The Sun. — London, England, 1833-06-22 00:00:00

that with the assistance of the military—horse, foot, an ; and with a cost of at least 15,0001.—(Hear, frpro the Opposition Benches.) There they storged, t a b , th e y call twat extinguishing tiCae3, !Lae, again,„" were pledged to a principle, and here again they sha w ;r l lerliselv es fli nch i ng from that pr i nc i ple. But, continued ' e 1101 1. and Learned Gentleman, I tell them, and we on tb! • " 4 ,!de of the House a!! tell them, that we will have the whole Biii, and Tiothirtg but the Dill.— (Cheery.) You have stripped that Bill of its Most . irh portant clause; you ,have struck out the only prirteiple in • • • . ~, • having it, since you hav ,, , asks from this House pu,ver of interfering with the surplus fund. You now and you make an alteration which you ask ns of a ;cept. We will not accept of it. We will not accept t his Bill so altered. Lt • it be sent to Carlton Terrace "re it will be accepted, for the terms have already been 'greed on. I repeat that I will not accept it, and I pro le,,, against it in my own name, and in that of the people °1 Ireland. I call upon Minis tors, and I call upon the aletribers of this House to act consistently with their I t tr ctnisi s , to repo di ate .t hi s alteration, an d . to a dh ere to '' ‘ great p r inciples originally held out.--(Cheers.) Jr. 3 STANLEY said that he would not imitate the 4)4 of indignation, real or assumed, that had been made °F by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The pre ,'" Government, when they entered office, were pledged wo easures. 'The onti related to the tranuillity of `rehincl ; st and he confetced that that mtasure was not v• ry e "ttkituti ona l. The other was a Pl'itStll eof ref •rrn in t i • ,t ' e church of I re l an d—it wa s td b e a necessary rerorni e t he goad of the eeople and for the security of tl e , reh; end everything was done in order to remove the iren g objections of some to meddling at ail with the 'Ureli. It had been said that Ministers had made enotpromise with respect to those measures : now, he 1 I '2:WY repudiated, in the name of the Government to ','"ich lie belonged, all idea Of compromise between the ''',.° Measures. But he would say, that Government was fledged to the two measures—to the Coercive Bill, as it It , i l's called, and also to the carrying of the Irish Church 1 q mPoralities Bill ; they were picked to both those I m e asures, and they were fully prepared to stand or fall by ' ll4- n..--4 Ch eers from the Opposition Benches.) He hderst oo d t h e me m i ng o f t h ose c h eers —h e saw p l a i n l y , Mockery of them; but still he would repeat the de e'atation, that they were ready to stand or fall by those I '''' ) measures.—(Hear, hear.) Let their conduct be : ° ropared on tho s e two measures, and it would be found W holly consistent. It Would be found that they were ' i det ermined to carry both in their integrity.—(ol).) i'', e would ask whether the Coercive Bill did not go ' " t ° th e other House in all its integrity.—(oh ! and ° ; lati g ho It would be said that they were de 4d!ng the people, that they were stripping the 13111 °,' 'ts best clauses, and that it would lie passed in such ' worthless condition that it would not be worth , 1 . - 7ePting. No doubt a gr e at deal of demerir would he e'l• Why did not the Hon. and Learned Gentleman ll ' ate hi s o b ject io ns t o t h e Bill on a f ormer occas i on ? Th e tl il l'tndr nents that he then proposed were adopted, and O i ling was heard of this clamour. The Honourable arid \:. 4T lted Member had as good a right then as now to charge ‘' l n:ster s with the crime of adhering to office with a - ,:!'tifice of their principles. The Hon. and Learned , e ?ttlem an says that this clause is the only one in the Bill ,"ich h e valuis, and his principles seem to be to strip the ! i l iurch of the property she possessed.—(" ands front g r ' O'Connell.) If that was the Hon. Learned ' 4 ',Nieman's principle, he would tell hint it was not the i • il'beiple on which the present measure was introduced. 1 4 was introduced on a better principle than that of mak • 1t sece table to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. It t to4, P , h ' introduced not to satisfy his party or any other party, 1 : t to bring about a reform in the Irish church that ,h!old promote the security of that church and do good to ~,7 Peopl e . If that measure was thrown out they would , - ‘ 4 ' away relief from Ireland, and they would cause a t - 'ialls loss to the people of Ireland.—(" No, no," from th ' Opposition benches.) What ! had they not heard that 4,lel.Yestry cess was one of the greatest grievances under 4,l\ i eh the Catholic population of Ireland laboured—(Na, 1 Pt-and we re no t ti t h es secon d ary to t h e vestry cess, an d 1; 4 obnoxious to the people of Ireland ?—(" No, no," and , t 4 'ghter.) He was prepared to show that the vestry cess hMore objectionable than tithes.—(Laughter.) Tithes A el 'oged to property, and could not, like the vestry Fs' b e improperly raised. Catholics and Protestants Acre equally liable to tithes—he meant that Catholic and ti r L 'testant property were both liable to the burden o f tu e't•l But vestry cess differed materially, for it was ,„ 1- P°serl exclusively by Protestants upon the Catholic po -I::tlation, an d i t was appled to the purposes of a religion !th W hi ch they did not agree, and ordered by an autlio he:yvat.ginhe stw vestry e which they rebelled. The consequence was, -s was more objectionable to the Catho nt t han, tith es, wh i c h , if t h ey were not pa id i n the i r pre 4,4t."aPe, must be paid to the landlord in the shape of ~, When th e present Bill passe d, t h e vestry cess p"?Id be no l onger a legal charge, and therefore could not ' , lied. The vestry cess was certainly the only amount P... Pecuniary relief offered by the measure t o th e I r i s h P t le• The Bill was intended not only to satisfy th e ' , none population, but to make the Protestant Church ,h e r b efficient in Ireland. The reform contemplated in ' I: Irish Church might not be agreeable to the Hon. and Ottecl Member for Dublin—it might be indifferent to , 41 , whether the number of Bishops was reduced or not t h u ot it was not indifferent to the Government, since INconsidered a very great obj e ct to k ee p d own an over n stiff o f t h e Ch urc h, an d to app l y t h e expenses of l o af stiff to the relief of the poorer parochial pastors, and a ; l'e building and r e p a irin g o f c h urc h es . Wh at h e 'ued to what he had st at heart, was to ro• 1 ° t" the effic an iency of the Protestant Church in Irela p nd. it - h Was the object of the Bill—that was th e p r i nc i p l e on 6,,,:e1l it was based—th a t was the pri nc ipl e Mi n i sters 61,,' bound to abide by—that was to what they had , Ceed themselves, and by that pledge they were ready is: t and or fall.—( Hear.) He repeated again that Mini• i 6,? Were prepared to stand or fall by the two measures fl, 4 ultd already alluded to. They were not to be terrified ;1 1 t 4 carrying the Bill, and front securing to Ireland an d (S,, t e Church that prosperity and security which they :" in need of—they were not to be terrified from doing 1,,, y an y taunts as to their love of office, and as to their 06 tifl eing principle to that love of office—taunts which sp i t it unworthy of him to condescend to answer. )i t4 ,. 4 t he had said would be sufficient, he trusted, to con lie,' the House that the charges with respect to want of II i t 'iPle were totally unfounded and unmerited.