The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-26 00:00:00

/ T ---/ A -7 - Z Ad'_ 2" ( ' -' L.f-d /1-10 ( c ) & 1- Z7 i ay : ',//9 --- Z'c- - J ., / / Zi/' ( JNCIL. • , • • .U • 2 1 - 17 3 , - ,0114 id : 49) (C - • t 7 vsko, \ • - Z4k ..4 7 4 -eN4.• ,‘-,, .1 V (4s ;‘.° * . -tr - ti p' //kir; v/74 ;.• , - ' • _ " I 110' 1.4 1,3 1 ' ,r• - NI ' C) I T of the take pia"' in the Ci t e l dace allots,' le Chait $t were read .s ordered of a Coto' three e'cl OSTEND. THE GENERAL STEAM NAVIGA , TION COIIPANY'S PACKETS leave the atom House or 'Tower for OSTEND every TUESDA SATURDAY morning with passengers and merchand;ze. 4 " . be ' h • the office c 4) information may o_tamf _at the 56 rn ii lia _ n . Y , 6 9, Lombard-street ; also from Mr. Underwood, 4 4 71/market ; and from Mr. Norman, agent, 1, \V!er b,' Tower•street, to whom application for freight is to G made. CHARLES BESSELL, Secretary. 'tneral S t eam Navigation Company's Office, I' ST EAM VESSEL FOR EDINBURGH. HE UNITED KINGDOM will sail from Th GREENWICH, for EDINBURGH, on , Orsday, Ist August, at Twelve, Noon. And f ufsday, Bth August, at One, Afternoon. bOrv ren' the STONE PIER, NEWHAVEN, for LON '', On Mona nth July, at Twelve o'Clock, Noon. r , I.6","'"CY, sth August, at Twelve o'Clock, i'`taY, 12th August, at Twelve o'Clock, Noon. Ford SCARBOROUGH weather permitting. 441 Iltirths apply at the Spread Eagle Office, Piccadilly, l i e s' o 7 m ,F encliurch-street. Goods received at the Spread o ` b— Piccadilly ; Cross Keys, Gracechurch-street ; Dl;. FRANKLIN'S FAMILIAR LETTERS. F., : u st published, in small Bvo., 'nice 75. cloth. AMILIAR LETTERS and MISCEL IANDZANEOUS PAPERS of the celebrated Dr. BEN• FRANKLIN ; now for the first time:publishrd. L „ Edited by JARED SPARKS, Esq. Yard 7" : Jackson and Watford, IS, St. Paul's Church- Bancks and Co., Manchester. TThis day was published. in 3 vols. post Sve. ?, E PARSON'S DAUGHTER. 4 '. A iI BY the Author of " Sayings and Doings," &e. ot ' , /i an e w‘vprk from Theodore Hook is at all times acceptable. t ,'lne ato _Naried are his powers, the humourist, the satirist, the Is , tei te :pf . character, the Hogarth of the pen, he never fails ~4o;s 0 interest, to gratify, and delight the reader. The ki the h e uughter ' is a iove-at-first.sight story ; the character t, s 'Alv '°lne—Emma Lovell—is finely conceived, and as ad i.-qre ',, s tlstained ; interwoven with an unflagging web of ear est.',' he scenes 'are full of life, and bustle, and stirring inte. Herald. ',....,_ Richard Bentley, New Burlington-street. h. s id - ---- aY Was published, in 2 vels. Svo., with numerous Etchings, &c., 1 111 ANSATLANTIC SKETCHES. BY CAPTAIN J. E. ALEXANDER, , t es iii, 42d Royal Highlanders. b sibs author, in his excursions ' tr a versed 16,000 miles : the o pi l , of `,'.'se of the best travelling books we have seen. It is a of 'kis situations of picturesque descriptions, of views of man in 44,,,tuations of interest, of snatches of natural history, and o ' 4l les'of alllimaginable kinds."