The Sun. — London, England, 1834-05-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The avowals made in Parliament seine weelcs ago 537 more than one of his Majesty's Ministers, as to 'he existence of dissensions in the Cabinet, and upon a question of the highest importaiice to the State, must have prepared the public mind for that result which is now apparently on the eve of com pletion. Had the subject of difference been merely an unimportant one, it might with management have been suffered to sleep during the session, and the Government have staggered on for a while without altogether losing its equilibrium: but the Church question was one of extreme urgency, as well as magnitude. The country would not sacrifice or postpone its adjustment for the convenience of per sons who had shown themselves but half disposed, and not half qualified, to encounter it. The great bulk of the community called aloud for a decision indispensable to tile peace of the United Kingdom, and tnsistee, that such decision should be not only final; 'out immediate. This all but unanimity of the ',cation has brought on the crisis in which we now are placed. The issue of it, if all portions of the Mi nistry he honest, will be, as indeed it ought to be, a breaking up, either partial, so as to admit of re pair, or total, demanding an absolute reconstruction of the Cabinet. There are reasons, perhaps, which uvula make the latter alternative the most to be desired. The point in dispute with regard to the Irish March question is pretty nearly this, whether the whole revenue of the Irish Church shall, in its nee form of a land-tax, be appropriated in perpe tuum to the Protestant established clergy, adminis tering to the spiritual wants of about one-sixth of the gross population of Ireland, or whether Parlia ment shall assert the right of determining the reve nue to be bestowed upon the clergy, according to the portion of the people who appertain to the com munion of the Established Church ? It were a fruitless task at this time of day to argue such a question in detail. He who denies the right of Parliameiat to deal with revenues so circum stanced, as with national property, must hold that the temporalities of the Church were esta blished exclusively for the personal enjoyment of the clergy, that a Christian laity constitutes no necessary member of a Christian church, and that a province, nay a kingdom, which contains not a single Protestant congregation, is bound neverthe less to throw away for ever an enormous mass of property upon Protestant ministers who have no souls under their spiritual guidance, or, in other words, who discharge no clerical functions ; while the demands of charity, of moral education, and of spiritual instruction for the great body of the people, are left altogether unprovided for. But here we take leave of a topic on which the country most deeply interested has with one voice declared itself. Ireland—episcopalian and Protestant dissenter, Catholic Ireland—these three forming the entire nation—have resolved on the readjustment of the whole system of Church property, and reduced the Legislature to a single course. The very abstract argument whereon the Church of England has ever been defended as a national church —namely, that of its embracing the ma jority of the nation that argument, when applied to Ireland, cuts away the nationality of the Irish Church, and reprobates the everlasting and total absorption of the only fund which has at any time been appropriated to religious ends and uses in that country, by a clergy administering to one-sixth of the people, as utterly justifiable and revolting. Of this opinion, held in common with 19-20ths of the Irish nation, are, we believe we may say, without rashness, the majority likewise of his Majesty's present Ministers. A minority, a small minority, are of an opposite creed ; and yet the world has seen with amazement, that in the framing of the Irish Tithe Bill there are clauses pledging the Legislature to perpetuate the vicious appropriation of the Irish Church revenues, as it now exists—an arrangement known to be con demned by the majority of the Cabinet, and form ing part and parcel of the bill, from no conceivable motive but a weak and most reprehensible submis sion of the many, including rank, age, and wisdom, to the few, of the most conspicuous of whom no more can be said than that he is a prompt, spirited, and successful debater—we are bound to add likewise, a man of unquestioned honour. Now, on a Cabinet so composed—on a Cabinet numeri cally liberal, hut morally and effectually, in relation to this - vital question, Conservative of a glaring abuse in the national policy, it is not possible that the people of the United Kingdom should place the smallest reliance. We respect unfeignedly the head of the Administration, as much as we have often differed from that distinguished nobleman, for the consistency of his professions throughout a long life—for his talents, integrity, and unblemished cha racter. But we must say, that, possibly from no fault of Earl Grey's, he has called into public ser vice same refractory and uncongenial spirits,—others who might, with equal justice and public benefit, have been left in their mediocrity undisturbed. It was not, perhaps, foreseen at the formation of this Ministry, that the same cordial and vigorous concurrence which enabled them to carry through the first grand measure of Reform, would be no less necessary towards the accom plishment of all reforms collateral to, and derivative from, the first. It had not been foreseen with what rapidity each separate fountain of corruption would, by public impatience, be drained of its foulness, through that main channel which was destined to receive and sweep away all political impurities. Much of the future was, unfortunately—though, we doubt not, unavoidably—left to be resolved by chance. Chance appears to have decided against the contimiance of harmony (at least of sentiment) in the Cabinet; and thence must come—there is no one who now disputes the event—its dissolution. In fact, the course already pursued on many occa sions, in the face of Parliament, has not been such, to speak mildly of it, as the friends of Ministers could approve. What could be less creditable than on the pension list Lord Althorp's acknowledgment of opinions which it required no straining, and as little casuistry, to . construe into an open con demnation of his lordship's succeeding vote ? What could be less dignified in the eyes of the coun try, or less fitted to obtain its