—(Hear.) ,lie O'CONNELL, in explanation, was aware of the li i4 ' t of abolishing the vestry cess, but he really did not 111,‘ v what the Plight lion. Gentleman meant to do yt it, What he meant to do to-day might be very ent from what lie intended to do to-morrow. I, r t STANLEY said that the Hon. and L e ar ne d ib,,,l°ber was more conversant with the intentions of Go- V r oent upon that subj ec t th a n an y one e l se cou ld b e. 1 6: Ron. and Learned Member was perfectly aware that ti l i lause had been postponed in order that his own h r' ''"n as a lawyer might be taken upon it, and h e it r t Stanley) had no doubt that the Hon. and Learned li t4l ?er would not now deny that he had been for some V, - ' l 5 the fullest consultation with the Government as to ;(,manner in which the clause should be framed.— 441 cheers.) It lr • O'CONNELL said, tliat the part of the Right 4 ;', Gentleman's speech which had been cheered, was l 'i . „ 111 which he said that he (Mr. O'Connell) bad been (V the fullest consultation" with the Government.— La - 4 4 ') He (Mr. O'Connell) did not deny that lie bad :top l ,irt consultation with them.—(Hear, hear)—but 4 11 it; the Right Hon. Secretary say that anything de 116t 114 (1 been agreed on ? He (Mr. O'Connell) denied 11 t1, 4 'Itliing had been agreed on upon that subject ; but 4 1 !team to the distribution of the surplus r evenues o f Itt ) c . i toreli, he would say that part of that the Bill was giiyely t t, agreed on.--(Cheers.) tti t '' HUME said, that in this discussion there w a s k,‘ l Inur e for sorrow and regret than for anger, for never 1 1 ) ,, Government reduced to a juncture such as his Ma \(/.; Government had that night reduced themselves t o . , :iik t e ar, hear.) He would put it to the Noble Lord, '' tt,,, t ecurity the House or the country bad that the Go tt),'''ent meant to carry that or any other Bill which , ti tt 4 ‘ight introduce other than that which he had i 's,;' that th e y should stand by the principles of the '. G . 4t Lill? • The Noble Lord had given his pledge that l' b uv ernment would stand or fall by that Bill.—(Hear.) Sy s t ' i ght Hon. Gentleman had s tat e d that the present A lla t alas not one of the p r i nc ipl es o f the Bill ; but . th; l 'e would ask, was to b e considered time principles ,', 6 Bill, but those provisions which were laid down by 0 , 4 Uy 'rnruent as part of the measure ? These provi ‘4illl4),l" stated by the Noble Lord, the Government were N ).;7lvere pledged as men of honour—to maintain ;or tit t e re bound, in consequence of those pledges, to ii i4 4 ,,,,°'11 office.—(Cheers.) Nay, more, it was stated VO, oolile Lord, that as the situation of Ireland was 11 ti ! to require so harsh a measure as the Coercion i,, '% ) :'t Church Reform Bill would be brought forward IL' 4 'tetion with it, in order to heal the evils which ° : t ight Ireland to that state.—(Hear.) There were ` L tc, -14 ciples (as he understood) to be established `itt'llitt;:k of Bill ; the one was, the reformation of the ii k i lreland—(Hear, hear, hear)—the other. and 11 , 4 4) t) 41 Pal point on account of which alone he (1111. , 4 ts' t , Sod many other gentlemen on his side of the '' 'N t , id supported it —was, that it admitted that the ' of the Church might be alienated for public pur- poses.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had then deft ndei the admissi,n of there most important principles, and the Noble Lord had even stated that the .tnei7ure would place three millions Sterlintr at, the riispoial of parliament, to be applied to pubic pure hear,) TheGovern meut now attempted to change their former opinions, and to retract their words ; but those words were written,and were known to the public ; and it would be for the public to judge of such coninct.—(Hear, hear.) For his part, he would say that it showed the most lamentable desertion of preititis P l edges—(De - a, hear)—..the greatest want of !irmties, and tra3 a die74raceFalbreaA of public (Hear, hear.) Could they, as men of honour, retain that honour if they did not redeem the pledge which they had given to the country, of either retiring or carrying the Church Reform Bill ?.L..( Hear.) He (Mr. Hume) had stated when the Coercive Bill was before the House, that the Tories them-elves had never ventured to bring forward a measure which violated the constitution BO outrageously as that which was then brought forward by the Whig Government ; but the excuse always brought forward was, .that they intended to bring forward a .measUre of Church Reform, would nullify the effect of th, Coercion /3111. He (Mr. Hume) admitted that the abolition of vestry eess was one of the principles of the Bill, although in that he was sorry to find be differed with his Hon. and Learned Friend below Lim. But of what value, he would ask, was that in comparison to the advan tages expected by Ireland from the measure?—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had stated it to be about 60,0001. a year, hut he (Mr. Hume) was prepared to show that the benefit to be derived was no more than 27,0001. And was that the advantage which Ireland expected from this measure 2—(Hear, hear.) Ti:e Right Hon. Secretary for the Colonies had stated that there was a strong feeling both in this House and in the country against alienating the property of the Church of Ireland. He (Mr. Hume) did not know what it might be in the society in which tee Right Hon. Secretary moved, but he knew that in the country generally the proposition was hailed as the esta blishment of a proper principle on the subject of church property.—(Hear, hear.) When the measure was brought forward, the Noble Lord had stated that be would put down ten of the Irish Bishops. He (Mr. Hume) saw no principle on which the Noble Lord could have fixed upo❑ . . that number, and h.' therefore assi,ted him with one— namely, that as four Bishops were found to be sufficient to do all the duties incumbent nn them as Irish Bishops in Parliament, the same number would be sufficient to per form the °tinr ecclesiastical duties. He (Mr. Hume) stated this merely to show that the provisions of the Bill were its principles and its only principles. They now found that the Government shrunk from some of the roost mate rial of those provisions, and they could not know whether any more were to be changed or not. What right had the Government to suppose that the clause would be thrown out elsewhere ? They had found, no doubt, that there would be a majority against them in the House of Lords ; and finding that there was no other way of keep ing their pledge of standing by the Bill but by yielding that point, they had yielded it. They were afraid to go before the public and say that they had done all they could to carry the measure, but that the majority of the House of Liirds was against them, and that there was no other way of carrying it but by their support. They were afraid to do so : but if they did, they would then redeem the pledge which they had given of standing or falling by the measure. The Government now said that the probable result of such a clause was to be deprecated ; but he (Mr. Hume) would say, that if that House sup ported it—and it had hitherto been well supported by the House—he saw no reason why it should be now changed. —(Hear, hear.) Since the 14th of February, when the Noble Lord brought forward the measure, the country and the House hid supported it ; and notwithstanding that, the Government now shrunk in alarm from the opposition of the other House. They deserted their duty and their honour to preserve their places.—(Cries of "No, no," and " Hear, hear.") Perhaps it might not be se, but it appeared so to him.—(Herr, hear.) He hoped that the majority of the House which had voted for the Bill as in troduced, would not retract that opinion.