The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-19 00:00:00

to that wise, J ul Ist still contin B his own part, ten in endeavour' justice.—(l 4 ° of that measure ) ense of the po) tecessity and jto`; ps had adopted' louse of Cottto o to of Ireland s , ! l tasting the vr:,t, lear, hear;) hey had passed, of their convict, iderations of e%l be supposed fr rgot how much ke oppdsite for would never foil d with the COD , de which they (3 ! a he wished to, s, that if Cad , ' 5, instead of be uences to which lever have occur! • time, would 1)° .', was unjustly r o to obtain it 11 " illegal combinati a and by this 111 ,!! situation in vi 7 u! !xtravagant pat', em. The comb° he coercive meo l !d from Parlia oel Nmement of etnl j the Right R e vef°, scussing the Or le to do w ith!, heaven, or Lt3 o Is merits or deu Hear, hear.) reit at considers' `Gibe, tvhn had, eat deal of non6 .l e v alculated to stiuu l to excite ill blool it to do with s would allow br, for their Lordsliq mention the no ° which were l o tic, he speeches of ;lies they had e !cried from PO I Did he say t/i . i lurch or Protest' led a more prefo o !stant clergy intt r elancholy situat° Mice of the Hoa 'asure which she d DE their just righ ° e present Bill, s e •efore thrown 8 11 _,, 1 . It would sPr r. Prelate, a nd ° I .t there was a c 0 ,,, 1 Church. He le delighted to P sl co u ntry. — t i 1 - 0 1 Ce a present of 0) In his opioiots tstant Church tb :0 for the purr oof against the 0 : a Noble Lord, !presentative of A l i but whom he from th e girl Lord knew hill'' was the trutb tbE iimself that all 0 in his own per d ' l°ll ;r1 last night tlw ,gainst the Prot: 4 as to say that 1 of Roden, "No: was the intent ° 'taut religion. he tendency of tv ant religion. d leave tiias.iure at the persons Al ' xiety for the tai l ris who %%ere card 'rotestant vou- 4 .t so much satisi°,, is in Ireland g e .: o Protestant relig,.ri as brought forol, h4 (I stability to ",j ht Rev. Prelate li o , iose of the measl i ,e d to effect only ', r cess. Now tko y object of thef t , 'e Right Rev. 11 0 1 t of the Protest il O H O ( e, Was not an - that there was n" Ath overgrown, At of a better te v o i posed to take fr ° i went a p o rtioti,i de it amongst t l3 / 50 1 e say that this ) ly that it was 't .ter repute thsOff clergy were 0117 , That was no n t ight Rev. pee lsl Another oted her the building a had entered 16 d be raised u n t o ;essary to meet to doubt that if t o I be found tha t 1 # sken. The 140 in exposition • f le Right Revetvo e su bsequent par, led from the 6,1 were specimen* 0 Right Rev. prep id that the ve 9t l :, is an evil ; but r o j ce of Noble L ° tb p both sides of er the vestry t:i f utmost enorg!Td ses—from its I (Hear, hear.) 0 ( the sustenanc e o of a church v i t v or which, as : ' O l tamed an babl t i i , t) wanted no e er e Lords who sg v Ireland, and ' v s , to remove ones, ek to avail th ey ,o Protestant Ch' i o o ace, and on ling and salnt l3 %; lat Church. d i , this measure r io % to the roll:ta i l, ght Rev. Pr e ll, history of the e ol hat in the tic ° , of the clergy 0 49# eland. It $ 0 "or re taken down' i 0 ted above a c e ` n ef afterwards o" , value should 6 been taken " o ld n that they sh 1 r his band, fl n oV His colleagu e lo o' His (Lord r tbt one was, th 3s i e ff lot entitled t° tbe and Mr. Jot , D oc in that pole , ,0 t that the C l ' 0 00 l on. Since i olt ad been c0 09° ,10 1 d Plunket) ,4 i. But thete o orf clued, manY.d 0 0c its. He , ]. Their the he ° l t el' strongly 0 1 which the ~ so ou t ' 0 6 thrown . 8 was hostile Protestant Chinch of Ireland. A man who made such 4 8 accusation seriously must be bereft of understanding. Government, seeing the dangers in which that Church Was placed, thought it incumbent upon it to raise a fund that should be applied strictly to ecclesiastical purposes, and they bad recommended to his Majesty to signify his consent to a measure being introduced into the other heuse of Parliament to effect that purpose. The other House bad passed this Bill, not with any levity, as the Right Rev. Prelate supposed, for a measure could not have been conducted with much levity that took three Months to discuss.—(Hear.) The measure had then come to this House ; and the Right Bev. Prelate had thought himself entitled to say of it,—and it was unfortunate that be '6llla s o speak of such a measure,—that it sanctioned tpuliatioti of property and robbery.—( Hear, hear.) laas it an allegation that Parliament had no right to legislate respecting the property of the Church ? Was it an allegatio n that was a matter above the law ? (Hear, bear.) That was not a doctrine calculated for the Presetit day...--(Chaiers.) He (Lord Plunket) did not doifter froth thy opinion he had entertained as to the pro -41.Y of the Church. He still held the property of the lurch to be a sacred deposit. Nothing was more idle athaa,4 to ask whether the property of the Church was or tinder th e contro l o f P ar li ament . All property was tinder the c on t ro l o f Parliament.—(Hear.) But when he said h so, he felt that it was a grave thing to meddle with ProPerty, unless in a case of necessity. He admitted that, i n ei certain semis-, the property of the Church was t:• - 'te prop er ty ; i t was , h owever , l i k e o th er c or p ora t e c r i r l ) P er tY, which was private property in the same sense as ft, ar ch property, and might be applied to the purposes of e cor poration, and it was within the power of Parliament tl,„ ta a 'PPir it, 30, in the present case; the property of n-htirch of Ireland, every part of it, was to he applied tehPurposes strictly and purely ecclesiastical. It was an er ti se of terms to argue that this was spoliation and rob f,Y,' No allegation had ever been made by any servant of Crown that Church property was applicable to pur -414 not ecclesiastical. With respect to the surplus, the oh - ",./cluesti on bad been whether it was Church property or p„ - ,; it had never been asserted that if it was Church pro ail/ it Was applicable to non-ecclesiastical purposes. The f 't w ere nce was, that if the surplus was fairly Church property, ties only to Church purposes. With regard 'e abstract question, whether Church property could e a P Plied to the general purposes of the State,. he gave 4 - PiriMti ; it was a foolish thing to give an opinion un aecees • ' The Right Rev. Prelate h ad Oily on such a question. he said that it might be necessary to give such an opinion ; LOr d P• ) however, said not. But he wished . to tall f e l l - ' l ght Rev ' Prelate's attention to an observation which istu"e4l h him as ' to the application of the surplus to Church . the' d (4 l s. Originally, as it had already been stated in lays di ate' the Bishops had exercised a right which the iaj h 's not give them, anti by letting at nominal rents t e f : tt l the property of the church. The Legislature in • r estor ed with the right so exercised by the Bishops, and LIZ ( ' its property to the Church? Then,. if the iSa phi 'tnte had done this, was it not entitled to 'Pll the propel ty of the Church ? Was that t ien iet i a° Then, it was said that the construe t,ede the machinery of the Bill was just as unpre " other parts of it; that the Commission was 01tc 4 , -BS t of laymen instead of churchmen. Why, the Pirs t '° Made this complaint forgot that the Board of eisat'tuita consisted partly of laymen and partly of eccle- J asti ee : The Lord Chancellor of Ir.iland, the Lord Chief rnea, e h and the Attorney and Solicitor-General, were "eh h e , r ," of the board. But it was again said, was ever ( :f . Whil i ng heard of as such a Commission, the members t=ort] t ie ". Were removeable by the Crown ? Why, the iicit or , l "ef Justice of Ireland, and the Attorney and So- Cr ow General were removeable at the pleasure of the tioa so that the Board was liable to the same objec ia still it was said that th ere was a p re d om i nan t p ower pe rt a 'quiet'. The commis s i o n was t o cons i s t o f e l even atti 4 ' , of whom s i x were nece s sa r ily to b e o f t h e ecclesi to t ai establishment ; so that there was a majority of six tp