confidence, than the numberless examples of hesitation, indecision, aban donMent of measures boldly brought forward, and metammphosis of others which had been described as unalterable—one and all marking a want of unity, an absence, as we said once before, of will, than which no defect can be more fatal, whether in indi viduals or public bodies ? From all these and other symptoms which, wishing to avoid offence, we for bear to mention, the conclusion ought to be,—and it is one of which the most valuable portion of the present Cabinet will have nothing hereafter to corn plain,—that for their own sakes, and from a regard to the better security of the public interests in the re-composition of the Cabinet, the Ministers ought to take the opportunity afforded by Mr. Ward's motion this evening- to declare the existing Govern ment at an end. If they reject this mode of extri cating themselves from a difficulty which ought never to have bee:i suffered to occur more than once, Lords Althorp and John Russell will be compelled a second time to speak and vote in Opposite direc tions—as seamen say, " to look one way and pull another." Is that respectable ? How came they, how came the majority of which they are members, we once more ask, to succumb to the minority of 3 or 4, and to lay on the table those obnoxious clauses which these noble lords in the bottom of their hearts condemn ? We can guess for their lordships what will happen if Lord Althorp should meet the motion of • Mr. Ward by that evasive expedient called the " previous question :" for by a direct ne gative it is not supposed that Lord Althorp will venture to resist it. He will be left in a minority —we can tell him that. What next ? The high church minority in the Cabinet must resign. If not, they must, and we hope will, immediately be left exclusive tenants of the Treasury Bench. There is every reason why the liberal Ministers and their friends should desire a total breaking up of the Cal* et tt is matter of more, we think, than suspicion, that much of the feebleness, approaching fre quently to a paralysis of the existing Ministry, has arisen from engagements forced upon it at the outset in a certain quarter, from the effects of which, so long as it shall subsist in its actual form as the Cabinet of 1831, it never can be wholly dis embarrassed. Well then, break up—and what fol lows ? Break up immediately, and the composition of the succeeding Cabinet must be that which the House of Commons shall approve of. In which case it is perfectly clear, that as the existing Cabi net will have been cashiered by a vote of the House of Commons, because of its too deep and extensive adulteration with Tory elements, the next Cabinet must unavoidably receive, together with the liberal members of the present, a powerful accession of de cided friends to every species of wholesome reform, —men who can take broad views, and comprehend objects in all their natural relations,—men who can propose to themselves and others one straight forward course of action, and follow it to the end, and be prepared for its inseparable conse quences, —men who have the will to do that which they have the sense to meditate,—such men, good, and reflecting, and discriminating Liberals, may be found, and must be employed in the admi nistration of the public interests. If, on the other hand, that dislocation of the Cabinet, which cannot by human power be long prevented, should through any evil influence or machination be retarded until after the Parliament shall have been prorogued,— if present differences, for they remain to this hour unsettled, should be patched up merely to admit of the Government going on,—so long as there is a -House of Commons sitting to watch over it, the manifest consequence is, that (during the proroga tion) the Court, not the House of Commons, will be master of the field. The Court will indulge, unrestrained, its own predilections. A coalition of mock Whigs and genuine Tories will, in all human probability, become for a time the successors of Lord Grey's Cabinet. There will be no Parliament sitting. l The administration of the Government will be with the enemies of reform in Church and State. Knowing the spirit which necessarily animates the great majority of the English reformed Parliament, the oligarch minister will try a dissolution—a dissolu tion ! and a new election—a new election with an exasperated people! with trades' unions organized throughout Great Britain, and convertible in an hour to the ends of political violence—moderation lost sight of every where—the extremes brought into each other's presence—the spirit of the Six Acts in conflict with multitudinous anarchy, and the nation hurled off its centre. Such would be the intermediate condition of the kingdom under an illiberal ministry, smuggled into office while Par liament was in a state of inaction ; successive throes of dangerous convulsion, terminating undoubtedly in the defeat of court politics, and the final prevalence of right and freedom ; but after what a fearful inter val! and at what an immeasurable cost! Yet this, we say again, is the probable result of a patched-up quarrel among the members of a Cabinet which, as a whole, has forfeited a large share of public esteem, but would speedily regain it after the salutary re adjustment following an immediate resignation. We say, therefore, and conclude with this earnest coun sel—Break up the Cabinet this very night ; Lord Grey would find valuable friends flocking round him to assist in its re-construction. We purposely ab stain from alluding to rumours which were circu lated yesterday, that attempts were preparing in sundry quarters to smooth over the ministerial dis pute, or, in other words, to postpone to a moment less advantageous for the country a crisis which is now inevitable. Such endeavours may proceed from honourable motives, but they cannot lead to ho nourable results. The question must be fairly met : it is folly to evade it. —Times. The public have been aware, for several days, that the question of Church reform involves the stability of the present Cabinet. The administra tion of Lord Grey, it is notorious, was formed under extraordinary circumstances, and composed of public men who had professed and advocated various political views. Circumstances combined them together on the great national question of a reform of the representation, and we believe that they have hitherto acted in remarkable unison of political views. But the original differences of opinion naturally begin to be displayed on the ends of Parliamentary