The Sun. — London, England, 1830-05-19 00:00:00

men supported existence by the mutual interchange of their. products of industry. The button-bur nisher could not live upon the burnishing of a but ton, unless he could exchange it for bread; nor could the ploughman, or the producer of bread, clothe himself with the product of his labour, un less be could exchange it for cloth. To break up a wonderful machinery of this kind was to create uni versal anarchy and bloodshed, and to bring on with this something like universal ruin and destruction, more cruel among the weaker classes than among the stronger themselves. The French people waded through torrents of blood, and for what? By the downfall of Napoleon they had gained a feature of constitutional liberty; but what did it amount to? At this very moment, he was sorry to declare, that out of 30,000,000 of inhabitants, which France contained, only 80,000 possessed the power of re tu: ping Members to the Frerch House of Commons. The misery which the French people underwent in obtaining their very limited representation was greater than almost any recorded in the history of nations; and if such misery was created by the breaking up of their social system, not a tenth part 'so complicated as our own, what would be the dreadful misery every man must sustain, be he rich or be he poor, if ever the complicated and wonderful machinery of English society was suffered to break up ?—(Cheers.) To return to Universal Suffrage. In America, the freest and happie't country' on the face of the earth, universal suffrage did not exist in any one of the estates. They had all exceptions, either founded on parish relief, or as being paupers, soldiers, slaves, and minors, with many other exceptions. Not only did not universal suffrage exist in any country of the present world, but it never did exist in any country recorded in history. The Greeks and Romans, the bravest nations of antiquity, gave the elective fran chise to only about one person in five at the very most. He (Mr. A.) did not wish to disparage uni versal suffrage, annual Parliaments, and vote by ballot; it. was possible there might be something good inlhem ; but it was possible there might be some th'ng dangerous in them.—(Cheers.)—All he could say was, that he thought it was not prudent to claim them. And why should he, when the undeniable Constitution under which their fathers flourished was open to them ? The Marquis of Blandford's Bill, if passed, would secure immense privileges for the people. It would restore the glorious system under which the lower classes of the people were undeniably happy and free. He would read to them the great provisions of that Bill, and give a faint description of the liberties which it would restore to the country. This it did by merely repealing Acts of Parliament which had been passed when the people were asleep, and had no watch dogs— no political councils—(Cheers)—during the last 150 years. But before he shewed them the solid benefits which the Marquis of Blandford's Bill would restore to them, he wished to give them an other glimpse of the evils which anarchy would bring upon them. A state of tyranny was the inevit .able result of a state of anarchy. It was not pos sible, indeed, for a state of society like theirs, when once broken tip, to settle down again by any other means than that of force. When masses of men broke loose from their ancient habits and modes of thinking, every man with a head upon his shoulders had an opinion of his own—(Cheers) —and he had an equal right to have his own opinion regarded as that of his neighbour. Here then were 20,000,000 of opinions, passions, prejudices, and interests, which could not possibly be reconciled but by force. —(Cheers.)—Then, as in the case of Cromwell arid Napoleon, the strongest soldier became the strongest man ; and he with the sharpest sword, or the mast delusive tongue, laid the country prostrate under the rule of a rod of iron. —(Cheers.) Nor was it to be wondered, that a rod of iron should suc ceed the rule of anarchy; for when men were worn by the calamities which anarchy produced, they gladly submitted to despotism, in the hopes that it might .aave.them from more frightful evils. To re turn to-the-Marquis of Blandford's Bill—the object of tlii,ViskirOche was about to propose—the Union mustaanairs mind, that justice and strict legality were the' foundations of all real strength. Their own Shakspeare had laid this down as a principle in his inimitable language— " Thrice i% he armed, that bath his quarrel just, And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted." They had their quarrel just; they stood upon ground where no power could resist them, and from which no law and no force could dislodge them.— Their strength was in their unanimity and in the justice and legality of their cause. They made no attack upon any of the sacred establishments of the country; they made no attack upon their venerable Church ; they made no attack upon the House of Lords; they made no attack upon the Throne of their beloved King—may God restore him to health—(A dead silence)—they only made an attack upon the people's own House, where they contended their rights were not represented. And how should they be represented, constituted as that was ? Lord Grey offered to prove, on oath, before the House of Commons, that 200 persons returned the majority of that House; and in it there were 117 officers in the army and navy. Noss', he had the highest respect for those gentlemen in their individual capacities ; he de aired, if upon trial for his life, he should prefer being tried by a Jury of officers of the army to any other description of men; but these gentlemen were all men actuated with human passions, and it was not possible for them to give an unbiassed vote, where their own interests and feelings were deeply interested. Sir R. Wilson, for instance, a noble, gait and high-minded officer, had been cashiered ant, by the arbitrary mandate of the Ministry, without a Court-martial, merely because he dared to inter fere in the business of the late Queen. Every officer was liable to the same fate ; 'and, therefore, it was no disparagement to their integrity to say they were not fit representatives of the people. What, then, did the Marquis of Blandford's Bill re store to them ? He could tell them ; first, it dis missed all placemen from the House of Commons. Secondly, it cut off all the rotten boroughs, and re lieved the King from his 300 royal pensioners ; for, most assuredly, at present they divided the royal prerogatives with him.—(Cheers.) Thirdly, it abo lished the qualification of freehold property; at pre `sent, there were not, perhaps, twenty men in Bir mingham who had got that freehold qualification. Fourthly, it repealed the Septennial Act. Fifthly, it broke down expenses attending elections, and gave the elective franchise to every householder in the king dom liable to pay poor rates. Here it was important to observe, that it was an undeniable constitu tionai law that representation and taxation must go together; and he had the authority of Lord Bland ford to declare to them, that in case that Bill passed into a law, it would be impossible to continue levy ing taxes which pressed upon the working classes of the country. The rich would be compelled, as of old, to pay all taxes, at they ought to do ; or, if they refused, hey would be thrown upon the other horn of the dilemma, and be compelled to give re presentation to the lower classes upon their own constitutional conditions.