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted that the same majority would now reject the mutilated Bill altogether.—(Hear.) It was a mere mockery, and the House and the country had been duped by the Ministry. Their conduct was a cause of deep sorrow and regret to him, and all he could do was to ob ject to the withdrawal of the clause, and, if it were with drawn, to vote for the rejection of the whole Bill. 11r. I\IACAULAY was not aware, when he entered the House, that his Right Hon. Friend meant to make the al teration in the Bill which he had since announced; but he (Mr. Macaulay) could say that he thoroughly approved of the change.—(Oh, oh ! and Hear.) The application of ecclesiastical property to secular purposes had not only not been advanced by the Noble Lord who introduced the Bill, but had been distinctly repudiated by him.—(Hear, hear,) The Noble Lord bad declared, that whatever his own pri vate opinion might be, he did not wish to urge it at that time, and that he wished the consideration of the subject to be postponed.—(Hear, hear, and No, no.) He (Mr. Macaulay) appealed to both aid, s of the House if such was not the statement made by the Noble Lord.—(Hear, bear, and erks of "No.") The Government had declared that they did not consider the surplus fund arising from Bishops' leases as Church property. Whether they were right or wrong in saying that it was not Church property he would not take upon himself to say, but he would say that, in proposing that that surplus should be placed at the disposal of Parliament, to be applied to secular purposes, they did not declare whether ecclesiastical property should be applied to secular purposes or not—(Cheers)—for, in so disposing of it, they had considered it as not ecclesias tical. He would say that not one Member of the Ministry had supported the application of Church property to secular purposes.—(Heir, hear.) lie himself had supported the Bill upon that principle, and if this clause were formed to a different principle, it would be absurd to expect that he should support it. Under these circumstances, and seeing that neither money nor the principle of the Bill was sacri ficed by the alteration proposed in this clause, lie hoped the House would not oppose the change.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. D. W. HARVEY was glad to find, that notwith standing all the splendid talent displayed by the sup porters of the Ministry on this occasion, th e H ouse h a d not allowed itself to b e gulled by the sophistry advanced by them. He was surprised to hear a person of the great judgment of the Hon. Member for Leeds put the inter pretation on the clause which he had then advanced to the House. Now what were the words of that clause?— " And the surplus of the slid moneys accruing to the credit of the said commissioners shall be applied to such purposes ar Perliament shall hereafter appoint and direct." —(Hear, bear.) Now that was the principle on which the Bill was founded ? It had been said by the Right Hon. Secretary that another clause to nearly the same effect was to be introduced in another part of the Bill ; but why, he would ask, should the Government beguile the House into a belief that another equally efficacious clause would be introduced ?—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Harvey) remembered when the measure was laid before the House by the Noble Lord (whose absence alit night he much regretted), that the clause which was now pro posed to be expunged was bailed as one on which the Government might display their standard of popularity; and it was triumphantly alluded to by the Noble Lord, as it would place three millions at the disposal of Govern. ment. It had been stated that this change in the Bill was to be made in order to conciliate hostility in another place. They had been told lately that the other House bad no voice in the affairs of the country; that the votes of the hereditary legislators were borne down by intimida tion from that House; but now they found that the opinions and votes of the Representatives of the Com mons of England were to he withdr a w n f rom f ear o f the other House. He congratulated the Tories on having dis covered that new way of defeating measures intended for the good of the people without exposing themselves to the responsibility of the rejection.—(Hear, hear.) In the worst days of Toryism, there had been nothing worse than this.—(Hear, hear.) What were they told ? That the vestry cess was not abolished, for they had merely al tered the source from which it was to be derived ; still it was as amenable to ecclesiastical purposes as ever, and the change would be of advantage to none but to the land lord.—( Hear.) To the people it would be of no advan tage. There was one other principle in the Bill—that of Church Reform. As to that, he was surprised that the Members for the Universities, who generally considered it their duty to maintain the interests of the Church, would sit by and listen with such coldness whil e 10 o f the Inch -...,- 13i‘hops were struck out. If the Catholic religion was making such progress in Ireland as was alleged, he (Mr. Hat vey) would have thought that no way would be more likely to support the Protestant religion than by keeping up the number of Bishops.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He was not surprised at the laugh, and he had no doubt that those who laughed would support the Church, if by that support they could keep their places. He would add one more word on the subject of the Reform of the Church Establishment. In his opinion, the reform ought to be such that it would place the Church Establishment in such a situation, that neither the adulation of its friends, nor the rigour of its enemies, could affect it. As they proposed to place it, however, they would be exposed to the attacks of both. They ought to endeavour to placs , it in a situation which would give it stability ; and if the clause then under consideration were withdrawn, that would not be the case. For these reasons, be would vote decidedly. against the Bill altogether, if the present clause were withdrawn.--(1Ie Mr. STANLEY rose to vindicate, not himself, but the Government, from a charge which had been bpoigh , against them by the Pon. Member. The Horn Memb er kid stated that th e Governme'et had introduced principles into the Bill to Whlch they had pledged themselves, and afterwards abandoned. Now the Hon. and Learned Member for feeds h id very truly stated that the alienati n of the property of the Church formed no part of the prin ciples of the Bill. That had been also stated by hims If (Mr. Stanley), and m ore directly by his Noble Friend the Ciemeeller of the B:Zehequeri ezid he ihoughst it important, not to the principles of the Bill, hilt tiithti character of the Government, that the House and the country Should be set right upon the subject. He would now teal what the Noble Lord had stated on introducing the measure, APer stating what the plan of his Majesty's Ministers was, he proceeded, " Now, I apprehend, that however great the differences of opinion may he, as to the right of Parliament to apply the property of the Chtireh to the purposes cf the State, both those that think that they have a right to apply it to such purpOs•_ , s, and those who think they have no right so to apply it—all will agree in thinking that the first claim upon the property of the Church, is the claim of the Church itself. No parties are !lei) , to dissent from this opinion, but those who either think that there ought to be no Church establishment at all, or those who think a dif ferent Church ought to be established in Ireland. With the cercPption of nose who entertain these opinions, it will be generally agreed that the present property of