rualitie. But it was s aid thi s was a Bill w hi ch touched rit „ es, and should be called the " Spiritualities terrain How was this charge made out? It was said in cases, where divine service had not been perform e d r three y e ars in a pl a ce, th e C omm i ss i on was authorized tWithhold the proceeds of the livings, and to apply them i a ; Other Church purposes. But was this stating the case t o -4 , 1 /,? What were the circumstances ? This was not , ai, h 4t4 e place till it was certified by the Bishop of the th e -e " t , that divine service had not been performed for t " l 'e specifi e d, and then the Commission was I t h %wed to exercise a discretion on this point. Could ai,, able "riously contended, that where clergymen were k nee from performing divine service through the vio an,,hi:f the times, if the fact were known to the Cons tant 4: a ers, they would not act accordingly ? It was then th a e to „ urb , sa t t tthbeisy were taxing the clergy and interfering with and ct._sperty Batton the rof bishopritchee church by consolidating bishoprics, was a thing unheard of. As to the consoli which was said to be a gross iuvasion %di n i g ht s of the church, ' there had been various pro other on this point . 1n1745 and in 1752, and in coathildastcnces since the revolution, bishoprics, had been . that th a ". Could it with any show of reason be said the r• !Parliament was incompetent to take away any of 18 10 1g4 f tl 'and privileges of the clergy, when the Act of right George 111. g went to deprive the clergy of the ;ell that in Parliament ? After this, could they , t( ri l 4 ' i ' the law of this land prevented the Parliament rre lat - a -erf "in with the church? The Right Rev. L a ectu e hj a a t d stated, in the course of his speech, that it was ; t tl th e Parliament to compel the landlords of Ire ja.°e(ll' h a ft ' a more equitable portion of the burdens occa -1.101 the remission of the vestry cess. Why, the 0, Gentl eman w h o t h en fill e d t h e o ffi ce o f C o- Peose°tej r k et StY did, when he was not a m e mb e r of th e r arli aa , u hiet, intr o d uce a measure t o th e o th er H ouse Phe eC t ut, the object of which was to shift the burden p cess fiiom the occupants to the landlords. tainaZPosition was thrown out, but it must be borne in he Yet beet was thrown out by a Parliament which bad t : t ilis ets ,O Purified by ) (Here toe as of the Noble and Learned Lord became in the gallery, partly in consequence of tiees sat .° Oa which he stood, and partly from the buz of u ' n which LOta a ,pervaded the House.) tinlery, that CHANCELLOR rose . to order. He tab- Z a t 's du, at , W Onkl be useless to continue the discussion 'so sp o k e attention were paid to the observations of those ear th ome . r He confessed lie had scarcely been able to kt 1 1 ;:d asLoti' He confessed and Learned Lord. tj an ,4 been the continued—He expressed his sorrow ta,, - ‘ ,,L° Whi c h N ° occasion of interrupting the conversa k-"" that if h ° hie Lords were indulging, and assured in ° s poke too loud, he would endeavour to t a ll t o - h • 8 top e. To resume—the Right Rev. Prelate, laerin g the un de r w hic h Ireland la 'tit e° ' h ad gr ievances u ted a professed his opinion that the vestry cess con 4efessh °as of these. He (Lord Plunket), with all clue ro ses h o e : ,ti.o.th.e opinion of . the Right Rev. Prelate, could . v ti: e , i t e . i e M a ki d ng that this impo . st k. was r o h ne vi o e f w th in e wgrhlvh tttii Ri g ht ,an prelate fa L a f d ro i m ndu t l a ge i d 7 he the view Plunket) 1)4,e:el that t " he real and ultimate remedy for the evils i ste d ia g. On that population, which the Right Rev. Pre , tf t o tt "Snated as wretched and miserable, was the want eotanlttoetion. Here the Noble and Learned Lord was 1 1 ,4 o - ai t ,elY inaudible; as soon . as he could be heard in s ee 'sty he observed that it was no matter what were : its of the Bill under discussion—it was no matter ' 4 1,1C: 1 1 ' 0, 4 was calculated to promote the prosperity of I t i etit.., i a h ° 4 to correct the abuses of the Church establish ghtalt t , Possessed one vitiating quality—it diminished the Was the P rotestant Church establishment in Ireland. t he S Con tended that in concurring in this enactment aver e i e Fri would be violating the oath he took at rsed 5 . 01 " ; that, in short, the coronation oath op 'easur 14"erable bar to the sanction of such . a Etr, y e•—cti to „ tat "r, hear.) He would take the li b' and a e a w h is notion with regard to the coronation ti no rec o il o.uld state, candidly and fairly, that he O li sed rtte : e a n t d e i:e d r e; ectian that the oath was used . in former %as It app eare t sense from that in which it was now to him that the coronation oath was a te h a ' well a, into between the King and his subjects, cit other• recselesiastical,— between the one as well as t i , ee P t lY biading°twcontract was equally binding on all, nut th at , t ° the wh , st h respect to the church, but with re ehri. a lf e the Bathe People.. He would go further and say h e `,!* teda_if it Produced the people with whom it was ofliverted fr om iProduced them no benefit, then it might ler,°Paisory disc, o iiginal intent ; but as to its implying te• '4 " t e would b,.'"ge of its professions when that per % tot woorn th e oath ontrary to the interests of the parties Protested, was contracted, from that doctrine he I t a a r e th an a "It The oath was in his opinion, nothing th "eee n th T.,°2leirin attestation ithe of God, titr e ,0 all a , ?n, n presence t h . to et, lik e all nu his subjects.—(Hear, bear.) That vsl, With the ther contracts, might surely be put an 0 : e ask ed consent of the parties contracting. If it , W hether between the coronation oath were merely a It ,7e in arhis , t e Wo parties, and understood to bind in the l's.clvee• naerelyena asoclbemmpeneraatytitetsoteaktioint, behrewszu m l d answer a answer yes; and blll ,4 l ot hie ]alte r n ng l might not the case arise elessee of the peop . e, ? nay, even the King him iu tlmosoltgootvt cdeuslrerits abrogation. But how could this he ~ ll af t h e 00a(„thlud7laree reg general iste r e w d i wishes e sh heaven v t e l i t i e nation and irrevocable? iat,toyetueZt titoa tphreediectaotirae;nti woodt put impossibleo escape from its trammels. But let this question of the coronation oath be further considered. What was its nature before the Reformation ? Was it not then just as bindine upon the King as it was now? Certainly it was; and if its binding quality had been equally insisted upon it was evident no reformation would have taken place ir the Church at all. Was not Edward VI., that pious Monarch, bound by his vow always registered in heaven ! to maintain the Catholic religion in England ? He was, but he unfortunately happened to die before he was called upon to break his oath.—(A laugh.) Was not Quon Elisabeth equally bound? But how, he besought the House, did she act? In truth, if the doctrine respecting the coronation oath which was now set up were valid at all, the reformation, by the strictest corollary, was stamped with the crime of perjury.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord then cited the testimony of Bishop Watson with respect to the binding nature of the corona tion oath, and quoted the opinion of that Prelate in favour of its abrogation, whenever the two Houses of Parliament on certain points should require that step to be taken.