—(Cheers.The lower classes, therefore, under any circumstances, would gain much by Lord Blandford's Bill; they would either gain representation, or freedom from taxation. —(Cheers.)—And he would declare, if the repre sentation were refused, the taxation must be abo lished, and one-tenth part of the saving the lower classes would thus experience would enable every one of them to obtain the elective franchise. Mr. Attwood, in allusion to what had been said of the late Duke of Richmond supporting Universal Suffrage,strotigly - 'eVaracterised the subsequent con doct ,Of'fli*t. Nobleman, declaring that his advocacy "O't 'Reform was.a mere clap-trap for the people, arid '....' ' dictated by spleen and selfishness. Immediately afterwards he was taken into power, and was the immediate instrument of seeking the blOod'ot Hornel '• ' Toblie iiirtrchernisright men, who went otdy two- I thiiihrof•ttioNiay.le had himself formerly professed 0 - " td , ,:„ tifi c icliisiefii ; Mr. Attwood strongly reenm ' ',IiS, eitl - siiilSiiieran -AO the laws—union, harmony, itt_ 4;1)0%40 the' and then he did not ~.. ~ ... _ / L doubt a successful issue of their just and righteous measure. On returning from the last meeting, or the 25th of January, he met a ballad-seller in the street, and on purchasing one of his ballads, he found it consisted of the Prophecies of the famous Nixon; one of which he considered curious, and not inapplicable to the present state of things— " Let all unite, but not to fight, And England soon shall get her right" —(Loud laughter and cheers.)' Let them stick to that doctrine, and they would ultimately succeed in defiance of all the sophistries and all the contrivances of their oppressors. lkir:Attwood then proceeded with the declaration of the Council on Lord Bland ford's Bill, and, after moving that it be approved by the Union, sat down amidst the most vehement and deafening cheers. Mr. HADLEY, on proposing the third resolution, said it became his duty to submit for their conside ration a resolution respecting the medal and ribbon, which the Council had thought ought to be worn by the Members of the Union on all public occasions when they were called together. The obverse of the medal was the British Lion, rousing himself from slumber ; the legend above, " The safety of the King and of the People ;" the legend below, " The Constitution—nothing less, and nothing more." The reverse of the medal, the Royal Crown of England irradiated ; immediately beneath the Crown, on a scroll, the words, " Unity, Liberty, Prosperity ;" the legend above, " God save the King;" the legend below, " Birmingham Political Union, 25th January, 1830." On the ribbon was inwoven the red cross of St. George quartered with that of St. Andrew, commonly called the British Union Jack. He could not help thinking with the Council, that the Members of the Union ought to have some appropriate badge, which would at once shew their loyalty and pwriotism, and distinguish them as men who were willing to make some sacri fice, and lend a helping hand in order to purify our corrupt political systems, and to secure their politi cal privileges. He should, therefore, beg to propose that the medal described in the advertisement in the public papers be adopted as the badge of the Union. —(Cheers.) The motion was seconded by Mr. BETTS, and carried unanimously. Mr. HADLEY, on proposing the fourth resolution, said, as they had adopted a medal to be worn by the Union, he should, before he sat down, propose that a gold medal, with the badge of the Union attached to it, be presented to the talented and patriotic Chairman of their Council (T. Attwood, Esq.) During the delivery of this speech, Mr. Hadley was frequently interrupted by tremendous cheering. Mr. WESTON cordially seconded the resolution. Mr. EDMONDS said, that it would be in the recol lection of many who heard him, that in 1813 Mr. Attwood received a similar token of regard from the artizans of Birmingham. Mr. ATTWOOD rose and returned thanks. Mr. RUSSELL moved that the basis of Union be obedience to the laws. Mr. EvANs seconded this resolution. On the motion of a member in the body of the building, a vote of thanks was passed to the mem bers of the Political Council. A vote of thanks was then voted to the Chairman, and the meeting quietly dispersed. Within half an hour after its close, notwithstand ing the unprecedented number who attended the meeting, and the extraordinary excitement which pervaded the town, the streets exhibited their usual appearance—all was perfectly quiet and peaceable. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(LAST NIGHT). Lord ELDON presented a petition from Tiverton for free trade in India. Lord GODENCH presented a petition from Kerry against the proposed duty on Irish grown tobacco. Mr. STUART, Mr. J. WitorrEsurr, and others, brought up several Private I3ills. Mr. Smith, from the Commissioners of Richmond Bridge, presented the cash accounts. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented a petition from Cork, praying for protection of the linen-manu facturers. The Bishop of LICHFIELD presented a petition from Derby against compelling Protestant children from at tending Catholic Worship. The Earl of DARNLEY presented two petitions from Canterbury, in favour of the Jews. The Marquis of BUTE presented petitions from Lanark and several other place: against the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. Lord MELVILLE presented a petition from the ship owners of Rye, against the Rye Harbour Bill. Lord CLARE presented a petition from Limerick, against the Grand Jury Presentments Bill. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from an individual in Dublin, against the Court of Con science. AFFAIRS OF GREECE The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was desirous of saying that he was unable to understand the foreign po licy of his Majesty's Ministers, and be should persevere in his motion on Tuesday next, unless the papers relative to Greece were laid before the House. They had now been promised nearly two months. If they were to be pro duced, he would withdraw his motion until the House had time to examine them. These protocols had been hawked about in foreign papers, and the British Parliament was the only place where any information on the subject was to he learned. More complication had grown out of this arrangement with aspect to Greece than from any other transaction in the foreign diplomacy of Great Britain. Ministers had changed the arrangements from an inde pendent kingdom to a sovereignty dictated by themselves. The sovereign appointed would annually withdraw a large sum of money from this country, and he questioned how the people of England would like to see a subject of