the Church estalildliment ought to be applied in the first place to the purposes which may be necessary for extending the benefits of the Church to the people of Ireland." And in another part he stated, that" the measure I have proposed, provides for not continuing the scandal of persons holding benefices and receiving the revenues of a living where no duty is performed ; and it provides to as great an extent as iS practicable or advisable for the redaction of the number of the Irish hierarchy. I would also beg to observe, that it does not lay down any abstract principle. indeed it is not necessary to do so for any practical purpose. It is not necessary now to decide whether Parliament has or has not a right to interfire with Church property. As I have already observed, all who think that there ought to he a Church Establishment at all, must agree that the Church has the first claim to be considered. But when a practical plan like this is brought forward, it is quite un necessary to call for a determination on any abstract prin ciple ; or to decide whether or not Parliament has any right to interfere with the property of the Church. The result of such a call would be only delay and obstruction. The plan which I have now detailed to the House is what his Majesty's Ministers feel themselves justified in proposing at present ; without meaning to preclude Parliament from considering the future disposal of Church property to other purposes than those of the . . Church. Whenever the purposes of the Church are fully satisfied, Parliament may, if it think fit, pro ceed to the consideration of the manner in which the surplus ought to be applied." These were the principles on which the measure was introduced, and he now stated ihem to be so, not in his own vindication alone, but in vindication of the Government. When the Government advanced a principle, and stated their intention to stand by it, they were not inclined to shrink from their duty; and he would not be doing justice to the Govern ment if he did not vindicate them from the charges brought Inward by the Hon. Member.—(Hear.) Dr. LUSHINGTON said that during his whole par liamentary experience he had never heard a discussion in which so little of the decency of Parliamentary language, or the courtesy of public life had been so much departed from.—(Cheers.) Neither had he ever heard a discussion in which the grossest and basest motives had been attri buted to a Government. He would say more; he had never heard such language used on an occasion where it was so totally destitute of foundation.—(Cheers.) An Hon. Member had explained, that the surplus arising front Bishops' leases was not considered part of the Church property ; and that therefore the question as to the alienation of Ecclesiastical property had not been touched.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He (Dr. Lushington) had been always, and still continued, of opi nion, that the surplus revenues of the church, after paying the clergy, and other church purposes, ought to be appro priated to the promotion of education, and be owned that it was from supposing that they were ready to secularize that property, that he had voted for the second reading of the Bill. Nothing would deter him from stating that these were the principles which he held on this subject. Was it worth while then to enunciate a theoretical proposition, when, by the very terms of the Rh itself, they were stripped of carrying that proposition into effect? And for what reason, he should like to know, were they bound to conciliate one part of Ireland at the cost of irrit sting ano ther ? He at least saw no just ground for giving this useless and unnecessary insult to the Protestants of Ireland. Then what would be its effect elsewhere? There might be some people in that House des roue of calling in the power of the people to annihilate the authority of another assembly.—(No, no, no, and Hear, hear.) When he saw the delight with which any proposition was hailed that seemed to threaten such an event, he must say that he did not observe that fear of a collision which any man desirous of avoiding it would wish to see, and which could not happen without such consequences as all m n of modera tion and prudence must desire to avoid.—( Hear, hear.) When there was any principle concerned that by its concession would he of great advantage to the country, and when it became absolutely necessary to obtain its concession, he trusted that he should be found at least as firm in demanding it as any of those who now appeared most ready to rush into the battle.—(Hear, hear.) There seemed to him no such necessity now ; and he therefore desired to avoid all irritation upon any subject on which the evil of that irritation was not demanded by an ade quate necessity, and balanced by at least an equal advan tage.—( Hear. ) He must say that he was surprised at the conduct of some Hon. Members. He had heard, not merely during this session, but long before, so much said of the evils of the church cess, and of the benefit that Ire land would gain by its abolition, that he could not but feel surprised at the remarks now made—remarks, which, if they meant anything, meant to deny all that had been before said, and to leave it to be believed that the aboli tion of the church cess was of no advantage to Ireland. What ! was it of no advantage to abolish that which had so often and 80 universally been the subject of complaint? Was it no advantage to abolish two Archbishops and several Bishops?—(Hear hear)—was it no advantage to equalise the livings, and to give the other checks on the abuses of the church establishment?—(Hear, hear.) After all this, he must say, that those who made these ac cusations ought first to enable themselves to support those accusations by facts, which in this instance he thought they hail nut done.— (Cheers.) Mr. O'CONNELL said that his approbation of the principle of the Bill had been often quoted against him. What was that approbation ? He would tell the House, from the same authority which had been quoted against hint, and in which it was said " he approved of the principle of the Bill, which would be applicable to all other property, and he valued the principle, since it recog nised the right of the Government to look into ecclesias tical property hereafter." As to the censure thrown on him for the language he bad used when he was expressing his abhorrence of what he conceived to be a gross breach of faith, he must, before he bowed to that censure, be convinced that the person who uttered it was entitled to sit in judgMent on a question of breach of faith.—(Hear, h-ar.) He had heard of some Hon. Gentlemen who had made pledges enough to their constituents when on the hustings, but who had found it convenient not to keep them when in that House.—(Cries of " Order," " You made pledges to repeal the Union.") Ile denied that he had given any such pledge.--(" Yea, and shrunk from it.") Ile denied it indignantly. (The Hon Member here made some observations with a great warmth of manner, but the confusion in the House prevented his observations from reaching the gallery.) Mr. BERNAL (the Chairman of the Committee) having in some degree restored order, said, he would put it to the Hon. and Learned Member himself to say what the line of argument he was now pureuing had to do with the question at present before the C-immittee? Mr. O'CONNELL—I shotild like to know, Sir, in what I deviate? Mr. BERNAL--I can answer the Hon. Member at once . The pledges which Hon. Members may possibly have given on other subjects can have nothing to do with the question of the Irish church now under debate. Dr. LUSHINGTON—If the Hon. Member alluded to him in his statement about pledges, be begged to say that the assertion was totally without foundation. Necessarily he could not use strong langr.age towards the Hon. Mem ber, but he distinctly dism - owed having made any pledge of any kind.