—(This quotation was received with loud cries of " Hear.") When he took all these circumstances into consideration, he flattered himself that in the light he ' viewed the question it was clear and intelligible. How did the case stand at the period of the revolution ? He would settle this point by appealing to the preamble of the Act of 1 William and Mary, from which it would be seen that no intention was entertained by the Sovereign of that period of altering the substance and binding na ture of the oath before in force. The enactment which followed the preamble of the Bill was to the effect that— "Be it enacted, that the King should swear to rule this kingdom and the dominions appertaining thereto accord ing to the laws and customs of the same. Secondly, that he should administer the laws with justice and mercy; and, lastly, that to the utmost of his power he should maintain ti,e laws of God and the Protestant religion as by law established, and to preserve to the Bishops and clergy all the rights arid privileges as by law should appertain to them or any of them." That was the effect of the terms of the oath established at the period of the revolution. The contract between the Monarch on the throne and the people whom he governed was special and defined, and though the character of the oath might be altered, the character of the contract still remained, and from it the King could be freed with the concurrence of both branches of the legislature. He did not see any answer that could be given to this proposition, for he would contend the doctrines of Watson and Paley did not apply to the point. It could not be forgotten that there was another oath co-relative to the coronation oath—the oath of allegiance, by which the subject was bound to perform his duty and hold allegi ance to the Sovereign on the throne. Thi , , too, was a registered vow ; but if the doctrines which had been advanced were maintainable the actors in the revolution were not only traitors, but perjured traitors. He would at least hope their memories would be saved from such an imputation. The next point which had been raised was, whether the coronation oath applied to the King in his executive or legislative capacity. Now, the history of the time showed what was the point or object sought to be guarded against on the accession of William 111. What had been the acts of James 11. ? The acts of that Mo narch had not been a concurrence with the Houses of Parliament in inlet ferina with the rights of the church, but an arbitrary exercise of the Royal prerogative, by dispensing with the then existing laws. It was to avoid these mischiefs, and to provide against their repetition, that the form of oath was established, and not on the ground that the Monarch had joined with both Houses of Parliament in even rash and improvident legislation. He felt that he had almost unnecessarily troubled their Lordships upon this point ; for, in fact, the coronation oath had no more to do with the present question than with any other point that could be casually introduced. But he now came to the sth article of the Irish Act of Union. That article stared that the C. urch of England and the Church of Ireland, as now by law established, should be united as one Protestant episcopal church, and he called the United Church of England and Ireland, and should be and remain for ever as the same was now by law established.—(" Hear," from the Duke of Cumberland.) He admitted that the preservation of the Church as established was a fundamental article of the Act of Union, nor did he mean to say that even if there was no coronation oath the King was not equally bound to the maintenance and preservation of both that article and the church establishment : the King was just as much bound as he a-as under a thousand oaths. This had been the uniform policy since the Reformation and from the Reformation ; and if it could be established that the tneasure now proposed to their Lordships would deprive the Irish Church of its just rights and privileges he (Lord P.) would retire from the argument. It never had been in tended by his Noble Friend or the Government to propose a measure that was calculated either to injure or overthrow the church ; and so far from the present measure being calculated to do so, he would maintain that the proposed measure was designed and would have the effect of not only preserving the church but the rights and privileges of its ministers, and that unless it was passed speedily, danger to the establishment might be feared.—(Hear.) He could not shut his eyes to the signs of the times, and he saw the danger in which the Protestant Church of Ireland stood, and he felt the difficulty to susta,n it, not against its ene mies, but against its friends.—(Hear.) He would say, then, do not delay this Bill, but pass it speedily ; for by delay it might become inefficient, sr, at least, like the Ca tholic Emancipation Bill, it might be said that this mea sure bad not been passed in time. He would also desire their Lordships to look back to the Reform Bill, and re mind them that when their Lordships had seen evils staring them in the face, which it was impossible to mistake as being violations of the constitution, yet they had refused to remove those evils, and the refusal had come back upon them to an extent that further resistance was impossible. Such had been the consequence of their pertinacious oppo sition to the reform measure, and the feelings and passions of the people had become so strongly excited that it became dangerous longer to efuse assent. The people expected to be represented, and when so, that the work of reform should proceed. The Earl of MANSFIELD thought that the whole measure was enveloped in dangers which, he feared, it would he impossible to obviate. He had, however, on mature consideration, fully made up his mind as to what he should do. At the time of passing the Catholic Bill, he clearly foresaw the dangers which would ultimately tall upon the Protestant Establishment: in consequence. These fears of danger were fully confirmed by the present measure, and the language held by its supporters. Much however, as he had differed from the Noble Duke who was at that time at the head of affairs, he had felt such confidence in his strength of mind and determination of purpose, as not to fear any particular ill effects from the measure while he continued in office. The face of affairs, however, was now changed, the Administration having fallen into very different hands. The supporters of the Bill laid down that the church was a mere Parliamentary church. This was a test to try the spirit of the whole, and he need not point out what that spirit was. Great complaints seemed now to be made of tardy justice" in the Catholic Relief Bill. There had been no such complaints made before it was passed. It was not then threatened that that measure was but a mere part of a whole. No, it had been begged as a panacea for all Ca tholic evils, and as such it had been granted. Their Lordships were iu a most awkward predicament ; for they must either support this most mischievous Bill, or expose the Irish Church to still worse dangers than even at present befel them. It had been truly said, that a tax was laid on the clergy by Edward the Sixth ; but it was not true that they had paid it without murmuring ; for they resisted the tax. But bad the clergy, in the present instance, been asked for their consent to the tax to be imposed upon them ?—(Hear, hear, hear.) The clergy ought to have been called to a Convocation, as in ancient times, and asked whether they should re fuse or accede to the proposed tax. With regard to the abolition of the vet try cess, the present plan was not a commutation of the tax; it was a way taken to take that tax off the community, and to lay it upon the clergy. The tax proposed to be laid upon the clergy was most objectionable; for there could not be a more vicious prin. ciple in taxation than that of a graduated property tax. —(Hear.) He would remind their Lordships, that in admitting the principle that Dissenters should not pay to wards the support of the E•tablished Church, they were holding out a premium to Dissenters, and that much as was now the fondness for cheap law, there were fully us many who desired cheap religion—( Hear, hear, hear)—and that the system of doing without clergy men was spreading very widely.