their country become Sovereign of a foreign state, and draw money from them for his support, and to spend among a people who did not deserve such a boon. The illustrious person himself appeared to have some doubts of the policy of the arrangement, and to hesitate whether he should ac cept the crown. If this were true, he had, in his opinion, acted very wisely. The policy of Ministers, with respect to Turkey, was disgraceful to the nation. They had first offered an amicable intercession, and then converted it to a hostile aggression. France had now an immense arma ment afloat, and if France and Russia were to coalesce, what would become of Great Britain under the present system of foreign policy. The Earl of ABERDEEN said, that the papers were now in the printers' hands, and he should lay them on the table of the House on Monday next. He should do this— not from the motion of the Noble Marquis, nor because they had been published in foreign Gazettes—but merely because the negociation had arrived to that point when Ministers thought proper to lay them before the House. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY then withdrew his motion. . . The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from the Justices of Montgomeryshire, praying that they might be relieved from the duty of discharging persons from the Courts of Conscience. The Hungerford Market Bill was read a third time and passed. Several Private Bills went through different readings. Messages from the Commons brought up several Pri vate Bills that had passed the Lower House. EAST RETFORD. The House they resolved itself into a Committee on the East Retford Disfranchisement Bill, and proceeded with the examination of witnesses until a Quarter before Eight o'clock, when the further consideration of the Bill was postponed until Ftiday, and their Lordships adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—(LAST NIGHT.) WALLACE'S DIVORCE BILL. The House went into a Committee on this Bill. Wit nesses were examined, the Report brought up and agreed to, and the Bill read a third time and passed. Mr. BRAMSTONE presented a petition from the in habitants of Chelmsford, against the Beer Bill. Mr. AGAR ELLIS moved for a return of the number of persons convicted of forgery on the bank of Ireland. Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition from a place in Somersetshire, against the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. Mr. KNOX presented a petition from Dungannon, against the proposed increase of duty on spirits. Mr. SLANEY presented a petition from Salop, against the truck system. Colonel LYGON presented a petition from Kiddermins ter against the Insolvent Debtors' Act. Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from the Letter press Printers of Kilkenny, against any increased duty on Newspaper Stamps. Mr. LENNARD presented a petition from the Dissen ters of Exeter against the punishment of death for forgery, and also a similar one from Ipswich. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from the Presi dent, Vice-President, and Members of the Chamber of Commerce, at Manchester, praying that the House would take steps to prevent the invasion of Mexico by Spain. The Noble Lord wished to call the particular attention of his Majesty's Government to the facts stated in the pe tition.—Ordered to be printed. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from a place in the county of Kent against the Beer Bill, and two others from places in the same county against the punishment of death for forgery. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was understood to say, that it was in contemplation of the Go vernment to reduce the duty to 10s. in cases where the premium did not exceed 201. Sir E. KNATCHBULL then presented petitions from Lieutenant-Colonel Gunning, against the present system of poor laws; from the proprietors of public-houses in Tun bridge Wells, against the Beer Bill; and from the inhabi tants of Ashford, in Kent, and the bankers and others of Margate, against the punishment of death for forgery. With respect to the last petition, he observed that he be lieved the time had now arrived when that punishment Was universally desired to be removed. Mr. C. BILLER presented a petition from the trades of the city •f Glasgow, on the subject of the state of the Mexican trade. Mr. EGERTON presented a petition from certain persons in Chester, against the proposed alteration of the local jurisdictions there. _ . _ Mr. HUME presented a petition from the distillers of Aberdeen, complaining of the Bill new in progress through the House, fettering their mode of carrying on business, and which Bill they prayed might not pass into a law. THE CHURCH. Mr. HUME had been intrusted with a petition from Rochester and its neighbourhood, upon a subject which appeareel to him of the utmost importance. It was upon the subject of tithes. He believed he might say, and the Hon. Baronet near him would no doubt confirm his as. sertion, that the time had now arrived when the in habitants of Kent were of opinion that the tithes ought to be removed.—(Hear.) He had himself recently travelled in that county, and in several others, and he found the opinion of the mischiefs occasioned by the tithes daily extending among all classes of the people. Every body now was pretty well convinced that the tithes were the great cause of the want of employment for the poor— (Hear, hear)—and that if they were removed, many parts of the country now barren, would be cultivated ; but the fear of the tithes prevented people from bringing these places into cultivation. He himself knew an instance in which that fear was shown to have been but too well grounded. A gentleman allowed a poor man a small piece of ground to cultivate for the support of his family—the ground was cultivated with potatoes, and the poor man hoped to ob tain great advantage from the gentleman's liberality ; but as soon as the potatoes were about fit to be removed, the Clergyman put in his claim, and the poor man hardly got enough tireward him for the labour he had expended.— (Hear.) The tithes were the most oppressive tax in Eng land. The system of paying the Clergy was quite different in Scotland, and no man could look at that country with out being convinced, that such a system as that now exist ing in England ought not to be allowed to remain. But if it was bad in England, it was even worse in Ireland, where the great majority of the people were paying pastors to whose tenets and doctrines they were most strongly op posed. The time had now arrived when it ought to be considered whether great part, if not the whole of the se curity now given for the payment of the Clergy, ought not to be dispensed with.