—(Hear.) Sir R. PEEL came down to the House this evening with the intention of giving his c, , rdial support to the amendment of the Hon. Member for Newcastle-under- Line, that whatever surplus there might be from the un proved value of the Bishops' lands should be applied to t h e purposes of the united churches of England and Ire land. The object of that amendment seemed to him to be fully answered by the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he therefore supposed that the Hon• Member would not think it necessary to press his amend ment. But there was one observation he must notice. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had said, that measure of the Government had been adopted -, r•f?4*l3s,(pi, , rlce of a et;eipinnine with their opponents.— (kar.) For himself he utterly disela:tned any know lege of such cotoprotnise—(Hear, hear) and he de clared, that when he entered that House this evening, he slid not know what was the intention of the Government. —(Hear, hear.) 11,1 disdproved of all compromises, and he owed it to the Gen,tlemen with whom he acted to say ' they did the same; 1n givipe• assent, therefore, to any part of the Bill, he was free as air as to the rest, and in public matters that was the course ,he should generally. pute,ue.—(Heir.) H e disapproved of compromise, for when once they were made, they not only did not gain the confidence of an opponent. but they most certainty lost that of the Men tfho had b!•en accustomed to follow anti rely upon those who made it.—(Load cheers from the ORosition. ) He entirely approved of the course the Government had adopted on the present occasion in °mi.- ring this clause; but he did not much rejoice in it, for he was able to show that there never would and never could be a surplus. The principle against which he on another occasion had protested was, not that they had 1:n right to apply church property to secular purpoies—for he had no occasion to dispute that point—but that if the Legislature gave a new valne to Chterch property, that new value belonged to the church alone. But of all the extraordinary propositions he bad ever heard, was that of an Hon. Member, who had always complained of the ab senteeism of the clettY, but who, nevertheless, proposed to abolish all hot four Irish bishops; and for this reason, o!' all others, that they were entitled to sit in Parliament— (Laughter)—and that was the way in which he proposed to remedy the non-residence of the higher clergy.__ (Laughter.) He should say no more now, than that Ire supported the proposition of the Rt. Hon. Gentleman with respect to this clause, but in doing 30 he did not think himself pledged to agree to any other clause in the Bill. Mr. LONAYNE accused the Government of giving promises which they did not perform. Mr. GISEIORNE observed, that it was natural that Irish Members shou'd wish to be heard on such a subject ; but Ire must say a few words, and he thought that there were many English Members in the same situation with himself. Many of them had voted for the Irish Coercion had for every clause of it, upon the faith that the Government would pass the present Bill in the form in which it was first announced. He did not deny that the abolition of the church cess was a relief to Ireland ; but then this clause also was a most important feature in the Bill. He looked to it without regard to Ministerial ex planations; and he wished to ask the Ministry whether they had any more prospect of carrying it in another place when they first proposed it, than they had at the present moment?—(Hear, bear.) Were they the only people in the world who did not know that it would be made the subject of a desperate struggle?—(Hear, hear.) If, when they proposed the Bill, they intended to recede front this condition in it, they deceived the House; if they did not, then they were bound to show that the circum stances" under which they now withdrew it were different from those under which they haul first pro posed it.--([leer, hear.) Toe Right Hon. Gentleman had at first told them that there was a division in the Cabinet on the subject of the church property, but they had at last agreed upon a medium principle, which was the one contained in this clause. If the Legislature, by any act of its own, could increase the value of the church property, it had a right to dspase of that increase. The principle must be admitted, for how would the Go vernment have the right to interfere with the property at all, if it was not state property ? He did not think it was a proper argument to address to the House of Commons of England, that they must recede from a certain mea sure, because it was possible that such a measure might produce a collision with the other House of Parliament. He knew not what were the chances of such an event, but he did not think it fit to be adduced as an argument to bias the resolutions of that House. Neither could be agree with the argument, that the Legislature could not meddle with church property, for that proceeded on the supposition that a finite possession of property gave the right of making an absolute disposition of it, which was absurd ; and they could only escape from that to another, by saying that the Legisl lure had confirmed that dispo sition, for that would go to show that one Legislature could eternally hind all other Legislatures. He hoped that the House would never agree to any such proposition ; and for himself, he never would consent to its adoption ; and further, he trusted that the House would not allow this clause to be withdrawn. Lord SANDON thought that the proceedings of this night formed an ample justification of the Ministry in withdrawing this clause. An opinion had gone abroad that this clause involved the principle that the State had a right to de with the property of the Church. As that was an error, the sooner it was corrected the better. Colonel DAVIES said, that Ministers had altogether disgraced themselves in the eyes of the country by with drawing the present clause.—(Cheers.) They had hitherto been supported by most obsequious Houses ; but if the House were as obsequious on this occasion, they would degrade themselves to the lowest depths of degrada tion.—(Cheers.) He trusted that the House would nut so far forget its dignity and independence as to he frightened like so many children at the bugbear of colli sion, so unceasingly held out by Ministers, for purposes best known to themselves.—( Hear, hear.) If the present Government pursued this course, he, f,r one, would give his devoted adhesion to the Right Hon. Baronet, who, although most of his past measures had not altogether pleased him (Colonel Davies), or met with his support-- had more in his head than all the Ministry put together. —(Cheers, and partial laughter on the Ministerial benches.) If there were to be Tory acts, let them be done under Tory banners. Lord Ei3RINGTON reproached the Hon. and Gallant Member for the inconsistenry of this his present declara tion, with his motion in support of Ministers the other night. As to the clause itself, he considered that no practical benefit would result from it ; and he did not, therefore, see any necessity for such pertinacity in attempt. ing to retain it. Colonel DAVIES said, that what be had done the other night was not for the sake of Ministers, but as matter of public neces,ity. Mr. F. O'CONNOR protested against cutting out the only two lines of any value in the whole 152 clauses. Ministers had thus given two Bills to the Protestants in Ireland ; he, therefore, wished to know when the people of Ireland were to have their case considered. The Hon. and Gallant Colonel talked of the House being about to degrade themselves by supporting the Govern ment; it was no new thing, and would, therefore, only be a dding to the measure of their degradation. He hoped the House, however, would now reject the Bill alto gether ; he, for one, would give it his most decided op position. He first said that he would premise his few observations by a confession that his recollection of what had been said by Government in the outset of this Bill, quite coincided with what the Right Hon. Gentleman had said to-night ; his opposition to it—(Cheers)-- therefore, was on no allegation of tergiversation on their part, but on much higher grounds. He opposed the Bill itself altogether. There appeared to he some deference paid to the anticipated fear of its rejection, if sent up, in its present state to the Upper House ; why the Lords could only have rejected it.