reform. The collision may occur on the occasion of the pending discussion of the Irish Church—probably this evening. We stated on Saturday that Mr. Ward intended this night, on proposing that the house do resolve itself into a committee of the whole house to take into consi deration the state of the Irish Church, to move the following resolution : " Resolved-That the Protestant Episcopal Esta blishment in Ireland exceeds the spiritual wants of the Protestant population ; and that it being the un doubted right of the State to regulate the distribution of Church property in such manner as Parliament may determine, it is the opinion of this house that the tem poral possessions of the establishment in Ireland should be reduced." The details of Mr. Ward's plan for the reduc tion of the Irish Church Establishment are embo died in a series of resolutions which have been some time in print. However, the hon. gentleman is to separate the principle on which he proposes to go into committee from the details in the resolu tions. The following are the resolutions : Resolutions respecting the Irish Chu.zch, to be pro posed by Mr. Ward. on Tuesday, May 27, 1834. " Resolved, 1. That the property now held by the Irish Church, whether consisting of Bishops' lands, glebes, tithes, or any other species of endowment, is the property of the State. and ought to be preserved for such purposes as the Legislature may determine. " 2. That in the opinion of this house the Protes tant Establishment in Ireland, as now established by law, exceeds the spiritual wants of the Protestant po pulation, to which standard it ought to be reduced. " 3. That, with a view to effect this reduction, the principles of the Irish Church Reform Bill of last year be extended, and the ecclesiastical commis sioners appointed by that bill be empowered to act as trustees for the whole of the church property in Ire land, including Bishops' lands, glebes, tithes, and every other species of endowment. " 4. That out of the fund thus created, the commis sioners shall issue to every archbishop, bishop, dean, rector, vicar, &c., the full amount of the sums which they are now entitled to receive during the term of their natural lives, they continuing to discharge their ecclesiastical duties as at present, where required. " 5. That upon the death of the present incum bents, no issue shall be made by the commissioners for any future incumbent, in any parish where the re gistered number of the Protestant inhabitants does not amount to one " 6. That upon the death of any bishop whose see does not contain testant population consisting of one of the whole population, no issue shall be made'by the commis sioners for any future bishop ; but the see shall be annexed to that adjoining see by which the duties of episcopal superintendance can be most conveniently discharged. " 7. That out of the fund arising from the bishops' lands, glebes, and tithes, thus gradually falling in, the commissioners be empowered to extinguish all private rights of presentation, by buying up the ad vowsons, where they are the property of individuals; but that the advowsons now in the gift of the sees shall only be retained by them where the livings arc retained, and shall drop without compensation where ever the living is extinguished by the want of a Pro testant congregation. " 8. That a discretionary power be given to the commissioners, in cases where the number of resident Protestants falls short of that proportion of the whole population fixed by the fifth resolution, to assist such Protestants in keeping up the performance of divine service, by an advance from the general fund, not ex ceeding 1501. annually, a return being made to Par liament of all such cases as may occur. " 9. That the provisions already made for the sale of bishops' lands, the repairing of churches, and the commutation of tithes into a tax upon land, shall not be affected by the present resolutions. 10. That the surplus fund remaining in the hand; of the commissioners be applied, either in the promo tion of education or in the employment of the poor, or in making a provision for the religious instruction of the people, by the ministers of every branch of the Christian Church, or in such other purposes of public utility, as Parliament in its wisdom may think fit." It is palpable that Mr. Ward's motion will test the sincerity of innisters on the vital question of the Iri* church. The majority of the cabinet are understood to be favourable to a bold and decisive policy as respects Irish grievances ; but Mr. Stanley, Sir James Graham, if not other members of the administration inferior in station, are said to be decidedly and irrevocable disaffected to any division of the church revenues. In this dilemma Ministers it is said will endeavour to ward off the evil day of decision, and will move the " previous question" on Mr. Ward's resolution. We confess that we view this procrastination of the important question of Irish Church Reform with great regret. The right and expediency of an appropriation of the surplus of the Irish Church revenue mu'.t ultimately be determined, and we do not know what is to be gained by delay except the postponement of a division of opinion among Ministers. Ministers may succeed in delaying the consideration of the question —or they may obtain a majority against it on the amend ment of the " previous question"--but the melan choly consequences of ruch a result cannot be con cealed from the country. What is already the state of public opinion on the conduct of the Ministerial majority in the House of Commons ? The Pension List—the question of the duration of Parliament— and other popular subjects, have been dealt with by the reformed House of Commons in a way far from consonant to the opinion of the country. A vote upholding the Irish Church would about con clude the reputation of the " liberal" part of the House of Commons. On the natural termination of Parliament, or in the event of a dissolution, what would be the result ? A large portion of the House of Commons has hitherto supported Ministers from the dread of their retirement froni office, but these members have lost favour with their constituents. Will not an adverse vote on the Irish Church complete their fall ? Such a triumph might prove a Thermopylae victory. We might regret the secession of Mr. Stanley from the administration, but his retirement could not stay the rapid current of liheral opinions, and the loss of no other member of the Government adverse to Church Reform would be felt. On the other hand, the administration