—(Hear.) —The petitioners stated this opinion ; and they added, that there was no au thority in Scripture—so far, at least, as they could dis cover—for having enormously paid Archbishops and Bishops, while the people at large were suffering all the miseries of poverty, privation, and want. The tithes were a greater enemy to the church than the Jews, of whom the Right Hon. Gentleman seemed so much afraid last night. The tithes alienated the minds of the people from the Church, and if the Government really wished to preserve and maintain the Church, they must alter the pre sent system of tithes. They must reduce the ecclesiastical as they had been called on to reduce the military esta blishments ; and certainly none of our establishments re quited reform more than the Church of England ; and that reform must be directed against the higher, not the lower ranks of the Clergy, for many of the latter were most scantily paid for their labours. Out of 11,000 Clergy, not more than six thousand did their duty in per son, and against these and the tithe system the petition was directed. Sir R. INGLIS said, that the parallel drawn between the holders of sinecures in the State and in the Church, was by no means just, and contended that when the Hon. Member for Aberdeen lately purchased an estate in Norfolk, he had bought only nine-tenths of the soil, for the other tenth most indisputably belonged to the Church. Every landed proprietor in England held his property on that tenure. It ought to be recollected also, that one third of the whole tithes of the country was in the hands of lay itnpropriators. He objected to discussions of this kind on the presentation of a petition, v although he ad mitted that the Hon. Member had given notice of his in tention to present it. Mr. PROTHEROE was not prepared to argue against a Church Establishment:in this country, but he was anxious to see the Clergy discharge their duties in a manner pro portioned to the emoluments they received. Sir E. KNATCHBULL maintained that no body of men in the country more conscientiously discharged their duties than the Clergy of the Establishment. The peti tion at Penenden-heath, which touched the subject of tithes, bad been got up at a period of excitement from dis tress. There were many different opinions as to the mode in which tithes ought to be taken, but the seniments in the petition now offered did not meet with the approbation of the great body of the country. If any amelioration of the system were necessary, a Bill was now before Parlia ment which had for object the introduction of some amendments. Mr. F. PALMER said that the Clergy, instead of taking only one-tenth of the produce of the soil, took much more. He knew an instance of a farm, which four years ago, paid a rent of 6001. to the landlord, and a tithe of 1401. to the Clergyman; at that date it was consider ably more than a tenth, but since, owing to circumstances, the rent had been reduced to 500/. but the Clergyman still insisted upon his full amount of tithe, 1401., on the ground that. the more relieved the tenant was by his land lord, the better able he was to pay the full tithe. Mr. BARING referred to what had falkn from him on a former day, on the subject of the annual value of the Sees of Canterbury and London. He felt called upon to admit that he had been misinformed, and had consequently made a very exaggerated statement, especially when he said that the income of the See of London would ere long be equal to 100,0001. a-year. The Right Rev. Prelate, in another place, had made a reply, which showed the extent of the error he (Mr. Baring) had committed. He most implicitly believed what had fallen from the Right Rev. Prelate, and he had himself taken the opportunity of inquiring. The result of his inquiry was a strong feel ing of regret that he had given currency to a very exag gerated statement, which had found its way round the country. He had heard it frequently asserted of the Diocese of Winchester, in which he chiefly resided, that in the first year it produced to the Bishop 90,000/. This statement, he had reason to know, was far beyond the truth. There was one consolatory point in the late expla nation of the Bishop of London, viz. the admission of his Lordship that if his income even approached the stun that had been mentioned, it would be highly proper for Parliament to interfere for its regulation. Such an opi nion front such an authority must have great weight. He (Mr. Baring) thought that the Church committed a great error in shunning inquiry, in order to refute prevalent exaggeration. Great prejudices would thus be removed ; but the Church did not place sufficient reliance on the haft it had of the feelings and affections of the country. In Hampshire the tithe upon corn lands amounted gene rally to one-third or one-fourth, and most of the occupiers of the soil would b e g l a d to compoun d f or one -f ou rth. Human wit could not h ave dev i sed a mo d e o f payment more inconvenient o r o ff ens i ve t h an t h at i n w hi c h re li g ion was paid for in this co un t ry . H owever , t h e w h o le was a delicate question. Mr. ESTCOURT expressed his concurrence with what had fallen from his Hon. Colleague. The Petition was then brought up, and read as follows : ,t T o the Honourable the Commons cf the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parlia ment a ssembled. " The Petition of the undersigned Owners and Occupiers of Land, and Others, Inhabitants of Rochester, and its neighbourhood, in the county of Kent, " Humbly Sheweth—That, impelled by the distress that at present affects almost all classes of society, and which is, by general consent, admitted to be mainly occasioned by excessive taxation, the petitioners beg leave to represent to your Hon. House the great relief that would be afforded by the abolition of tithes, a tax which, by drawing so large a share of the gross produce of the land, is alike injurious to the community in general, to the agriculturists in parti cular, and to the best interests of religion. To the coal munity, by unavoidably increasing the price of articles of most general and necessary consumption—to the agricul turists, by subjecting them to vexatious restrictions in the cultivation of the land, and by depriving them of the ability to compete with the foreign grower, or to contend against the importation of grain, which it is the present policy of this country to encourage—and to religion, by proving a fruitful source of discord between the clergyman and his parishioners, and so destroying that harmony, upon the continuance of which the success of his spiritual labours chiefly depends. "In urging the abolition of this impolitic tax, the pe titioners disclaim, with the utmost sincerity, any desire to •advocate a system of spoliation ; en the contrary, they fully admit the vested rights of private patrons and lay im propriators, as well as the claims of the present incum bents to a life interest in their present incomes ; but, due regard being paid to these, they maintain, that the tithe tax is, equally with all other taxes, properly the subject of legislative disposal; in opposition to the argument now much relied on, that tithes, having been given for the maintenance of religion, are therefore, inalienable. The Roman Catholic might, with some plausibility, advance such a claim to their recovery, they having been originally granted for the support of his creed, but the Protestant can found his right upon the law of the land only—upon that law which, as it gave, can only modify or take