—(Cheers.) With regard to the vestry cess, he thought that if they shifted the burden from the occupier of land, they ought to I iy it on the possessor, but not on the clergy. He could not look on the proposed Commission with satisfaction ; neither could he think that it was calculated for the nature of the unties confided to its charge, as it would have too often to meddle with ecclesiastical matters. He thought that in a Commission of this nature, all the Bishops should Ire members. Si , ith regard to the proposed junction of the bishoprics, he would not offer an opinion. He would not say whether the present—or what number would be sufficient ; but be would have thought it reasonable that it should have been provided by the Bill ; that the revenues of such bishop , les as were:joined to others should be made over to the Commissioners, as the junction continued ; but that, if for .any reason it was hereafter thought advisable to restore the bishopric, the revenue should then be taken out of the 1 , hands of the Commissioner and applied to the support of the Bishop. By this Bill, leiwever, the source from which the revenue for the support of the Bishop w a s disposed of, so that the bishopri cs could never hereafter be separated. Then there was the clause of the Bill by which no clergyman was to be appointed in parishes where there had been no service for three years. Would this clause not be an incitement to the Popish clergy to prosecute and drive away the Protestant clergymen from their flocks ?—(Hear.) Earl GREY said that the time was limited to the Ist of February, 1833, which was past, and there could, therefore, be no such inducement. The Rail of MANSFIELD admitted that such was the case, but @till he thought it would lay the Protestant clergy open to persecution. He (Lord M.) would not apply the term spoliation to the Bill ; but it could not he denied that it was a Bill which laid an exclusive tax upon a body which was formerly exempted from that species of tax ation.—(Hear, hear.) They all knew that the Bill was very deficient when introduced into the other House; and they all knew the motives which had induced the change —a motive of which he approved, as it was for the pur pose of conciliation. But he still thought that there was mischief enough in the Bill as it was left, and that the principles left in it would lead to the ul imate adoption of that clause which was left out,—(Cheers.) He feared th it this principle might lead to similar feelings regarding other property. It had been said that the time might come when those discussions regarding the property of the church might lead to similar discussions regarding other property. On that he would give no opinion ; but this he would say, that if the Noble Earl had stood up in defence of the church as a Member of the Crown, it would have more effect in allaying the feelings of the country upon that subject than all the zeal and all the eloquence of all the Members of that House of Parliament or of the other.—(Loud cheering.) The Noble Earl had stated his attachment to the Constitution on that and on former occasions. To him (Lord Mansfield) it appeared that he had singular notions of proving that attachment. He had alluded to his love for the Constitution when he brought forward the Reform Bill— a measure which he (Lord Mansfield) believed the Noble Earl did not consider quite as good now as he did at that time. He had alluded to his love of the Constitution, too, when that House, as an independent branch of the ;Tie. lature, rejected the Reform Bill, and when the Noble Earl thought it his duty to recommend to call a great number of Members to the House, but for far different purposes than to let it remain independent. He (Lord AL) had no doubt that the Noble Earl bad no other motive in the present and other acts of his administration, but to add to the glory, and augment the splendour of this country, and to send his name down to futurity connected with the great objects which he contemplated ; but he would say that there was a strange fatality attending the Noble Earl in all his measures, for while they created alarm and dis may in the breasts of those who wished to preserve the Constitution, they met with the decided approbation of those whose avowed object it was to subvert that Consti tution. He knew nothing to which the country, at the present juncture, could be compared so well as to a loaded waggon on an inclined railway. It went with great ve locity, but its course was so smooth that those who were upon it were not sensible of its speed, although the spec tators were sensible of the danger; and it was only when an obstacle occurred in its headlong course, and the crash was felt, that the actors were made aware of their head long course, or rather of the abyss to which they had been led.—(Cheers.) He objected to the Bill on principle, and the principle was so far wrong that he could not hope that it would be amended.—(Cheers.) The Marquis of LANSDOWNE rose amidst loud cries of "Adjourn," and " Withdraw." He did not wish to add much to what had already been said en the important question before the House—a discussion which he was willing to hope, from the temper happily evinced by the Noble Lords who had spoken, showed, though certainly not a favourable change as to the objects of the Bill, still a disposition fairly to meet the facts of the question, and to discuss the views of both parties, without excluding from their consideration the consequences of the abandon ment of the Bill at its present stage.—(Cheers.) From this, he thought himself entitled to hope that they would allow the second reading of the Bill, and allow the details to be discussed at a future opportunity. He, therefore, proposed to touch on only one or two points of the argu ments mede use of by the Noble Earl in the speech which he had just made, and in making those retnaks, he would confine himself exclusively to the Bill, without alluding to the many remarks made, by which the Bill itself, the proper object of discussion, was thrown almost entirely out of view ; and which, by allusion to former discussions on totally different subjects, had given rise to much angry and polemical feeling, which was the curse of such dis cussions, and which, he should have thought the Right Rev. Fathers of the Church would at all events have en deavoured to allay. He had heard one remark from the Noble Earl, in which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) en tirely coincided, which led the Noble Earl to a totally different conclusion to that to which it had led him, and which, in fact, was the whole foundation of the measure now before their Lordships. The Noble Earl had stated that he perceived a growing disposition in the country to reject religious establishments altogether, and an increasing love for what he called cheap religion. But what was the conclusion to which the Noble Earl had come on those premises—that the present religious establishments ought to be left untouched and unreformed.—(Loud cheers.) The Noble Earl said, leave them untouched, for they have been too much meddled with already. But when he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) looked to the abuses which had crept into the Church of Ireland, be thought that they ought to come to a different conclusion. Then the Noble Earl said that if the present state of affairs led to convul sion, the sooner the convulsion arrived the better.—(Loud cheers.) He was surprised when he heard the Noble Earl state that it would be better to go on knowingly and wil lingly in the course which led to convulsion in the hopes that some good might arise from that state of convulsion. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) was sure he spoke the sentiments of his Majesty's Ministers, and he believed he spoke the sentiments of the majority of that House, when he stated that they thought that no expedient should be left untried by which such a convulsion could be avoided— (Cheers) —or that should not be used to conciliate the feelings of the country. And if the Rev. Prelate would endeavour to forget and avoid irritating topics, and at the same time make some advances towards healing those wounds which had been too long kept open, it would tend much to do away with the rankling ani tnosities which had been engendered.