—(Hear, hear.) Whet: the Lower House got it sent back to them, then they might have seen what they could do to accommodate: it to their Lordships—(Hear, hear)—but ; as it was, this House was framing difficulties for itself.—(Hear, bear.) Supposing the Lords to have made a stand in opposition to this clause, the Commons could hut have cut it off; but now, not having this clause to work upon, their Lordships would direct their opposition to some other clause, and the Bill would be rendered, if possible, still more inefficient.— (Hear, bear.) He protested against the omission of the clause. In conclusion, he would earnestly advise Minis ters not lo tantalize the people with those crumbs of reform, those parings of a blessing, adapted to the opi nions of another House, hut to frame a reform suitable to the wants of the people, and then let the other House deal with it as they, in their judgments might think fit. They need not fear being accused of going too far or too fast.—(Hear, and a laugh.) Mr. H. GRATTAN considered the attempt made to terrify this House into compliance was most unconstitu tional. He protested against the intimidation held out, and called on the House of Commons to stand by their pledges, and then the country would stand by them ; but there was no doubt the country would not stand by such a vacillating Ministry.—(Loud cheers.) The conduct of the Ministry was such as no previous administration had ever been guilty of.—( Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL had always contended, that though Church property ought not to be lightly touched, yet it was competent to Parliament to apply it for the promotion of the religious and moral culture of the people. —(Hear, hear.) At the same time, it was, in his opi nion, much to be deprecated, that the question could not be raised without bringing on a convulsion in this country. The different views taken upon this subject made it one of very delicate nature. Those who opposed the appropri ation of Church property contended, that to appropriate Church property in the manner suggested, was neither more nor less than spoliation ; whilst the Hon. Mein • her for Derbyshire and the Hon. Member for London appeared to consider the clause chiefly valuable, because it sanctioned the principle of appro priating Church property to State purposes.-.- (Hear, hear.) Consequently, if they yielded to this feeling, they would not be carrying into effect their oe r principle; but would, without any ttlequate necessity, is yie'ding to the general principle' of the diversion of chmel property fur State purpeses.;-, (Hear.) If that-House wa to enter into a contest with the Lords, they should do i for something wordi t'ontesting, The present waS but the shadow of a claim to prosecritte rehi.ll would be riskier the peace and tranquillity of the cotintry i for the sake i 2; an abstract principle. He regarded e th e C onst i t e t i on i n very different light from some Hon. Gentlemen. Th. check which 636'11000e eliereised oeer another was nn. invented for the purpose of lesirgiesg the two Heusi, in , collision on every difference of opinion, beet in order tha measures should be adopted that were satisfactory to boti and beneficial to the country. There was no doubt that the diminution of the number of lliseops, and the abolition o the church cess, would not b vo'untatil7 acceded to by the House of Lords, but merely because, on considering the nature of the Constitution, they would feel it their dut ) to yield to the sense of the country, and to the declare , ' wish of the House of Corm/Tem The question for them tc 1 consider was, whether, at the ptettent season, they woule think it worth white to pass a Bill which contained many essential benefits, although it did not sanction a principle to which there now existed great, and, perhaps, able objections.—(Cheers from the Tories.) If that Huns, was to enter into a contest with the House of Lords, he hoped the centent would take place on a question' of some. importance, and that they would not wantonly, and on trivial grounds, provoke a col.leisse.—(Cheers ) Although the Huse of Commons wa., doubtless - , the strongest of the two branches of the Legislature, yet he hoped they would use their power with temper and moderation. Some of the gentlemen on the other aide, especially the Hon. Mem ber for Colchester, stipported the cliuse, because they itn gined that if this clause were retained there would be more probability of the Bill being rejected—sean event to which they looked forward with no inconsiders :satisfaction. —(clear, hear.) He could not at all approve of each a feeling. He could understand it as proceeding from those who, in the discussions vihich had taken place in that House, had paid but little regard to the general security of property ; but, for himself, lie was of opinion that this country could not stand a revolution once a year..---(Loud cheers.) Let others be for convulsion, lie was for peace. lIEATHCOTE regretted very much to bear so unconstitutional a doctrine as that which hail been laid down by the Noble and Learned Lord and others of the Ministry, as to the conduct to he pursued by that House in anticipation of a collision with the House of Lords.—( Hear, hear.) His opinion entirely clashed with that of the Noble Lord, and he called upon the House of Commons, in the name of the people of England, to do their duty fearlessly.—(Loud cheers.) The next question was, were the people of England to succumb to the House of Lords ?—(II. ar, hear.) He was bound, as an honest man, to say that no power on earth should have induced him to vote for the coercive measure, had it not been the opinion of his Majesty's Ministers that they would carry out the principles of the premedial measure in the spirit in which it was first introduced, without reference to any party in the country, or to any power, however high. Sir H. H. INGLIS said, that even if this clause were left out there was quite sufficient in the Bill to mortify the friends of the Established Church, and afford matter of triumph to its enemies—there was enough still left in the Bill to induce him to give it his most determined op positien.—To adopt this clause, under existing circum stances, would, in his opinion, be nothing less than a gra tuitous insult to the clergy.—(Question, question.) After a few words from Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, Mr. HARDY contended that the same principle which the clause would establish as to church property, might with equ 4 justice be applied to private property. If the Hon. Member for Middlesex was correct, his Majesty's Ministers were in a state of extreme jeopardy ; for if they retained the clause they were in great jeopardy from the House of Lords, and if they expunged it they were in danger from six out of every seven men whom they might meet out of that House.