away. " It has been deemed necessary ti accompany all the plans heretofore proposed by the repeal of this objection able tax with a substitute affording an equivalent income to the Clergy; it is however evident, that, although a com mutation might remove the inconvenience of the tithe system, yet it would afford no diminution of taxation ; and as all taxes, in whatever shape imposed, fall ulti mately upon labour, that the inability to compete with the less taxed labour of other countries would remain unabated. But the petitioners confidently submit that the time has, at length, arrived, when it ceases to be neces sary to provide a substitute of this nature, as they con sider, that, however esssential the aid of wealth and ho nours may have hitherto been to the Church of England to enable her to lure to her service men of learning and talent, to advocate the truth and excellence of her doctrines anti discipline, the necessity for such aid happily no longer exists. The task has been so ably performed, as to leave nothing further to be expected or desired, and it may be fairly assumed that the Established Religion can now be safely left to its own intrinsic excellence for its future sup port. The well-paid labours of those eminent men, who, attracted by the splendid rewards of the Church, have en listed in her cause, have so simplified the clerical duties as to make them practicable by persons of ordinary capacities and acquirements ; to such an extent, indeed, as to render the functions of the Clergy of the Establishment almost entirely ministerial ; for its comprehensive Liturgy, by supplying all the formularies of devotion, whether for prayer or praise, imprecation or benediction, disavowal or belief, and al.o strictly enjoining the various occasions upon which they are to be restrictively used, affords no oppor tunity for the exercise of judgment, the exhibition of talent, or the display of learning. Nor do the duties of the Preacher, any more than the Minister, require an educa tion superior to that which is usually bestowed upon the middling class of society ; for the inexhaustible stores of invaluable sermons which have emanated from the labours of those highly-gifted Divines who have, at different periods, shed a lustre upon the English Church, afford a fund of instruction admirably adapted for every purpose, and to select from which requires but a moderate portion of literary attainments. " The qualifications for the proper performance of these functions being few, and the acquisition of them not requiring expense, as they consist princi pally of propriety of demeanour, and the possession of the natural advantages of suitable voice and delivery, but moderate stipends would be necessary to ensure a sufficient number of competent candidates, and the payment of these stipends might be safely left to the generosity of their respective congregations ; for the petitioners consider that it would be a libel upon the Members of the Established Church to doubt, fora mo ment, their liberality for this purpose, when it is seen how respectably the different Dissenting congregations maintain their pastors, and how readily they supply large sums for the erection of chapels and establishment of schools. " In this economical plan of reform, there are no in comes from the State for future Archbishops, Bishops, and other Dignitaries of the Hierarchy. But the ad mirers of Episcopacy need experience no alarm on that account, for the history of the early periods of the Church satisfactorily shows that the care of suitably providing for all orders of its establishment may be safely entrusted to the proper feelings of the people. " The petitioners have thus sketched the outlines of a scheme of reformation, which, when matured, would, they believe, work well, be generally approved, and ren der the abolition of tithes easily practicable. This plan would receive the approbation of many, who consider a wealthy priesthood as peculiarly unfitted to inculcate the precepts of Christianity, and who regard the unexpensive provision for its primitive teachers as indicative of the de sire of its Founder, that his servants should look, not to riches or rank, but to a reward of a far different nature, as the recompence for their labours. Others, who are desirous of upholding the Church of England, would truly calculate that its adoption would tend to insure the stability of that now tottering fabric, as, when shorn of its wealth and temporal honours, it would cease to be the object of attack, either of the financier or reformer. Those who are enamoured of the beauty and sublimity of the language of its Liturgy, or impressed with the con viction of the truth and importance of its Creed, would most effectually protect these from innovation, by confin ing the office to a class of men who, from their functions being ministerial, would have neither opportunity nor temptation to deviate from the path of orthodoxy; whilst the community in general, and the agriculturists in parti cular, finding themselves relieved, from an oppressive tax, would hail the reform with unalloyed satisfaction. " The petitioners, therefore, pray your Hon. House to take the necessary steps to effect an early abolition of the tithe tax—a measure which would give more satisfac tion to the country, and reflect greater credit upon the Legislature, than any enactment that has been carried for centuries past; and, when coupled with the boon of re ligious liberty lately so liberally granted, would entitle the present Parliament to be mentioned in terms of the most glowing eulogium by the historian of the United Kingdom. " And the petitioners shall ever pray," &c. Mr. HUME could not see anything delicate in the ques tion, and certainly clergymen never had any delicacy in the collection of their tithes. No body of men in the country weremore indelicate than the clergy.—(Laughter. ) —They had no scruple in exciting and took one third and not one-tenth of the property of the country with the greatest coolness. They 11;4 certain duties at tached to their situations which they swore to discharge, and when they did not discharge those duties, they were guilty of r. fraud, and received money upon false pre tences. He wanted to see the Church of England put upon the same footing as the Church of Scotland, and then he should be satisfied. To the Hon. Baronet, the Mem ber for Oxford, he should only reply that if he did not like discussions of this sort upon petitions, he ('l[r. Hume) was quite ready to fix an open day for bringing the sub ject forward upon regular ;notion. Mr. PROTHEROE drew a distinction between the clergy and religion. If any-body talked of dilapidated churches, neglect of duty in the education of the poor, or the exaction of tithes, then it was a matter of great delicacy. Religion might be attacked with much less ceremony. After - a few words from Mr. ESTCCIIIAT, the petition was hid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. Mr. HUAIE wished to press upon the attention of the House the inconsistency there was in the Legislature of this country continuing to give its sanction to imprison ment for debt. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought there would be great difficulty in carrying any measure having that for its object, against the opinion of the public. He wished to take that opportunity of inquiring of the Noble Lord oppo site, whether he intended to persevere with a Bill of his then before the House, as he (the Attorney-General) in tended himself bringing forward a similar measure ? Lord MORPETH thought himself justified in inquiring of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman more particularly what the nature of his measure was ? The ATTORNEY -GENERAL meant only to impose upon newspapers established de novo, the necessity of giving security to the amount of 1001. more than those at present existing—with the latter he had no intention of interfering. He thought that the public ought to be better protected than they were from libels affecting private cha racter, for as matters at present stood, the real proprietor, of newspapers found it no difficult matter to maintain in prison a nominal proprietor, and escape with impunity themselves. He took for granted that there was but one opinion as to the necessity of repressing private libels. Lord MORPETH said that in tha , ; part of the measure which coincided with his own, he, of course, concurred; of the intended adjunct he might disapprove, but he wa , decidedly opposed to that part of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's motion which went to impose increased re strictions upon the Press. Mr. BRIGHT suggested to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to leave the clause, respecting arrests on mesne 'process, out of the Bill, that it might be discussed as a separate question. Mr FERGUSSON said that it would be better to leave that clause in the Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL said the proposed measure would have the effect of lessening a great evil. In his opinion, Judges ought to be made responsible for a due investiga tion of every case wherein arrests were made, and that security ought to be required from the plaintiff that he make sufficient compensation in the event of the arrests tnrning out to be malicious. He was sorry to learn that further restrictions were to be imposed upon the press, and that those already in possession of large interests in news papers were not to be affected by them, thus making a monopoly iu the newspaper trade, similar to that which existed in too many other branches of trade already. He complained that while there was so much regulation on the subject of newspapers, they had not yet been favoured with any definition of libel ; it was only fair and just that they should have a rational definition of the crime of libel. Mr. CHARLES BA-RCLAY said there were in several quarters of the mercantile world very strong opinions en tertained with respect to the alteration in the law relative to arrest on mesne process, and he, therefore, wished the matter to receive due consideration. The petition war then brought up. It appeared to be from the Prisoners confined for Debt in the Borough Gaol of Liverpool.—To be printed. Lord CHANDOS wished to know whether the motion for a Committee on the subject of West India affairs would have the support of his Majesty's Government? . Sir R. PEEL was not aware of the terms in which the reference was to be made to the Committee, and there fore could not be prepared to answer the question of his Noble Friend. Mr. LENNARD presented a petition from Tewkesbury, against the punishment of death fur forgery. Mr. WODEHOUSE presented a petition from the Pa per-makers of Norfolk, against the use of machinery.— To lie on the gable. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the wea rers of Spitalfields, saying that their condition was worse than that of negro slaves, and praying for a Reform in Parliament and a Relief from Taxation. They called the attention of the House to the fact of there being in this country a German Prince with 50,000/. a year, who would be very well provided for with 6,000/. Mr. FYLEP. supported the petition, and it was ordered to be printed. Mr. O'CONNELL rose to present a petition from an individual named James Kelly, a Lieutenant in the 3d Corps of the Revenue Police, complaining that he had been dismissed without trial, in consequence of dates being confounded with each other. After a few words from Mr. DAwsox and Lord CLIMENTS, Mr. C. WYNN thought the House should not be made a Court of Appeal for every petty case of that nature. Mr. DOHERTY wished to put a question to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite (the Member for Clare). There was reason to suppose that he would that day have presented two or three petitions, on a matter in which he (Mr. D.) had an interest, and of which he had given notice ten days ago. Now it would be extremely satis factory to know what the Hon. and Learned Member in tended to do about them. He (Mr. D.) had remained in the House last night till half-past two o'clock, and he now learned that the Hon. and Learned Member had with drawn his notice. Under those circumstances he wished to learn from him whether he intended to fix any day for bringing the subject under the consideration of the House, that he (Mr. D.) might look forward to a probable period to the matter, or whether he might not disembar rass his mind of it altogether? Mr. O'CONNELL said his wish was not to present the petitions at all. He had written to those from whom he received the petitions, and if they agreed with him in thinking that the subject, after what had occurred, should not again be brought forward, the House would most pro ba,,ly hear nothing more relative to it. If they did not agree with him, his request was, that they would put the petitions into the hen& of some other Member ; and if they assented to neither of these proposition, in that case, and in that alone, he should lay the petitions on the table of the House. He could not expect to receive an answer before Saturday—on Monday he should be able definitively to state what he should do. The Hun. and Learned Gen tleman then presented three petitions—one from the parish of Whiteehurch, in the county of Cork ; another from the parish of Garrycloyne, in the same county—these two praying for a provision for the poor arising from an ab sentee tax ; and the third was from the parish of St. Mary, in the city of Dublin, complaining of the Vestry Act.— To be printed. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice, that be should to morrow move for returns respecting the number of lives lost in affrays between the Irish peasantry and the police ; and, also, for the coroner's inquest upon the body of man named Daniel Delane, who came by his death in the county of Clare. Lord CLEMENTS moved for a return of the amount of fines imposed at Quarter Sessions in Ireland during the last five years.—Agreed to. Mr. HUSKISSON postponed, till Thursday, the pre sentation of the petition from Liverpool, respecting the trade of this country with Mexico, of which be gave notice. Mr. DENISON presented a petition from Wolking, in Surrey, against the Beer Bill.