral churches. That was a matter far more difficult, and admitted of fur ther reforms. On inquiring further into it he thought it necessary that the revenue should be ascertained be fore a measure should bo introduced with respect to another application of it.—(Hear, hear.) He, accord ingly, advised the Crown to appoint a Commission of In quiry, and several Members of the House were members of it. With respect to the question why he had not in troduced a measure with regard to either of these sub jects during the present session, he had stated to the Hon. Gentleman that he would propose a measure having reference to the composition of the Ecclesiastical Com mission, and the uniting of the episcopal fund with the common fund. The House was aware that there were only two days in the week, or eight in the month, upon which Government business could be proceeded with, and considering the way in which the time of the House was taken up on those occasions, he would put it to the House, whether there was any chance of making progress with a measure of this kind, if it had been introduced. They had thought it necessary to bring in a Bill to continue the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland, which would otherwise expire in the present month. They had, also brought in measures ' which they thought were urgent and indispensable with respect to the famine in behind; and if the navigation laws were to be proceeded :with at all in the present ses sion, it was obvious that they should be considered in an early part of it. Thi , claims of the western districts of Ireland was another subject which demanded their prompt attention. Under these circumstances, would the House have considered him justified in postponing any one of those important measures, for the purpose of introducing one on the union of the episcopal and com mon funds? Those were the reasons why the measure had not yet made its appearance, and he had only stated them to justify himself, in answer to the charge of having broken his pledges to the Hon. Member. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON recommended the Hon. Member not to pursue the question to a division. Sir F. BARING said he had waited to the last mo ment, in the expectation of hearing that the motion was to be withdrawn, but not finding the slightest chance Of its being the issue of the debate, he now begged leave to propose the co urse w hi c h would, probably, be deem:: the most satisfa c t or y to a ll parties, viz , to move t" previous question. The House then divided, and the numbers were — For the previous question 52 Against it Majority The Effect of this division is to postpone idetlnitely the consideration of Mr. Horsman's motion. CONDITION OF THE WORKING CLASSES. Mr. SL NNEY moved for the appointment of a Stand ing Committee or unpaid Commission, to consider and ' report, from time to time, on practical measures to im prove the condition of the working classes. The Hon. Member contended that the richer portion of the popu lation had increased very largely the amount not only of their property, but of their comforts and luxuries, since the peace; as a proof of which, he stated that between the years 1812 and 1841, the number of carriages used by them had doubled, and that in Manckester alone, between the years 1815 and 1841,property had increased 190 per cent. This increase was attributed mainly to the labour and incessant applicati( n of the working classes, and that being so, it was only right that a Com mittee should be instituted in order to ascertain whether the increase of the comforts of the poor had been com mensurate with the increase of the comforts of the rich. Mr. Slaney was proceeding, when he was interrupted by an lion. Member, who moved that the House be counted. The gallery was cleared, and 32 Members only being present, the House was declared adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) TUESDAY, MARCH 20. BISHOP WEARMOUTH RECTORY. Motion made, and Question proposed, " That an humble Address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she will be pleased to issue a Commission of Inquiry into the allega tions contained in the petitions presented to this House from the parishioners of Bishop Wearmouth and Sunderland; and that the said Commissioners be directed to take into consi deration the agreement stated in Parliament km the autho rity of the Patron of the Living of Bishop Wearmouth) to have been entered into between himself and the present In cumbent, whereby the surplus income of the Living, over and above the sum of 2,0001. a year, reserved as the income of the Incumbent, is to be paid over to trustees; and to re port on the best mode of appropriating that surplus to spiritual purposes connected with the two parishe s , and of giving legal effect to such appropriation :', —Where u p on pre- . vious Question put, " That that Question be now put." The House divided : MINORITY-AYES, 39. Anderson, Arthur Heyworth, L. Smith, J. A. Ashley, Lord Kershaw, James Smith, J. Benjamin Brown, H. Langston, J. 11. Spooner, Richard Clay, James Lockh ar t , W. Cobden, R. • Stanstield, W. R. C. Cowan, Charles APGregor, John Strickland, Sir G. Mangles, It, 1). Thompson, Colonel Currie, Henry Molesworth, Sir W. Thompson, Alderman Duncan, George Mullings, J. R. Duncuft, John O ' Connor, Fear Thompson, George gus Walmsley, T. Sir I. Fordyce, A. 1). Osborne, Ralpk Wawn, J. Greenall, Gilbert Pattison, James Il W. P. ardcastle, J. A. Raphael, Alexander Wood, TELLERS. Henry, Alexander Sandars, George Horsman, Edward Hastie, Archibald Sheridan, R. B. /Rune, J. MAJORITY—NOES, 52. AbdY, T. N. Grace, 0. D. Richards, Richard Baines, Al. T. Grenfell, C. Pascoe Romilly, Sir John Baring, Sir F. Hawes, Benj. Russell, Lord J. Bellew, K. M. Ilayter, W. G. Seymer, H. K. Berkeley, Captain Hobhouse, T. B. Shell, R. L. Blackall, S. W. Hope, Alexander Slaney, R. A. Boldero, li. G. Howard, Lord E. Somerville, Sir W. Brotlierton, J. Lascelles, W. S. . Tancred, 11. W. Campbell, W. F. Lewis, 0. C. Vane, Lord H. Craig, W. 0. Macnamara, Major Wilson, James Cubitt, William Maitland, Thomas Wodehouse, E. D'Eyncourt, T. Maule, Fox Wood, Sir Charles Dundas, Admiral Milnes, R. Monckton Wyld, James Dunne, F. P. Palmerston, Vis. Wyvill, Marmaduke Ebrington, Viscount Parker, John Edwards, H. Peel, Sir Robert Elliot, John Reid, Colonel Estcourt, J. B. B. Rice, E. It. _ French, F. Rich, Henry TELLERS. Hill, Lord Marcus Grey, R. W. 0 1 I: Mail to the Calcui Sin land t aneotti at Chi of Dior th e p i Ow W hich for tify fo ur 111 cam p. Cana, ?ffensi f rom z