—(Question.) Mr. D. BROWNE rose, but his voice was drownid in the cries of "Qllts iou." M. STANLEY felt the importancr of corning to a decision that night, but begged a hearing for his Hon. Friend the Member for Mayo, who had the great Parlia mentary merit of making short speeches. Mr. D. BROWNE said, it was now proposed that they should of a sudden come to a decision quite opposed to that which they had entertained fur the last three or four months.—( Heir.) It always gave him great pain to differ from his Majesty's Ministers, but be was compelled to do so in the present instance. He would rather have a Tory Administration—would rather see the present Minis try break up—would rather see a dissolution of Parlia ment, than that it should go forth into Ireland that the Reformed Parliament had declared that church property was inalienable. He could conceive nothing more disas trous than the effects which such a proceeding would have on the people of Ireland.—(Questiou, question.) Dr. BALDWIN supported the clause as it originally stood. He denied shat ,the chose went to appropriate church property; all that it appropriated was the right of the reversion to the property at present held on lease.— (Loud cries of " Question," and " Divide !") Mr. ROBERT FERGUSON wished to have the prin ciple established arid the details might be altered ; but the withdrawal of the clause would do away with the princi ple.—(Again loud calls of " Question," and " Divide.") Mr. STANLEY wished the House to be aware that the clause did not open the question whether the Sate had or had not a right to deal with Church property. No such question was at issue before the house. If it were, be might be obliged to vote one way, and his Right Hon. Friend another. That was not the question at issue, and those who voted for the omission of the clause might adhere to and act upon thoir opinion, that Parliament might inter fere with Church property without ary inconsistency what ever. The Government thought that that property was dif ferent from any other description of Church property, and might be separated from it ; but that idea bad been dis countenanced by both sides of the House. The question, then, was, whether the property was not to be dealt kith as other Church property, and to be placed in the same fund, and devoted to the same purpose, as other Church property ? He again repeated, that the abstract question of the right of Parliament to deal with Church property was not before the Committee. The Committee then divided upon the question that the anise stand part of the Bill : Ayes Noes Majority for excluding the Clause --132 On re-entrt ing the gallery, we found that the House had resumed. SEPARATISTS' AFFIRMATION. Mr. PRYME moved the third reading of this Bill. Sir M. W. RIDLEY moved that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Mr. MURRAY supported the Bill, and expressed his surprise that it should be opposed by his Hon. Friend. Sir ROBERT INGLIS opposed the Bill, and would vote for the amendment. Mr. BRISCOE supported the Bill. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, hut Sir M. W. RIDLEY said he would not press his amendment to a divi sion, and the Bill was read a third time and passed. BOROUGH OF WARWICK. Sir RONALD FERGUSON regretted being obliged at so late an hour to trouble the House with a new subject; but he would state the circumstances of it as brialy as possible. Oa the 20th of February a petition had been presented from certain electors of the borough of Warwick against the return of Sir Charles Greville, on the ground of corruption and bribery, and of illegal and unconstitutional interference in the election by the &ill of Warwick. Immediately afterwards a counter-petition was presented against the return of Mr. Bolton King, charging him with bribery and corruption. The Committee was appointed in May. Of that Com mittee he was unfortunately chosen the Chairman. If any person would read the evidence taken before the Committee, they would find strong statements of bribery and corruption, and of the illegal and uncon stitutional interference of the Earl of Warwick. The Committee began by inquiring into the allegations of bri bery against Sir Charles Greville, and it was soon proved to them that seven agents had been appointed by him, which seven agents had bribed twenty-two electors. When that was proved, Sir Charles Greville withdrew the case, and the petition against Mr. Bolton King was abandoned. The Committee could do nothing, therefore, but close their proceedings ; as they could not go on at an emu - mous expense to parties who had spontaneously abandon, their case. They made a special report to the House, stating that it had been proved that Sir Charles Greville. through his agents, had been guilty of bribery, and al,o that it had been proved thrt the Earl of Warwick', Steward, Mr. Brown, had paid large sums, amounting t. 1,5001. info the bank at Warwick, in favour of the Town Clerk, Mr. Tibbitts (who had been appointed I)) the Earl of Warwick), and that Mr. Tibbitts had give)) checks on the bank to the agents of Sir Charles Greville. It was with great regret that he made thlsmotion7bO: the nature of the evidence lift hint no option. He woul.: move, therefore, that a Select Committee he appointed t consider and report as to the best mode of preventir,,, bribery, treating, and other corrupt practiees at the hitt), election of burgesses to sit in Parliament for the borotig!. of Warwick. fie intended to propose that the Membzr• of the S,lect Committee be the Members of the Com mitt, which had sat ou the petition ; they being, from th •ircrimatance, the best persons to carry on the inquiry. Lord AI OL YN ti s-corulcd die mutton. Sir JOHN HAMMER orain.sined that the allegations in the petitio n against Charles Greville bad not been 'mine out by the evidence, and rxticessed his hope that it this late period of the session House would not brow away Ito rim'e by entering into the consideration of such a !object. Mr. ELLICE supporter/ the proinaition for a Corr lnittee ; but moved, as an arnewlment, that the Coo .. utitterf also instructed to make further inquiry int,. ti e circumat.l7mt, of the late election for the borough of Varwirk. Ile catty not who were the guilty persons •lie object of that House PIT/A to be to trace such prat. tice• up to their source. - An Hort. MEMmut, whose name the Could not learn, , naintained that the allegations in the petition were corn pletcly borne out by the evidence ; and that the House would lose its character with the country if it did not follow tip the inquiry. Sir RONALD FERGUSON male a few observations. Mr. HALCOMB observed that the report of the Com mittee ought not to be received, as Warwick was, in his opinion, a place as little susceptible of corruption as any with which he was acquainted. The Committee had even called upon the Earl of Warwick's banker to show his hooks. If he (Mr. Halcomh) had been in the situa tion of the banker he whould ha►e preferred going before a jury to exhibit his books. The number of 22 had been cheered as a large number of cases of bribery —The Hon. Member for Beverley might, perhaps, be able to say whether it was so or not. An Hox. MEMBER, whore name we could not learn, made a few observations. Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE. and Sir RONALD FERritl±,ON 4 Igo made seine remarks, which were inaudible, amid erica of " Question ! question !" in all directions. Sir E. KNATCHI3ULL moved, as an amiltdincrit, that the Committee should be appointed by h,llot. Mr. MURRAY objected to th- appointment ff the Committee by ballot, as implying an imputation upon the Members of the former Select Committee. The House divided upon the amendment, when 'here appeared, For the Amendment ll Againbt it 97 Majority . _ _ Th. original motion vras then :weed to. CoIoneIDAVIES brought i❑ a I3iil for the more speedy trial of persons accused of petty larceny, which was read first and second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday. After the presentation of several petitions, the House adjourned at half-past two o'clock. LIST OF TR) As far as it could be aserrti E MAJORITY, reined, who voted against the r the Registry Bill. [PhiHipps, C. X- , -North Leices tenthire Second Reading 01 ENGLAND. Aglionby, H. A. —Cockermoutt, Attwood, M.—Whitehavet, Bethel', R.—East Yorkshire Blamire, W.—East Cumberland Boss, J. G.—tiortballerton Cayley, Sir G.—Scarborough Cayley, E. S.—North Yorkshire Chandos, Marquis of—Bucks Chapman, A.—Whitby Chaytor, Sir W.—Sunderland Chetwynd, Capt. W.—Stafford Cobbett, William—Oldham Cornish, James—Totness Curteis, H. B.—East Sussex Curteis, E, B.—Rye Darlington, Earl of—South, Shropshire Divett, E.—Exeter Duncombe, Hon. W.—North Yorkshire Pryme, George--Cambridge Richards, JP .—Knaresborough ltidley, Sir 14. W.—Ncwcastic_ upon-Tyne doss, C.—Northampton Ryle, ./.—Maccle , ficki Sheppard, T.—Frome Staunton, Sir G.—South Hants Strickland, G —West Yorkshire Tennyson, Right lion. C.-- Lambeth Thompson, P. B.—East York shire Todd, J. Ruddell—lloniton Cooke, W.—Truro Tynte, C. K. K.—Bridgwater fynte, C. J. K.—West Somer. setshire Tyrcll, C.—West Suffolk VtUiers, Viscount—Honiton , Vvvyan, Sir It. IL—Bristol Wason, Rigby--Ipswich Wilks, John—Boston Williams, W. A.—Monmouth.. Fenton, L.—Huddersfield Fielden, John—Oldham Finch, G.—Stamford Gaskell, J. M.—Wenlock Gaskell, Daniel—Wakefield Goring, 11. D.—New bhorcham Holcomb, John—Dover Hardy, John—Bradford Harvey, D. W.—Colchester Heathcotc, Sir G.—Rutlandsh. Henniker, L9rd—East Sussex Hodges, 'l'. L.—East Kent Howard, P. H.—Carlisle shire Williams, G.—Ashton NVood, T.—Breeknockshirc Yorke, C. P.—Cambridgeshire SCOTLANIY. Hay, A. L.—Elgin, &c. Ingham, IL—South Shields Ingilby, Sir W. A.—Parts 01 Lindsey, Lincolnshire Jcrmyn, Earl—Bury, Suffolk Jervis, J.—Chester :IRELAND. Castlereagh, Vise.—Down Talbot, J.—Athlone young, J —Cavan TELLERtI. Johnstone, Sir J. V. B.—Scarbro Knatchbull, Sir E—East Kent Lister E. Cunlilie—Bradford Lowther,Viscount—Westmore. land Lowther, Col.—Wetcmoreland Marshall, J.—Leeds Parker, J.—Sheffield 1 ' Sanford E. A.—. West Sorer . . , setshi'rc Hodgson, J.—Newcastle-upon- Tyne -1 FAIRED OPE. Lincoln, Earl of—South Notts Ossulston, Lord—North North- Parrott, J.—Totness Pease, Joseph—South Durham • I'clham, lion. C. E. W.—Lin umberl;nd Molyncux, lord—South Lancs. •shire Herbert, Hon. B.—South Wilts Gladstone, W. E.—Newark ILunsden, J. C.—Mallow collisliire, parts of Lindsey Philips, M.—Manchester COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE 21. JOHNSON IN FORMA VAUTEILIS V. BEACH. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a ship's carpenter, against the defendant, the Captain of the ship Illadres, for an assault and false imprisonment. The plaintiff was carpenter on board the Madras, free-trader, on her voyage out to India in 1829 ; and on the sth of May in that year, he happened to have had a quarrel with a lad on board, to whom he gave a blow. One of the passengers, a Lieutenant Rockford, remon strated with the plaintiff, which so exasperated him that he threw a jack-plane at him. The noise brought all the passengers on deck, as well as the Captain, who remon strated with the plaintiff on his violent conduct, which had quite a contrary effect to that which was intended, and instead of inducing him to be quiet, la! abused the Captain, and attempted to strike him. He was imme diately put in confinement in irons, where he was kept 110 days, deprived of his grog, and every convenience necessary to the preservation of health. On their arrival at the Cape he might have been brought to trial and punished, and he could have been discharged, but his imprisonment was continued tinder the greatest possible bodily suffering. It was proved, that at the time the plaintiff was first put in irons he was a strong healthy man, and at the termination of his incarceration he was scarcely able to walk. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 701 CONSISTORY COURT, J 19113 21. BOWCOTT V. BOWCOTT. This was a suit commenced by Mr. James Bowcott against his wife for a divorce on the grounds of adultery. The parties were married on the let of January, 1825, the lady being sixteen years old and the husband twenty-one, the consent of the father of the lady being given. A child was the issue of the marriage, and the parties co habited together till July, 1830, when Mr. Bowcott pro ceeded in command of a vessel to Calcutta. In November the wife proceeded to India, but was compelled to return owing to ill health. The husband returned soon after, when Mrs. Bowcost declared she would no longer reside with her husband, and formed an adulterous connection with a Mr. Reynolds, the parties living together at many places as man and wife. Dr. LUsHINCTON pronounced for the divorce. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JUNN 21. Charles Wadsworth, who figured at Hatton-garden police office some time ago, came up to•day to receive judgment. - The insolvent was opposed by a Mr. Stephen Henry, a watch and clock maker, residing in Berkeley-square, and was defended by Mr. CHADWICKS JONES. He took a house in Clifford -street, Bond-street, which he got splendidly furnished by tradesmen in the neighbour.. hood ; be had incurred numerous debts within a short time, and was then taken to .Hatton-garden Police-office o■ charges of swindling, but no case was substantiated against him, and he was consequently discharged ; he was, however, immediately arrested, and had since been incarcerated in Whiteeross-street Prison. Before he quitted Clifford-street, where he passed as a pri vate gentleman, he called on Mr. Henry, accompanied by two dashingly-dressed females, and ordered . a handsome clock to be sent to his residence, which was done. The price was fixed at sixteen guineas, and no portion had been paid ; in a short time it wag pledged, and on Mr. Henry calling one day he found the street door barred with a chain, and many creditors round the house. Some had obtained their goods by force, but the insolvent alleged that he had made over the furniture which he had of Mr. Bailey, an upholsterer, but which that gentleman fortu nately got back, to his brother-in-law, one Cooper, now in Horsemonger-lane Gaol. It was stated that the furni ture had been made over by a bill of sale to that person for the sum of 2901., which the insolvent, Cooper, and a person named Aylett, swore had been ;slid. Mr. Commissioner Bowgt: said it was quite clear that there bad been a gross conspiracy and an illegal com bination to obtain goods for the purpose of disposing of them. The Learned Commissioner, therefore, sentenced the insolvent to an imprisonment of nine calendar months. Every necessary arrangement has been at length finally made for the erection of a new theatre on the site of the former Lyceum aeatre, which was a fe w years ago destroyed by fire. The plan been appr .ved, and the theatre is to be on a compact scale, of a modeat4 siv, and in every particn'ar convenient and commodious. It is expected to be finished in the tootling spring, n WAREN 49 7 wed 0' eth ruck is o°l en tbd ";:ile° l er. , pi no. 010 0 cf?. et' r No, te 0'1,4 : 1 1 teE: Jet' , cal f Pr r ir i At o , o u rai] a f t gh t ,: I (eh' le s ; r :i ,f 0 E V' 5 0 tell