—(Loud cheers.) The vote he intended to give that night would be in favour of the indispensable measure before their Lordships, not withstanding all that had been said by a Noble Duke as to the expediency of the Bill. If he was aware that the establishment of the Church was placed beyond the con trol of the Legislature, the conclusion, from its being so placed, that he would come to would be that the safety of that establishment was endangered by its being so circum stanced. If it were placed in a state of permanency as to its abuses, it might exhibit the spectacle at first of a powerful institution, but it would at last show symptoms of decay and fall. There was no reason, no principle, he thought, that applied to the Church Establishment that did not apply to other institutions. The present measure was one important to the community—that was a reason for its expediency, and on that ground he considered it should be sanctioned. If, at present, the Church was threatened with no danger, he was so extremely averse to anything like change respecting it, that he would rather put up with any small evils that might surround it than consent to the slightest change. But he maintained that they were forced by circumstances, apparent not only to themselves but to the whole world, to make a change, and the present Government would be guilty of a dereliction of their duty, and would merit the accusation of weakness, if they had not the courage to undertake and frame such a measure as the present, and submit it to their Lordships. Many great names might be quoted to show that there was a necessity for improvement, and he would add to those great names that of Dr. Paley, who was sincerely attached to the Church, as their Lordships, who no doubt were well read in his works, might perceive from many of his arguments. In the very outset of his works, when his great mind was directed towards the support of the Church, he prefixes to one of his first chapters the following words :—" The Establishment is not religion, nor Chris. tiauity, but only a means of inculcating it." And con tinuing to argue on that principle, he adds, " the Esta blishment is a stream of instruction, and when looked into in any other point of view, it becomes an unbounded source of corruption." These were Dr. Paley's words, as nearly as be could recollect. He would not enter into a detail of all the provisions of the Bill, but when he con sidered that the number of Protestants in Ireland amounted to about 800,000, he considered that nothing could make th e Church more useful to that body than the pro vision of the measure which provided for a better dis tribution of the revenues of the Irish Church. After all that had been said upon the subject, and after the long, able, and criticising speech of the Right Rev. Prelate, who spoke at such length that night, he thought that the number of Bishops ought to be reduced, and that still there would be a sufficient number to perform the duties. When it was once admitted that the number of Bishops was too great for the duties they had to perform, it could he no longer a matter of indifference to deal with them. It was fully proved that those duties were not effectively performed. Nor was that to be wondered at, for let the number of Judges in this country he looked to, and he would ask whether, if their number was increased by 15 or 20, their duties would not be more improperly per formed than they were at present by the smaller number? The rule held good in all institutions ; by employing more persons in high situations than were absolutely necessary, the doors of intrigue and corruptlon were thrown more widely open, and the utility of the very institutions themselves was impeded. He contended, that under the operation of the proposed measure, the respectability and independence of the Protestant clergy would be increased, for what was taken from the Bishops, after providing for certain matters connected with the Church, would go to provide for the greater independence and respectability of the parochial and resident clergy. Leaving a sufficient number of Bishops to discharge their peculiar duties, and to uphold the splendour of the Church, it was to the pa rochial clergy that they ehoold look for a real and useful amelioration of the Irish Church. It was to them that the Protestant population of Ireland had to look for im provement. When he heard it said that the proposed measure would let in a flood of Popery in Ireland, he was willing to have it tried by experience, and he Only wished that the measure had been established thirty years ago, at the time of the union. To the authors of that measure he felt gratefal, but his gratitude would have been still greater if they had at the same time adopted a measure of the present description, bl which the Church establish ment would have been rendered more in harmony with the people. If such a measure had then been adopted, would not, he asked, the parochial clergy have been better off at present? If, as is proposed by the present measure,2o,oool. a year were expended on them, would there not be a greater number of them resident in Ireland ? Would there not be a greater number of churches built, and a greatea number of useful clergy provided for ? And would not the Church now present a more steady front to the accusations hourly made against it ? There was one consideration more, and with that he should conclude. He would ask their Lordships to look tc the effect of the Bill on the Roman Cathode population of Ireland, con nected as they were with the respectability of the PrGtee tant clergy of that country. If any good was to be operated on the Roman Cntholics of Ireland, he consi• dered it was to be chiefly through the medium of resident parochial Protestant priests. However unpalatable many of the provisions of the Bill might be in same quarters, of one thing he was sure—that they should have the ap probation of the Right Rev. Prelate, who spoke so ably that night against the measure—they should have it fur endeavouring to increase the number of resident Proms. tant clergy, to whose utility the Right Rev. Prelate had borne full and ample testimony. If, by the provisions of the Bill, Government were enabled to relieve the est 1- blishment from the odium cast upon it by the church cess, and were also enabled to place resident Protestant clergy men in parishes where there are few Protestants, the greater number being Catholics, they will be able to render a service to the Roman Catholics that will be afterwards found to be invaluable. From what he knew of the provisions of the Bill, the Church would be relieved from a load that embarrassed its operations, and if it did only that, in his opinion, it would be worth passing into a law. But that was only one of its objects; besides re lieving the Church from the incubus of the cess, it would also diminish the number of Bishops, which, compared with the number in this country, must by all be allowed to be far too great. It had been very unjustly said that this measure was intended to be a boon to those who allowed the coercive measure to pass. It was no such thing ; it was one of a series of remedial measures towards Ireland, with which Government had been day after day occu pied. Those measures had, perhaps, been brought on in too great haste, but there were some of them in a for ward state of advancement in the other House—the Grand Jury Bill, for instance. All these remedial measures were coining forward in succession, and the present Bill was intended to be in conjunction with the others. He augured—if those measures met with a fair consideration, and should pass into a law—he augured, somewhat san guinely, that though the improvement might not be ra pid or sudden, there would be a safe and gradual ame lioration of the fortunes of Ireland ; and, in making this anticipation, he did not exclude the interests of the Church, as connected with that country. On his own responsibility, he was prepared to answer for the benefits the measure would produce ; and he trusted that the se cond reading of the measure would that night meet with the consent of their Lordships. The Duke of CUMBERLAND rose, as we under stood, to move the adjournment of the debate. At the same moment, a great number of Peers crowded towards the doors. Amid the noise, Earl GREY was understood to say that, as a great many Noble Lords intended still to speak upon the ques tion, and as the hour was so far advanced, it would be impossible to conclude the debate that night. He should consent to its adjournment until to-morrow (this) evening, provided the Noble Marquis opposite (the Mar quis of Londonderry) would consent to defer his motion (for the return of papers respecting Portugal), notice of which he had given for that evening. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was understood to postpone his motion ; and the House adjourned at half past one this morning. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 18. The House resumed at a quarter past five o'clock. A messenger brought up certain Bills agreed to by the Lords (for which see the Lords). Colonel EVANS moved for a return of the number of stamps issued to the different London Papers for the years 1830, 31, and 32. Mr. SHEIL presented a petition from the county of Wexford for a Repeal of the Union. Sir F. BURDETT presented a petition from the parish of St. James, Westminster, begging to be relieved from the house and window taxes. Colonel EVANS moved for a return of the number of persons confined in Newgate and the other gaols of the metropolis, from 1823 to 1832, distinguishing the nature of the crime of each individual so confined. THE PRESS. Colonel EVANS rose to complain of a paragraph which bad appeared recently in one of the news ; iapers , alleging that the p resent and the late representatives of the city of Westminster (Sir F. Burdett, and Sir J. C. Hobliouse) had obtained their return by means of bribery and corruption. He was most anxious to deny the asser tion, although he felt that he owed no courtesy to the Hon. Baronet, whom he bad succeeded in the representa tion of that city ; but still, in common fairness, he was bound to declare his entire relief that neither bribery nor corruption had ever existed in Westminster, and to assert that both the Hon. Baronets had been returned to that House as freely and as fairly as himself. The Hon. and Gallant Officer then moved for a return, showing the nature and character of the municipal government of the city of Westminster, and the authority on which the parochial and other officers of the different parishes and districts within that city levied and expended the local taxes. HUME observed that if they were to notice the observations made 1 .4- newspapers on the conduct of the Members of than House they would have very little time for attenr!iog to the public business. It was true that a Mr. De Vear had called on him by letter to explain why he had libelled the electors of 'Westminster, as a news paper report had represented him to have done ; but there being no foundation for the allegation, and not knowing that Mr. De Vear could have any right to ques tion him, he had not considered it necessary to make any reply to his letter. It was undoubtedly true that i❑ the course of the observations which he had made (those to which Mr. De Vear's letter referred) he alluded to the bribery and corruption which had taken place in West mirster during former periods, but without any reference ► o the present time. Sir F. BURDiJT T was perfectly convinced that the paragraph in question was a misrepresentation, and for his own part, he must say that he did nut believe a word contained in it. Mr. O'CONNELL said that it was a very general complaint that the reports of the proceedings of that House were made by ignorant and incompetent persons. He. had himself been egregiously misrepresented in the newspapers on many occasions ; but about that he was perfectly indifferent, because he cared nothing for, and was quite independent of, either newspapers or reporters. kle bad, indeed, heard other Hon. Gentlemen in the course of conversation make similar complaints; but, although the evil was so generally felt, not one of the aggrieved Members of that House had been bold enough to avow his se ntiments as he had now done. No doubt they had their own reasons for abstaining from noticing the manner in which their sentiments had been misrepresented, but the l aisr:iporting to which he alluded was attributable to the monopoly that was allowed to exist in newspapers, and the advantage which the newspaper proprietors derived from having their business done by cheap reporters. Th e reporters of the present day were a very different class oh persons from the reporters of former times. The former were men of education, but the latter were comparatively uninformed persons, and, on that account, wholly incapable of properly discharg ing the duties i n w hi c h t h ey were engage d. This difference had arisen, as be bad been told, from the competition that existed among reporters, and which en abled a newspaper proprietor, instead of paying six gui neas a week t o a qua lifi e d person, as former l y, to o b tain the services of an unqualified person for two guineas. During the last fortnight they had been engaged in die. cussions of the utmost importance to the country, but hardly a syllable of what had passed in that House had been sent forth by the newspapers to the public.—(Hear. hear.) He begged to be understood as not noticing thi• by way of complaint, but in order that the public should see the necessity there was for providing themselveo with better sources of information than they at present had.— (Hear, hear.) At all events the pnbic should know that the Members of that House were not to be bound by any thing attributed to them in newspapers.—( Hear.) Mr. BARING how: tbst tu the Cmnissioners appointed for the purpose of inquiry into the state of corporations would especially investigate that of tile City of London as well as the municipal government of the city of West minster and other places around the metropolis. Mr. ABERCROMBY (as we understood) did not think the Commissioners would have any power to extend that Inquiries beyond corporations. Mr. M. PHILLIPS was about to make some observa tions in defence of the reporters, but The SPEAKER informed the Hon. Gentleman that it would not be orderly to allude to a matter with which the House could have nothing to do. The motion was then agreed to. NEWSPAPER DUTIES. Mr. E. L. BUINVER, by desire of Lord ASHLEY, and in order to enable the House to proceed with the Factories Bill, postponed his resolution for a repeal of the stamp duty o❑ newspapers and advertisements, and for a S2l,ct Committee to inquire into the propriety of substituting a cheap postage on newspapers and works under a certain weight, until the Bth of August. MISCELLANEOUS. The Earl of DARLINGTON also postponed his mo tion respecting the continuance of military flogging for the present. Mr. HUME postponed his motion calling the attention of the Hozlse to the warrant of appointraent of Privy Seal in Scotland until the 23d inst. The HoN. MEMBEit moved for copies of the Supple mentary Commission and additional instructions un-ier th!:: royal sign manual for the island of Ceylon, referred to in the deapatch from Viscount Goderich of the 23d of March, 1833, to the Right Hon. Sir R. J. Wilmot Horton.—Ordered. The Hor,r. MEMBER also moved for a copy of the despatch from Lord Goderich to Upper Canada, of the Bth of November, 1832; and also for a copy of the correspon dence respecting the removal of the Attorney-General of Upper Canada.-Ordered. Mr. HUME beggcd to call the attention of his Majesty's Government to a statement which had appeared in the Newspapers of a gross outrage committed by a policeman on the person of a respectable female named Murray. If that statement were true the matter ought to undergo immediate inquiry. Mr. Sergeant PERRIN postponed his motion respecting the Terms of sitting of Courts of Justice in Ireland. Mr. O'CONNELL also postponed his motion on the subject of establishing Local Courts until this day se'nnight. WASON moved for returns of the Orders in Council under which slaves were transported into Dome. rara from the Bahamas, or any other British colony, since 1815 ; also of the average of the slaves in the colonies.