might be greatly strengthened and liberalised. But whatever may be the result of these ministerial differences of opinion, the Tories can reap no advantage from them. Tory ascendancy is impossible. If this Government and the House of Commons are condemned for juste milieu" policy, what would be the unpopularity and weakness of a Conservative administration ? The idea of a Tory Cabinet is abiurd, but irremediable mischief might accrue from its temporary exist ence. We hope, however, that the Government will open its eyes, and will see the impossibility of maintaining in Ireland a Protestant church esta blishment in a population of eight millions of inha bitants, seven millions of whom are Catholics, half a million Presbyterians, and one-sixteenth portion only belonging to the State Church! No person can mistake the nature of the question. Religion has nothing to do with it. The existence of the Irish Protestant Church is an abomination in the eyes of God and man, and the endeavour to con tinue to such an establishment the large revenues now possessed by it admits of no justification. The common sense of the nation revolts at the bare idea of the thing ; and they who have the assurance to advocate such an abuse ought to renounce all claim to the title of liberal ministers. No Parliament ac countable to the nation can - for a moment sanction the principle of appropriating so large an amount of public money to the maintenance of a sinecure I church.—Morning Chronicle. The resolutions which Mr. Ward is to move to night relative to the property of the Irish branch of the Church of England involve a principle of con fiscation which, no doubt, all the O'Connell party will as eagerly support as if it were the next best thing for their purposes to the repeal of the legis lative union. It is remarkable what virtuous in dignation the Irish Roman Catholic members ftf the House of Commons feel and express against church property, except when it happens to be in posses sion of the Church of Rome. They venerate the Sovereign Pontiff in his double capacity of head of the Church and a temporal prince, but they are quite intolerant of any connection between the Church . of England and the State. Mr. Ward's resolutions go the length of constituting the eccle siastical commissioners appointed by the Irish Church Reform Bill of last year trustees for the whole of the Church property in Ireland, including bishops' lands, glebes, tithes, and every other species of endowment. The commissioners are to be empowered to pay to every archbishop, bishop, dean, rector, &c.,‘ the full amount of the sums which they are now entitled to receive during the term of their natural lives but, upon the death of the present incumbents, no payment shall be made by the commissioners for any future incumbent in any parish where there is not a certain number of registered Protestants, or, rather, where the number of the latter does not amount to a certain proportion in reference to the whole population of the said parish. This part of Mr. Ward's plan shows pretty evidently the intention of breaking down the Irish Church to make way for the ascendancy of that of Rome. Because if every parish in which the num ber of registered ProteStants does not amount to the required proportion is to be deprived of a Protes tant pastor, the resident Protestants must be de prived of all religious instruction and spiritual conso lation. The consequence will be that they will fall out of the pale of Christianity altogether, or be driven to enter that of the Romish communion. So that the project promises to work well, either for the cause of irreligion or of Roman Catholic ascendancy. This alone, without going into any more of the detail of Mr. Ward's in tended resolutions, will throw a clear light upon the character of the whole measure. We cannot, however, avoid touching upon what is proposed by the last resolution. It says " that the surplus fund remaining in the hands of the commissioners be ap plied either in the promotion.of education, or in the employment of the poor, or in making a provision for the religious instruction of the people by the ministers of every branch of the Christian Church, or in such other purposes of public utility as Par liament in its wisdom may think fit ;" so that, in fact, the Church property may, according to this resolution, be applied to any other purposes than those which imply the necessity of keeping up a church establishment. We are no advocates for the very unequal distribution of property which now prevails in both branches of the Church of Eng land ; we would take a portion • from the large re venues of the dignitaries to pay an adequate in come to the working clergy. Until the whole of the latter be adequately paid, we must look on the proposed confiscation as no better than an act of sacrilegious plunder.—Morning Herald. The Times yesterday announced the : probability of an immediate change in the Administration. We give the observations of our contemporary : " It is generally believed in the best informed circles, that the difference of opinion entertained in the Cabinet on the question of appropriation must lead to some immediate change in the Ministry. We have not been able to learn how the Cabinet are divided, but it seems doubtful whether there are more than two who are opposed to the appropria tion. One of them, unfortunately, is the most dis tinguished orator of the Government side, who,• both in the cause of liberty at home and in our colonies, has shown the greatest ability. The other an useful administrateur. How they could have come to these conclusions is extraordinary. Rumours are afloat, which we cannot credit, that the example of these seceders will be followed by others, and . the Government will retire en masse. This is not The vacant places, if filled up, must necessarily be occupied by men of principles at least as liberal' as those who remain. The present administration certainly has not been too liberal. Any auxiliaries. from the Tory camp would make it less liberal, and entirely deprive it of the confidence of the country. Coalition administrations have always been unfor turiate : they want the unity of purpose indis pensable to vigorous measures. Even the talents of Fox and North availed nothing. The King, we have no doubt, notwithstanding the rumours to the contrary, entertains the same salutary horror of those conspiracies of party by which not only the dignity of the Crown, but the welfare of the people, are sacrificed to personal ambition and selfish in terests." Of