—To lie on the table. Mr. BERNAL inquired of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) whether be intended to propose any measure respecting the French claims ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Ye►, very shortly. Mr. C. W. W. WYNN wished to know when the case of Sir Jonah Barrington would be heard ? Sir ROBERT PEEL thought the earliest practicable day should be appointed for it; and, as all others were oc cospied, he should propose that the House meet at an early hour on Saturday next —suppose at two o'clock. Mr. HUME thought that some rule should be laid down respecting the hour at which public business should com mence ; and he thought, too, that after a given hour, busi ness should cease in that House. He was kept during one day lately 21 hours out of bed by the business of that House. The physical powers of men could not endure the fatigue which the present mode of doing business imposed upon them. In his opinion Parliament should meet earlier in the year. say in November. There were several Bills before the House, and unless some hour were fixed for the commencement of public business, they could never get through what was before them. Sir ROBERT PEEL could have no objection to a par ticular hour being fixed; it would be as agreeable to him and his colleagues as it would he to any other Members — some limit should be fixed te the toils of the Members of that House ; what with Committees, and nine or ten hours' attendance in that House, it was more than they bad phy sical strength to endure—they were really called to apply their minds to the difficulty, and devise some remedy. After a few words front Mr. Husnsson and Lord F. L. GOWIR, Mr. O'CONNELL understood that it was the intention of Sir Jonah Barrington to persevere in claiming to be heard. Mr. CROKER agreed in the necessity of Sir Jonah Barrington being heard. Mr. RICE was favourable to the appointment of Sa turday. After a few words from Mr. C. W. W. WrNN, Lord F. L. GOWER. proposed Saturday at twelve o'clock. The SPEAKER said, it was always the rule that the House should stand adjourned to ten o'clock, and from that until four it was supposed to be sitting. Mr. C. W. W. W YNN adverted to the precedents ap plying to the case ; and it was understood that a motion should he made in the words of the precedent, to enable the business in question to be brought on on Saturday. THE WEST INDIES. Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS, adverting to a motion of his which stood on the Paper, for a Select Committee to inquire into the distressed state of the British West India colonists, thought the Government ought to take upon it self the responsibility of proposing a measure to Parlia ment upon the subject, and spare him the necessity of per forming a duty for which he was much less qualified than were the advisers for the Crown. Mr. BERRIES feared, that so great were the embar• rassments of the colonists, that nothing which Govern• meat could do would afford them relief. Lord CHANDOS said, that the Government had made promises, but had never given the West India interest any relief. He must be convinced of the intention of the Go vernment to take the matter up, before he would consent to abandon the motion. Sir ROBERT PEEL was satisfied of the depression of the West India interest; but he did not see how any mea sures could be undertaken for its relief during the present Session. His Hon. Friend, who had spoken before his Noble Friend, seemed content to acquiesce in the recom mendation that Government should take the matter into its consideration. He would so far pledge the Govern ment that he would undertake that it should investigate the matter, anti should give him notice of its intention at so early a period, twat he should be able to bring forward his motion on the fir,t week of the next Session of Parlia- tnent. If his Hon. Friend postponed his proposition till next Session, there would then be tune to make the in quiry more complete, and find some practical remedy. When he mentioned the late period of the present Session, it was with no intention to cut any reflections on his Hon. Friend. Ile knew that his Hon..Friead had bee n anxious to bring forward the subject, but the state' Of the Order Book had been such, that he had not been-able, The best course, he believed, for his Hon. Friend would be to acquiesce in the proposition of Government—allow it to examine the matter in the mean time, it undertaking to give such an early notice to his Hon. Friend that he roig h , submit his propositi o n to P ar li amen t th e fi rs t wee k in t he next Session, if he were not satisfied with what the G °. vernment should find it proper to recommend. Mr. K. DOUGLAS, being p er f ec tly satisfied that tile Government would undertake the inquiry with sinceril and determination, he should find it his duty to accede to the proposition of his Right Hon. Friend. Sir A. GRAN I' expressed his satisfaction at the mat te being left is the hands of Governm e nt, as it was bot h able to investigate the subject thoroughly, and applf practical remedy. He begged leave, however, to call the attention of his Right Hon. Friend (the Chancellor of th e Exchequer) to the state of overwhelming di s t ress in whic" the West Indies were involved, if some practical rev:wa t might not be found in equalising tho d u ti es . At presto the duties pressed most unequally, because the duty 01 , the same on the finest as on the coarsest sugars. Til° would give the lower classes an opportunity of getting : be coarse sugars cheap. The Hon. Gentleman also :wow , mended a lower rate of duty for sugar in I re l an d, whi' he thought was justified by the Chancellor of the ROW quer having departed from the general principles in le r ing a different duty on spirits in Ireland and England. , The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER 0 1 though he was not in general a very orderly person laugh)—he must show his sense at present of what! ; due to the usual course of proceedings, by refusing Le enter into the subject, as there was no q ues ti on before IP House. Mr. HUME protested against the manner of dispn" of the question. - FIRST FRUITS.