— Ordered. THE FACTORIES' REGULATION BILL. The House then resolved itself into Committee on the Factories Regulation Bill, and resumed the debate on the clause adjourned from the early sitting. Mr. G. W. WOOD was understood to support the amendment of the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Ex. chequer. After a few words from I\fr. 13AOTHERTON and Mr. FINCH, Mr. BRISCOE supported the amendment. Mr. STRICKLAND was convinced that there never was a stronger case made out in this world demanding the interference of the Legislature ; and he could not in his conscience refuse that protection up to the age of eighteen. He objected to an Eight Hours Bill allowing the working of double sets, as tending to interfere with adult labour, by inducing the working of grown persons for the whole time of the two sets of children. He was told that if they interfered with the labour of children in our facto ries, we should be unable to maintain our manufacturing superiority in foreign countries. He was not one of those who believed that any part of the prosperity of this country rested upon such a basis as that of deforming the limbs and destroying the health of little children.—(Cheers.) He was of opinion that whatever might be the specious rea sonings of philosophers, there was an overruling power under whose guidance and protection they should never do wrong while they were prompted by the desire to "do justice and love mercy."—(Hear.) Mr. DUNCOMBE contended that the evidence upon which the proposition of his Noble Friend (Lord Ashley) stood was an unswerable demand upon the House to pass the Bill. He was of opinion from the observa tion he had made that the boasted Reformed House of Commons had not ranch popularity to spare; and, without wishing them to pander to popular opinion, he recommended them to endeavour to earn back the good opinion of the country by passing this measure as it stood. Mr. WILBRAHANI supported the amendment of the Noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was opposed to the Bill of the Noble Lord (Ashley) because it did not go far enough, but especially because all the manufacturers were opposed to it. Colonel TORRENS contended that any Legislative enactment upon the question must he injurious, unless the whole of our commercial system were revised. A MEritnEa, whose name we could not learn, said he would have supported the measure if he had thought it likely to afford relief to the children, but he was con vinced it would be injurious if all its provisions were carried. He should support the proposition of the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. R. POTTER said he would detain the Committee but for a few minutes. The Hon. Member for the Northern Division of Yorkshire said he was not aware of any attempt to agitate. When this subject was before the House a fortnight ago, he (Mr. Potter) gave the House a pretty fair example of the kind of efforts used in Yorkshire to produce agitatio❑ ; for that exposure he had bad no small portion of abuse heaped upon him ; but if the authors of that abuse thought to intimidate him from the discharge of his duty, they were greatly mis taken. The Gallant Colonel, as well as his Hon. Friend the Member for Salford, had connected this subject with the repeal of the Corn Laws; but he would venture to predii.t that almost every Gentleman who had spoken in favour of the Bill, would be as strenuous opponents of their repeal as they were supporters of this measure. The Hon. Member for Stamford read some evidence to the House to show that there was ❑o fear of foreign com petition; but if the House would give him its attention for a very short period, be should be able to show, that not only was there great fear of foreign competi tion, but that it was in full operation. Machinery was now made in France, and other places, upon the most approved and newest plans. It appeared by official docu ments, that spinning and the cotton manufactory were rapidly on the increase, not only on the continent, but in the United States of America. By the official returns made to Congress in 1832, it appeared that the United States had consumed in the previous year, 77,557,316 pounds weight of cotton, and had 795 mills, in which were 1,246,503 spindles at work. It further appeared that the whole spun in England in 1822 was 222,596,907 lbs; of this 71,662,850 lbs. were exported, of which only , 162,798,270 lbs. were sent to the Continent of Europe. The Continental establishments spun 99,038,762 lbs. in the same year, and we exported to them only 62,798,270 pounds. It could not be supposed that our smaller quantity would govern the prices of their greater in the market. In France, Switzerland, Prussia, and the Rhenish Pro vinces, Saxony, Lombardy, Austria, arid India itself, cotton spinning was increasing. So much for foreign com petition. When this Bill was first introduced, be took occasion to observe, that many of its provisions were so objectionable, that if passed into a law, a blow would be struck at the cotton trade of this country, from which it might never recover. He rejoiced that the Noble Lord who introduced the Bill, now proposed to leave out the objectionable clauses. He also rejoiced that the discussion was carried on with that calmness which its great im portance deserved. Mr. A. SANDFORD thought it impossible to have two sets of laws for juvenile and adult labour in our factories. He should therefore vote for the amendment proposed by the Noble Lord (Althorp). Mr. FRYER contended that the evil was one which demanded a remedy, but that the remedy now proposed Was not the right one. The only remedy was a destruc tion of the monopoly of food now held by the landed pro• prietors. It was impossible that things could continue in their present state ; a change must take place, and the chances were that that change would be a revolution in that House, or out of it. It would rest altogether with the House to determine by their acts whether that revolu tion should be peaceable, or whether it should terminate in bloodshed and violence.—(Hear.) The people might well be supposed to have a great and paramount interest a sanguinary, but he was confident they would prefer a paceable, revolution.—(Hear.) In the first place the rational Debt would be wiped of.—(A laugh.) The rouse might laugh ; but did they suppose the people did pt think of such an event? In the next place the Church istablishaient and the tithes would be wiped away ; not Ise religion, that the people loved.—(Hear, hear.) Then r!,e whole nest of siliccurcs would be ferretted out, as well all the abominable monopoly of sugar, taniiir, and co: n. oid the House consider how the case was circumstanced ? u p pose in a winter of distress and poverty, a few hold men should incite their fellows to resist the military in some great town, and that the military were beaten (an event by no mcans improbable), in an hour all Englan-i , ould rise in arm9,—(A laugh.) What then wont iecome of the Members of that House?—(Hear.) chat would become of the Nobles of the lind ?—(Hear, ear, hear.) They would at once be exterminated. An lid they suppose the people would matter the loss of a few tines if for such a purpose?—(A laugh.) With regard o the measure before the House, he had only to say lie could support it, although it was a contemptible Bill, a iltry delusion.—(A laugh.) Ministers acted on the resent occasion es they had done in the case of the Irish Church Bill. They basely truckled to their opponents becau.se they found themselves too weak to resist them. --(Hear.) By a sneaking pickpocket scheme they had robbed the Irish Church of 60,0001. to pay the vestry cess; and when once they admitted the principle of spoliation they might quite as well have robbed it of six millions.—(Hear, hear, hear.) In conclusion, the Hon. Member would vote for the Bill because he was confident it would either be evaded or would altogether stop trade; ~nd if the latter event took place, the master manufactu rers would at once join with the people in calling for a repeal of those cursed, damnable corn laws.