course during the day there were plenty of rumours upon the subject of the expected changes, but nothing transpired which we can ven ture to communicate to our readers as certain. The two ministers pointed at by the Times are of course Mr. Stanley and Sir James Graham ; and it was pretty generally believed the right hon. gentle man and the right hon. baronet had actually ten dered their resignations. It was supposed, however, that other members of the cabinet shared their sentiments; and Lord Melbourne, Lord Lansdowne, and the Duke of Richmond were named as likely to accompany them in their present course. We believe that it is undoubtedly true that Mr. Stanley and Sir James Graham have taken up a position on the question of the Irish Tithe Bill from which they will not shrink. While Lord Grey receives with the sullen fretfulness of a whipped child the affronts of the Chancellor,—while Lord Al thorp beholds with meek endurance the House of Commons deliberately tearing up the contract which his hand signed and sealed,—Mr. Stanley and Sir James Graham have resolved that they will not retain office when their retention of it ceases to be honourable to themselves and service able to their country. We rejoice devoutly at their determination. Why ? Not because we can see clearly what may be the event of the changes which we anticipate ; but because, come what may, we know that it is good to have redeemed the charac ters of these two men. If they had submitted to the forward impertinence of their noble colleague, they would have been ridiculous. If they had sacri ficed their opinions upon the most solemn subject that ever Parliament discussed, they - would have been base. If there was a time in which a fair fame was the first requisite in a public man, we live in such a time now.—Since the above was written we have learned that a temporary adjustment of the differences in the Cabinet has taken place. The movement section are said to have given way, in consequence of the determined course pursued by Sir James Graham and Mr. Stanley. How Lord John Russell and Lord Althorp will reconcile the keeping of their seats in the Cabinet with their speeches in the House of Commons, we confess, indeed, we are utterly at a loss to conceive. It can matter, however, very little to Mr. Stanley and his friends whether these noble lords retire or not, as from this time forward their own influence in the Cabinet must be para mount, and Lord John and Ms friends must be con tent to occupy the place of ciphers—to receive their pay and to hold their tongues. We have no doubt that they will be quite content to do so, and if the matter be attended with no other result lL •a, than this, it will still be beneficial. There is no doubt whatever, that Mr. Stanley and Sir James Graham (we believe there were others also) sent in their resi g nations , with the peremptory intimation to Lord Grey that nothing but the un qualified submission of their rebellious inferiors should induce them to withdraw them. Mr. Stan ley it was said had been sent for, and had seen the King. This report, however, we believe to be in correct ;—but we understand that the communica tions addressed by that right hon. gentleman to his Majesty, and his Majesty's reply to them, was the cause of the delay which took place in the arrival of the King in town yesterday so long after the time which had been appointed. Meantime the account has not yet been settled with Lord Brougham. The indignation of some of the noble lord's colleagues at his recent conduct is loudly and openly expressed, and the differences said to be arranged to-day may give place to new ones to-morrow on this score.— Morning Post. COURTMARTIAL ON CAPTAIN HUGH PIGOTT, R.N.—(ELEVENTH DAY.) The officers composing the Courtmartial on Cap tain Hugh Pigott assembled as usual on board his Majesty's ship Hastings, at Sheerness. The court was then opened in the usual manner. Lieutenant Walker, the prosecutor, addressed the court, and stated that he had most unexpectedly received the assistance of another witness, whom he begged might be sworn and examined relative to the state of the Alban's boats, with regard to which there had been some discrepancy. The witness had not been summoned, but came voluntarily forward. Alfred Waddelove was then sworn. Mr. William Costell, formerly clerk in charge of the Alban, but now of the Flamer steam-packet and a purser on half pay, another fresh witness, who had only that morning arrived from Falmouth, was next sworn and examined upon the first, third, and fourth charges. The fifth charge was then entered upon and read over by the Junoe ADVOCATE as follows : " For vexatious and oppressive conduct in ordering on the 26th of April, 1832, the conditional relinquish ment of the cabins occupied by the clerk in charge and pilot, having previously given a verbal order for their absolute relinquishment ' • and, on the 23th, the immediate relinquishment of the cabin occupied by myself as my habitual messplace, under pretence of their being required for the use of the British Ambas sador and his suite, which was not the fact, and for indecent conduct about this period in inspecting the bedplaces of myself and the clerk in charge and the water-closet at the early hour of eight o'clock in the morning." Lieut. Walker, upon opening this charge, brought in a great deal of docdmentary evidence. They were principally the official orders from Captain Pigett to Lieut. Walker upon the relinquishment of the cabins, and a special order from Sir Thomas Foley to Lieut. Walker, desiring him to appropriate a cabin to Mr. Cotsell, the clerk ; a very long letter of remonstrance from the latter gentleman to Captain Pigott, and a lett( r of Lieut. Walker upon the same subject. Previous to these letters being - reac Captain Pigott rose, and, addressing the Court, said, " I beg to call the attention of the Court to the disrespectful tone and language of the two letters about to be read." Sir RICHARD KING—The Court will hear them read. The letters were then read. Lieut. Walker then detailed upon oath his complaint upon this charge. Lieut. Walker, First Lieutenant of the Barham. who accompanied Captain Pigott, was then examined at immense length, but his recollection upon some of the questions propounded by Lieut. Walker appeared to be imperfect. The usual hour having arrived the Court adjourned. S FA t) 0 ‘'; R-44 SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. THE LONDON GAZETTE THIS EVENING. CROWN-OFFICE , MAY 27. 3IEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT. COUNTY or Moxan HA N. —The Hon. Henry Robert Westeura, of Rossmore-park, in the county of Monaghan, in the room of the Hon. Cadwallader Davis Blayney, now Lord Blayney. Bonounii or DuNcaavoN.—Ebenezer Jacob, Esq. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. WILLIAM DEAYTON, victualler, St. Albans. WILLIAM PARRIS, livery stable-keeper, Hampstead BANKRUPTS. GEORGE JOHN RICHARD JAMES DICKIN SON, surgeon, Ealing, Middlesex, to surrender June 4, at twelve, and July 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Sleap, Middle Temple-lane; Waithman, official assignee, Basinghall-street. DAVID LEYSER COHEN, grocer, Norfolk, June 3, and. July 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, King's Arms-yard, official assignee ; Stevens and Wood, St. Thomas Ap os tl e . . _ EDWARD EVERTON, ribbon-manufacturer, Coven try, June 11, and July 8, at eleven, at the King's Head Inn, Coventry. Lloyd, Crown-court, Cheapside. GEORGE LAKE, hat-manufacturer, Stockport, June 9 and July 18, at three, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Back, Verulam-buildings, Gray's-Inn, Lon ; Lingard and Vaughan, Heathon Norris. JAMES BA RC LAY general-shopkeeper, Pembroke, June. 10 and July 8, at eleven, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol. Clarke and Medcalf, Lincoln's Inn-fiads, Lon don ; Harley, Bristol. ,-• JAMES SALTER - and WILLIAM .RALSTON, twine-manufacturers, Poole, June 16 and July 8, at eleven, at the office of Messrs. Parr, Poole. Lang, Fenchurch s reet, London ; Parr, Poole. I AIPERIAL PAR LIAMENT, THIS EVENING. HOUSE OF LORDS. A message from the Commons was announced by the Deputy Usher of the Black Rod. The LORD CHANCELLOR came down to the bar, and the doors were thrown open, but no message appeared. The LORD CHANCELLOR then ordered the doors to be closed, and went back to the. woolsack. Lord LITTLETON presented a petition from the vicar, parish guardians, &c., of the parish of Yardley, in Worcestershire,respecting the better observance of the Sabbath, the desecration of which they attributed to the great inconvenience of beer houses under the new beer bill. The noble lord said that so far as he under stood the bill of the noblelord ( Wynford), as well as that which was inttroduced in the Commons, he could not give either his support, but he yet hoped to see a better bill than either yet brought up, when it would give him pleasure to do for it as much as it was in his power. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice that it was his intention on Monday, if convenient to the noble earl (Grey) to ask questions or make in quiries, or move for papers relative to our want of any Ambassador at the Court of St. Petersburgh. Lord Heytesbury, he believed, was recalled in August. 1832, and Sir Stratford Canning was appointed in the October of the same year, but had never gone out, and since that time we had been without an ambassador of any sort in that great country. He \ would take the opportunity of being on his legs to state his regret at the recal of an in dividual (Prince Lieven) who had served the important office of ambassador in this country for 25 years, and that with great celebrity. He regretted that recall, because he believed that no other person belonging to the same country was so well acquainted with those interests best for both. He did not wonder that his Imperial Majesty recalled that individual, but what he wished to know was, why this country had re mained for so long a period without having an am bassador of the same rank in that country ? He would not then say more, because on Monday lie would have an opportunity of bringing the whole question before the house. Earl GREY said that any day would be equally convenient to him. Monday would suit him as well as any other, and he would take care to be prepared. He considered that he would be deficient in his duty if he did not entirely concur in the regret expressed by the noble marquis as to the recall of the cele brated individual to whom he had alluded. (Hear.) He believed that that recall was entirely, because that illustrious individual had been appointed to an office of very high distinction in his hwn country, but he must hcae his testimony to the character and good intentions of that individual as well as the noble marquis. (Cheers.) The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that in the absence of his noble friend the Duke of Buckingham he had to present a petition from the parish of Illesden, praying that the universities might not be forced to receive persons of any religion but that of the establishment. The noble marquis presented several petitions to the same effect, and then said, that while he was on his legs he would take the opportunity of stating that he felt great pleasure in saying, that since the last discussion upon the de tention of Sir John Campbell in Portugal, the Government had wrote a letter to the Government of Lisbon, he meant of Don Pedro, demanding his re lease, though they had not said one word upon the matter for the three months and a half previous. Such an application having been made, he would not , now say more than that he trusted when the Government got an answer to the application it would be communicated to the house by the noble earl in the same spirit as the other papers had been done, and that he trusted such an answer would be received before the termination of the session He was sure that when their lordships looked at the papers they n f -oul r d t c h u in t ic on wi u ttLii r m w t: i i i a c t h it h w e - as h r i ttl e i ng en detained so lt long.r e se Earl GREY said that if the noble marquis had any thing to bring forward against Sir John Camp bell, he should be perfectly ready to meet him ; but if he only dealt in the assertions he had done, those as sortions being without proof, he should give them no attention. The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented several petitions from different parts of Essex, in favour of the claims of the dissenters, and praying for redress. Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition for the total repeal of the malt tax ; and for an alteration of the Poor Laws. The Earl of MAL ME SBUR Y wished to ask his noble friend opposite (the President of the Board of Trade) whether any communication had been received upon the subject of smuggling between Guernsey and Jersey ? Lord AUCKLAND rose, and was left speakihg. HOUSE OF COMMONS. , The SPEAKER resumed the chair at 25 minutes after five o'clock. A messenger from the Lords announced that the United Kingdom Assurance Bill had been agreed to, with amendments. _ _ Mr. HUME presented four petitions against in temperance. Mr. L E FRO Y presented a petition from Mid dlesex, and two others to the same effect. Lord GERMAINE presented a petition from Bury St. Edmonds against drunkenness. Sir A. AG NE W presented petitions from Edin burgh, Tiverton, and other places, against drunkenness. Mr. WILK S presented four petitions against the proposed plan on the subject of church rates, two against drunkenness, and one for an alteration in the laws affecting friendly societies. Mr. E WING presented a petition from Glasgow for a committee to inquire into the cause of drunken ness. Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition from Christchurch, Monmouth, against dissenters. Mr. G ILL ON presented several petitions from Linlithgow against drunkenness. Several other petitions of a similar nature were also presented by different hon. members, but in consequence of the excitement which prevailed in the house, we were unable to catch the names either of the members or the places. ESTABLISHED CHURCH (IRELAND). Mr. WARD said, in rising to bring forward the resolutions of which he- had given notice relative to the established church, he begged to assure the house that he had not become the centre of the momentous circle which the discussion was u reatlpie ancientkarseet s uponloyw fif claim lrpri t aeei rw o recti nyhgtdipeico the give nro great ee groundsg , rise to, without a deep conviction of its importance. Onahpi s a theset conscience he an fir groundsi n iHe o u s y s u a t innovation, nioe should a nd a l fodbtbneysheeupespaohhrpbeot publicoluwi s h gri ieanen dgdgfri v tttnohoh e ma n at t t tr bringing d a shney deficiency of the house, and he would not do hon. mem bershis part would induce them to treat the question with attention at some length, in order to justify himself to and that it would be productive of great practical good. He would first prove the necessity that existed for this change, and then he would show the justice of what he proposed. For it was upon those bases alone the policy or expediency of such important changes, and, above all, those in which religious principles were involved, should rest. He entirely concurred in the observations of the right hon. Secretary for the Colo nies, who had said two years ago that the question as to the maintenance of the connection which, in Christian countries, had been established by the legis lature between the religion and the state, should not be raised without deliberate consideration, and that it would require the most imperative necessity to justify any interference. He (Mr. Ward) entirely concurred in the whole of those sentiments ; but the question which he had to put to the house was, whether, on the most deliberate consideration, so far, at least, as Ireland was concerned, the case of impera tive necessity had not already arisen? whether that house would not reject the evidence of necessity that had accumulated upon it ; and whether, then, it could refuse justly to apply the remedy which the constitution had placed within their reach ? This was a case in which, if be failed in establishing it, the house would do no more than its duty in on d jetting it. Before he proceeded farther, haen " tho state what it was his intention to do, reason!! of the change which he had mad e i n the hape of his resolution as it had originally ap peared. He hoped the house would do him the justice to believe that he lead not sought to obtain by. that - change any unfair advantage. He had been toll that he must separate the question of principle from details, and he had felt the necessity of this the more, because many who would support the ques tion on principle might not support the details. From want of local information a degree of obscurity would, he feared, necessarily attend those details. He had to ask the vote of hon. members on the prin ciple of deduction ; the details, provided the house sanctioned the principle of the bill, he was desirous of leaving for discussion for another occasion altogether. He was most desirous not to trench on the rights of others in any res.; eel,_ end if any more etre - tual mode could be surge .ter, of carrying tl plc he had to propose ire() exev , lri n, he ;co Id be one of the first to accede to it._ 1-1, would coele Lo w to the question of necessity, which was the lasi: of his present object and of the whole. (l el"' The necessity—the imperious necessity of maii- 0 4 a great and important change in the law affecting the Protestant Church in Ireland was evident as th e shining of the sun, if hon. members desired to ton' quillise that country, heal old wounds, and to identify the interests of Ireland with the feelings of d e empire at large. (Much cheering.) In entering upn this nothing could be further from his tril l l than to fati g ue the house with details of the fruits his own experience, but it might be essential on th is . occasion to prove that some f the wisest and grea tes t' statesmen who ever adorned the British Parl i S l. ment had' always said the greatest causes that ever disturbed that unfortunate country were rather rte"'-: is gious than political. ( Hear, hear.) Indeed the qut, tion of religion was so bl en d e d w ith our Irish poilv that it was impossible to draw any line of de marcation between its religious and politi, al s tates. Sir James Mackintosh had said that religion' the church, and the whole administration of propertY in that unhappy country, were so blended together that any rumour raised in any one of them spread a a l2 _ most cordially concurred. TLis opinion ha throughout the whole. In that sentiment out peculiar to Sir James Mackintosh ; it shared by nine out of ten who had ever been con cerned in the management of Irish affairs, o r _ paid any attention to them. Their o pini9 l s mint have been modifieed as the proscliptions of In: tolerance had disappeared, but still they could 11,0 . : fail to be entertained to the present moment. / I ,r_ Canning, as early as the year 181, reprobated o_7 . principle of the policy which which affected Ire,. land, forwarded, as it appeared to be, on the systent.