—IRELAND. r , Sir JOHN NEWPORT ros e t o bring forw a rd a 113 " . . tion that would make a large revenu e th a t w a s one s t— • disposal of the Crown, and bad b ee n app r opriated by I' for the service of the church of Ireland. We understood him to say, that be had brought forward, in 1818, a o° ' tion similar to the present, and it was then rejected by • majority of 17. He had again submitted the subject 0 the House in 1824, and then it had been negatived by t majority of 12. He then, for the third time, meant to sub' mit a motion which would have for its object to carry into effect the benevolent views of the Crown, which apPr t " priated a great branch of its revenue to the service of th e Episcopal Church of England, but which bad failed to s e ' complish the object intended, owing to the negligence ti t the Members of the Government and of the Legislature , ' not properly enforcing the benevolent views of the (W.' P ; It was in 1710 that Queen Anne bestowed on the Char:a of Ireland the first fruits, or the first year's revenue of secant benefices, for the purpose of repairing the c hurcb e !,' and buying glebes, and other useful purposes. (P e t Anne had also remitted the Is. in the pound, or twentieths, which the clergy were bound to pay. Ili t h e clergy of England had not been returned the to 13 tt ,, they were bound to pay, and they continued to 'd these tenths. Their benefices also, which were van lued in the time of Henry VIII., Elisabeth, eli ee Charles 1., were valued at a much higher 11 , than the benefices of the Church of Ireland. The reve rs derived from the Irish first fruits was so inconeid er t ; able that the Parliament had frequently been obligee r make grants to keep churches in repair, and provide i e .f other ecclesiastical objects, for which thes e first fruits, I properly appropriated, would be sufficient. In the ton years ending January 1821, according to r e turns la i , cl l ,„j the table of the Ho use , th e fir s t f ru it s o f Ir e land yielded 3,722/. ; and in the t e n ye ars endi n g with •""i nuary 1830, they bad yielded only 5,1401. A sa lary e 127/. was paid out of the former sum, and 7401. out i the latter. But during these last ten years fifteen Bi.hor rice and four Archbishoprics had fallen vacant; and the first fruits of all their revenues ought to have been pa id ; and yet only 5,1401. was paid as one year's revenue of 6' teen Bishoprics and four Archbishoprics. Durief, seven years of the same period, the first f r uits in Eng t a te . had yielded 14,000/. Many of the benefices of had never been valued at all, and several had been Tall at a rate far below th e ir value. While this fund b ed been misappropriated, the grants of Parliament to t b° ,,, Iriah Church bad amounted to 686,000/. According the valuation for the first fruits, ninety-three parishes w e estimated at 258/. 12s. ; but fifty-seven of these parisb r had compounded for their tithes, and these fifty-se /1g alone paid the incumbents 18,259/. The Right 11 0° ' Baronet then referred to the observations of the Prints ° lioulter, contained in a letter addressed to the Arch . ' bishop of Canterbury on December 24th, in 1724, is , show that th e I r i s h Cl ergy h a d a l ways b een to contribute to the wants of the Church, and ba d ` always appropriated to themselves the revenues whie ought to have gone to beautify and repair c h u rebe ° ' He then entered into a comparison of what was C 0 tributed under the name of first fruits by the Eag i ' l i and Irish Bishoprics : Derry, he said, 'Which Nae .ji rich see, having an annual revenue of 20,000/. p' C) first fruits 2501. ; while Rochester, a very poor e e !ii paid 322/. Another Irish see paid 93/., Cloyne 10!. 10s., Killaloe paid 201, Clogher paid 350/ ; svh ) , - 1 Winchester paid more for first fruits than the whole of ty l Irish Archbishoprics and Bishoprics. The Hon. Bove% then contended that Mr. Shaw, the patentee of the it s fruits, was bound by his patent to inquire into and e,i amine the first fruits of the Irish benefices. There coo' be no question that the funds derived from the first 100 small and insufficient as they proved, never were ape' propriated to the objects fur which they were intend et and that they were uniformly distributed among the ric e and the well beneficed Clergymen, to the neglect of t l : b Church and the injury of the poorer class of the 1 0 Church. It was expedient that a Committee should be ir d pointed to inquire into the merits of these valuations, 0 3 , into the general administration of the produce of tbe fun d ' Lord LEVISON GOWER opposed the motion. proposal of the Hon. Baronet to revise the valuation the fund would have the effect of taxing the people, WWI out benefitting either the Church or its Ministers ; at the same time, if he was to give his assent to tb, motion, he would be admitting that the Church of Irelaa ° l was established for the benefit of the Clergy, and n ot 61 the benefit of the people. T o s uc h a p ro p os iti on he coo l never give his assent ; and therefore felt it hi e duty t ° move the previous question on the Right Hon. Baronet' motion. Mr. RICE said, that the magnitude of the question , 1° this case was little under s t oo d. Th e coun t r y had beenl years paying 50,000/. a year to this First Fruit Fund, it was not until a ft er th e most strenuous exert i ons on P",: part of his Ri g ht H on. F r i en d (Si r J. N ewport ) t h a t Pi eyes of Parliament had been opened to the folly and e ste; vagance of the vote. In his opinion this moduli of 1) e Right Hon. Frie n d was o n e of great importan c e to t b Church of Ireland, aid if it were carried, would be 11 ' 1 tended with grea t a d van t ages t o th e Ch urc h, an d 0 1 , ° o t; attain the end of con fi rm i ng an d conso lid a ti ng it s pn He should most cordially supp or t th e mo ti on o f hi s Rig' Hon. Friend. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER WO, altogether opposed to the motion, from which he did 1 9 , anticipate any such advantages as the other side suppose°: ( He begged to say that this was not entirely a question Bishops' incomes, confessedly large, but not larger the the necessities of their Sees required, but affected the in comes of all the Clergy in the country. Sir J. NEWPORT replied. The House then divided. For the motion.... 65 Against it 94 Majority —29 Dr. PHILLIMORE postponed his motion. Sir C. WETHERELL postponed his motion generallP, Mr. BROUGHAM asked if it was the intention to the Attorney-General to give the House an opporiunis of discussing the subject relating to the Court of Ch anc ery, For one year it had been put off in hopes of the La g Chancellor's Bill. This Bill came down and was the° withdrawn. He said this, because, if there was 01, so me reasonable prospect of this measure reac hi n g tb , House, it would be necessary for some Hon. Member at II" side of the House to make it imperative. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR had not brought forward hit : motion, in the hope that the measure would be brougl" forward by the Attorney-General. He concurred in th i expectation of his Hon. and Learned Friend that thi ° great and important question would be brought under tio ° consideration of the House. Mr. Secretary PEEL expected the Bill would c od down to-morrow or Thursday. He had been . in th e country for some days and knew nothing of the motion' If the measure was not brought forward in th e tim e hello, n amed, it would be free to any Hon. Member t o or i g ins° a motion upon the subject. BIRMINGHAM CANAL. Mr. DUGDALE brought forward his motion regardisil, the Birmingham Canal, in order that the House migl" adopt such measures as seemed expedient to pr o t e ct th e public from such projects in future. He observed that th: estimate of the undertaking, made by Mr. Telford, psi 453,0001., and a list of subscribers, to the amount °, 394,0001., had been d e li vere d i n , i n d u e course. It tures' out, by inquiry before the Committee on the Standing Or dere, that this list of subscribers consisted in many 01 stances, of indigent persons, not competent to pay the dr f