—(Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would give his support to the amendment of his Noble Friend. Mr. HARDY would only look to the medical evidence. ;n deciding upon the question before the House. He con ended it was perfectly absurd to say that a child under thirteen years of age should not work more than eight !lours, svhiie a child but one day above that age should ;work twelve hours, No man, with the feelings of a fa ther, could suffer persons between the ages of thirteen and eighteen to work in the same way as he would work adults. He trusted the House would do impartial justice to those poor children, and extend them that protection which they so much required. Mr. P. THOAISON was opposed to the clause as being too great an interference with adult labour, while it did not adequately protect the infant. He would therefore support the amendment of his Noble Friend. Mr. PEASE felt it his duty to support the amendment of the Noble Lord, and if the provisions of Sir J. Hob house's Act had been property enforced, the evils at present complained of never would have existed. Mr. FIELDEN made some observations which were in audible i❑ the gallery. Mr. BOLLING denied that the cruelties attributed by the promoters of the Bill to the factory system existed i❑ any of those factories in which the provisions of Sir J. C. ilohhouse's Act were enforced. But whose fault was it. that it had not been enforced ? Was it not the fault of the very persons who now put themselves forward as the lriends of humanity ?—(Hear, hear.) Even now, if Sir J. Flobhouse's Act were carried into effect under the su perintendence ot proper inspectors, the evils of the factory system would be removed, and he thought it would be much better to adopt that course than legislate upon evi dence so defective as that on which the present measure was founded. For his part he dissented from both pro positions, and his reason was because be was convinced the interference was not called for on behalf of the pro per class. He thought, instead of passing this Bill, they would act more prudently in postponing the subject for a year, in order to ascertain whether the evils complained of might not he remedied by the application of Sir J, flobhouse's Act.—(Cries of " Move, move.") The Hon. Member said that i❑ compliance with the wish of the house be should take an opportunity of submitting his proposition for their decision. Sir G. PHILLIPS should support the amendment. Mr. GISBORNE suggested whether it would not be better now to dispose of the amendment of the Noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for which he should vote, and reserve the consideration of the proposition ot the Hon. Member for Bolton for a future occasion. He must, however, say, that he never would consent to any class of persons being restricted in disposing of their labour as they thought fit. Mr. HUME approved of neither proposition, but as the least of two evils he should feel himself constrained to vote for the amendment of the Noble Lord. He agreed that the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bolton was the wisest they could adopt, for he was quite satisfied if Sir J. Hobbouse's Act was enforced all the evils complained of would be remedied. Mr. DUNLOP supported the amendment of the Noble Lord. Mr. COBBETT observed that heretofore it bad been said that the Bank and the landed proprietors were the great supporters of the country, but now it was found out that the country was supported by three or four hundred little factory girls of Lancashire. Mr. J. STANLEY said that this discovery existed only in the breast ,f the Hon. Member for Oldham. It wla his (Mr. Stanley's) opinion, that if the Bill of the Noblo Lord were adopted the whole manufacture of the country would be involved in ruin. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY expressed his intention to op pose the amendment. Lord ALTHORP begged to recall the attention of thc House to the exact question which they would have to de cide. It was proposed by the Noble Lord opposite to fill up the blank with IS years, but to that proposition be objected. If the House concurred with him in rejecting the motion of the Noble Lord, they would still have to determine how this blank was to be filled up.—(Hear, hear.) He undoubtedly had very great objections to this measure, but the question was merely the protection of children, and whether that protection should be extended to persons of 18 years of age.—( Hear, hear.) After a few words from Mr. SLANEY, the Committee divided. The numbers were—. For the original motion 93 For Lord Althorp's amendment 2313 Majority for Ministers 145 On the re-admission of strangers into the gallery, we found Lord ASHLEY addressing the House. The Noble Lord was understood to say, that he had taken up the Bill conscientiously and upon principle, and that his object having been defeated, after a fair discussion, he must ad :nit, by the decision to which the House had just come, he could take no further part in the progress of the measure. He would not render himself responsible for the amendment if the Noble Lord, believing, as he firmly did, that its adoption would only lead to the introduction of a worse state of things than at present existed. Under such cir cumstances, he felt that he must surrender the Bill into the hands of the Noble Lord, and retire from it altogether. But he could assure the House that he had taken it up, not with the view of acquiring popularity, but solely for the benefit of the working classes ; and now, that he telt himself compelled to abandon it, he must conclude by say ing into whosesoever hands the Bill should pass, he wished most fervently that God would prosper his exertions. Lord ALTHO.IP was quite sure no one in that House had for an instant supposed the Noble Lord had been actuated by any other than honourable motives in bring ing this measure forward, and in the determination to which he had now come of abandoning it and leaving it to the disposal of Government. Indeed, the Noble Lord had very distinctly notified the course he meant to pursue; but as the Noble Lord bail thrown up the conduct of the Bill, the course he (Lord Althorp) wished the House to pursue was to allow the Chairman to report progress and ask leave to sit again, in order to afford him (Lord Al thorp) an opportunity of considering how he should act and the steps it would be advisable for him to take. He certainly must say that the evidence which had been ad duced before the Committee clearly showed that the fac tory children required protection, and his object would be in any amendments he might propose to accomplish that object.—( Hear, hear.) The House resumed, and the CHAIRMAN reported progress, and azir..ll leave to sit again, but no day fer the purpose was named. THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY BILL. Mr. STANLEY, in an:iwer to a question (we believe from Mr. Stewart), said that it was not his intention to i:ring on the Slavery Abolition Bill before Monday. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at half-past one o'clock. INDIAN ARMY.—An important document on this subject will be given, we understand, in the Naval and Military Gazette of Saturday next, July 30. It consists of an accurate statement of the Military Force in India from 1793 to the present time, showing the total number of European and Native Troops employed in etch year at the three Presidencies, with the number of officers retired on f u ll p a y, h a lf- pay , a nd on furlough , with the total cost to the Government; and als o the umber of Cadets and Assistant. Surgeons appointed rse d o u f ri t n h g e •;, e abov e period, b y w hi c h the gradual a ar n m d y m to th i .t t a s ry pre G se a n z t e extent fo is t. w co i r r r d e e c d tl ea e ynbeyshoawunN. News_ lien, postage free, price 7 d. FLUENT ORATORS.-It was a notion of J e an SWIFT'S, that a man with a multitude of ideas could v er speak well, whilst one with a limit e d number could ,•. ~hiress an audience without interruption. Ideas, he used Thasdntly to say, were like a congr:gation in a church , ':e they were, the less ii.ffictilty ‘s as ther e i n ' iptying the church,