°lol of religion. lie asked one of his opponents, hill boasting of the abolition of the penal law, whether he thought it judicious that an impartial removal of Or, chains which bound the Roman CVholies should take place, and that a part should be left re. • maining, as it were, for the purpose of re minding him that he had once been in c hains. The feeling against those laws, by which a compulsory w d as b: l provision was ground in the shape of tithes from the pittance of the poor was not of modern date, it was dated from the period of the relaxation of those penal laws which gave, if he might be allowed to use th e term, to Catholics a legal existence. Lord Claremon t ' in one of his earliest memorandums, stated that the cause of the great misery in the south of Ireland must be ascribed to the exaction of tithes. Mr. Gratt.r, was of the same opinion ; and Mr. Pitt coincid.ei°, in opinion with his great rival Fox. Mr. Pi tt that without some great reduction of the Protesta±, establishment in Ireland, the uaioa with that coon 3i could never be . completed. The experience ofthat years had only given additional cause to deplore,e-0 the opinion then expressed by Mr. Pitt had not Pv_.er acted upon. ( Hear, hear.) The union had ne;ie, been completed ; the interests of the two ° °llll ; a d a r te hid never been identified. ( Cries of Hear , . ! It was one great argument with those wao the the question of the Repeal of the. Unio", the all ay claims of Irish Church pressed most 1f and; he need not inform the house that he a li repeal petitions were petitions for t. di h ose r of, P tion of tithes. If this latter portion var .; t s 'wir h it . the question of repeal would be disposed 0 .. sEd t hat Sir John Newport in his motion in 18'.1 at the c:' it was impossible to collect tithes ex cept of th e expense of the internal disquiet and misery country. Upon the same occasion the right he n. geC if ther e tleman cpposite (Mr. S. Rice) exclaimed, that. _ as , was one thing more dangerous than discussion It 7 , 0 exclusive cause a the disorganizaation of Ireland, Y t ' despair, and added, that though tithes were n ot w e they were so intimately mixed, with it that i t would be futile to devise measures of relic' (LEFT SPEAKING. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT- then ht aenneinp: derhioraic.ev Navin ell aenndtgihde,:dh HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 2 6. , r . Mr. P. SCRO PE rose and said that he had c i - b e tain amendments to move to the 48th clause, an ( r. . would detain the house hut a very short time. 1 4 °, 1° d son was more alive than himself to the evil s to the mal-administration of the poor laws or e s . the necessity that existed for a reform of those abus._, No person had laboured more perseveringly to VT.! . those abuses before the Government and the Legis,` A ctuornet,inbuuet to ardent be, r n e o form per e s r oa as ee h a e ld had e been, and astonished and and confounded than he was when he open r el the bill then before the house. It appea c? , member here referred to the clauses relative to . ob, law of settlement, and the law of bastardy, d; . ntells'v stoionhshnwetoregaot muchvarivariance reowfiatrb, common m t hoant sense. many o f The its h e p r h o to ci ; served, that considering the bill made such ex _ ent alterations in the machinery of the law as it at pt stood, he thought the house should 100% p a a m ss o ed st a ea m r e n a e s s a t deta ils re scru a ti s n o y eb in bu to po t anee. s ociety involved the safety of all that large portion ° „ co . timr imagined. i do hanngedosi which was liable at any time, from the 1 dan ger stances in which they were placed, to be i. l w e re $ of perishing. The poor laws of Elizabeti:ion __. an noble and glorious and god-like • institution were institution worthy of the age in which . n th i l, , r og r i i s h founded, and worthy of the brightest Pf sg h e o l se nie ll : b/ whom they were established, and w orthy history—worthy of the great names 0 - t o f bel logy I n l considered for two centuries and half the g it h ot the u live o the honour of Great Britain. ( Hear, hear' ) _.,0 of been the guarantee of tranquillity, our productive industry, the security of the e uthe the poor, and by consequence of the propertY__turies a:r t ei a h tpe e wtt earsi aoit. exception fnotchuemtbpbeoe on rts o yl f :sit; s mts o hy : : pit j o. lita si o b toe i re ; rich. It had been during the past two ee' few abuses sitfi and ttuht i a esd wtbhabyasal Elizabeth, the last few years, the most pregnant and %wife' source of the wealth and prosperity of the e_ ta iv .. c 1 before it entered into any alteration of the tog. ;0o , to , of that system with a view to adopt the Talbhteeefra°Tn-artee.-astartibuerle, take care that havingit rn d re id n: i h io ico t hf I o li, p ieu o al ff dt a .b n e y theo o f th erw vi i s t e ! ticoi ex i ..t so that lest with a view to arrange the Inin' e ci f v h%le. put not a stop to the vital principle oafitn ir neiPl ° The house ought to know the r upon which the poor law was of vagrancy, which was the p - ieace, happiness, an He believed i l t tihrz t uwaa o bedi b techt e hhc , i n the existed, and a fatality the poor true ia.s _. _e l ni n a, j b o o. o y mu - t°I I h To avoid tbig' or' r beth provided by a compuls .: the poor law of Elir f the impotent poor, and ic:{ fund for the r elief a wo u I d b e l a s s :l e l ' i tehtleu wherever uhPeP f r ea rere:e e s ri l l °lll m atter of necessity, be and otherwise would, to beg,ans means of maintenance. A I le b wre been eeh o p noi crdht wererd of ih v i fs ep mass of al perhaps, the bread of idleness , °:.' o ,. in citingd, I_, l i dd r by Edzabetb• d t e h i a s e a t tile s e t i ino n Ireland.and rebellion. e l l Theio n . ho T n h o i u s r : b e i : llent obe th r e opulent condition of England and the wretenexistence. b e en - 0 . of poor laws in the former country reco that the workhouse system which badmissioileri eu genera had not been so successful as hatinbsetances of pa: s yste. o ',.. d tn. 'le ; an "ro - of making the workhouse intolerao4 alive° t e _ ll ; fact had been, that the poor, i n thu other P l o a li e tgl' their parishes, bad nsetthat should be 11 , 1 :; tb°. and were living given by the bill v" or extraordinary pow er - • - bat e 0 to the support commissioner., to declare n" ie t the house to the e ared to them most advisabi; ho regulations(4"P:the:vs. He objected `-., f a re of the land. Upon th rotcler' lbae"fore they went into committee to . yr' i t ese g o si c o ,„ byv t I s ht besthede Ysca • les of the poor laws. When this act had nil o p bta l t lie would ask what security had a pauper of ° 5 ? , relief in cases of extreme and urgent distregobe appeared to him none whatever. In large P ctohnltemtendiewoi taoaahunt eptl distinction r b s oi t f u s i oo n e t , e rid e dr it al io,bstnoy b e T . ee de giros' tff, to e th e to,„