—Atlas. '''' , ......Liehard Bentley, New Burlington-street. as a candi' ..h was sec' utineers on ❑d Weston to the sent to press. uls DA f the Coup sl paying*".: alder the Sr , and upon Oil' had no ich it was 01 uch mond US DA' KINsoN. he defer answer for ing thera a, marked! stiff in TO' h of April' business urkish ins" his name, hich had great init l :ime since , le object of efendants, of 'ChSo I of using copy the 0 00 aite such market. , adants, :he name tic : sod Counh , e' d f ed of WO ' I ) of the ill the inf° r r igs, he 105 r the F. lOl had not n—that S„ and Frot l '; r any nan 3 ", 'ire to do " d by then], efusing tb that, as xr .lusivelY t° HIS DA/ outward v- —Arrived /; ney, frord„ , Grisvroo m ' c d Star !W ol f eing paid, fresh g3jC Patterso n,' ornebergr to Londty ' rom Lelyraricl, Knowles, from 9 Strand,l 4 Mobile ; New Oril alhousi e, slie, fro . Smith , undlaud Ib, fronl fl Milford, id Ela" , Vy'atio°° morrih Fer sl4 c, Saari on'' Li tin, IJ6r geJ' he Cha n - a and PO:I,' ignals miles S nerara t/Je ling aly 424' . 0 0 1 mulissio inforro st , 0P 7 , 1 1 1 , , a,. str„ h inst* , d on tll ' ,l 'lds pad' the FO BARA°II4 July 9, _IfOP: inforro;,o t the lig" :oast, bild notices' invent. 400, intend d t o Resr• A • s ect el' ot, g hness moq u IP P i ady 444 g AS 9# '• • svci O f h :O l t ,‘ . tgoi gal' ) 0 August Ist, Part 11., price 2s. 6d., V -- A I'S Ai n ,,Containing Twelve Engr GAL avings, NATIONALGALLERY of To be P AINTING and SCULPTURE ; ti 'llt i .„ ; ce t°Plet e d in 16 or 18 Monthly Parts, each Part oliti t .„ - ng Twelve Subjects, executed in the first style of The engraving • with a Description of each pict . ur i e lo . oted ip the e Series will comprise all the Paintings now collected he ttNprA;TIONAL GALLERY, and the Sculpture in - " , SI-1 MUSEUM. be l' T his OPINIONS. 44t ' w ork is distinguished by neatness, accuracy, and ~,ttitigiahisd Particularly valuable to persons in the country, as 14' Neti -t° their hands ‘ ' faithful copies . of the most splendid t, It (till or art,"—Liverpool Chron e icle r . os tr:4pl y i i y„ eloavlizes the ro t m n fth P pectus, and bids fair 0 F i e se a o rts with engr . avings of all er t a l t i e e t ke't, ;l pro ducti r o s n o s ofthe pencil and the chiselat a od ` l : ' ,Nii, lie i ts Publication in Monthly Parts renders it accessible al e ,' h e •,.,°f limited income."—York Chronicle. 14,L;otecit,:-'o;gravings in this work are trulyexquisite, and '' P.Ae' v an animated idea of their originals."—North tip, tp, a ,ertiser. ' , lt qtp 'cautiful work, and extremely heap. The expres atioh °Pictures is reserved in a manner truly astonishing." fp r , ..al Standard P p 4 L ' ti tl t 4 ,, d , a . ltd Published by A. J. Valpy, Red Lion-court, th e C., and sold by all Booksellers, Printselleis, &c., t4gdi)rn. , tj j i h GIN'S PATENT DOUBLE 'N by - i : 4I NIMED VENTILATING BEAVER . HATS j il t I . ,„* St i the brat kind of Hats ever yet produced, weigh ,.°4 5 , h " t° 3 ll four ounces; will never injure by wet, or ureal,""', colour; the brims being double, they cannot tes3 q Pe eR c . t. go out of shape; they will not prevent the egress of d ater 11ration which has been so much the complaint trhihot-h,a: often producing the headach and the loss the Prie s ; 2 ' le and 265. ; Drab and Blown II its at 't e arn e Price. Rat e , e had of the Patentees, Duggin and Co., 80, New ept,ltteet, near the New Post-office. Boys' and Men's t very er ri a ncl Silk Hats, from ss. and upwards. Caps of kt eseription 41)tetia---A liberal allowance will be made to merchants, TAE.-„,224i.....ind dealers. c t , Gti a '' L ERRATED DETERGENT TOOTH AND E 14"1! TINCTURE, FOR THE IMMEDIATE R - 1 1 - ' ' °F TOOTH-ACHE, AND THE EGYP 4r,N ODONTALGIC POWDER. , 'NSIEUR MALLAN and SON, Sur -4 GREAT RUSSELL -6TII ET, No. 32, 1 11h,`"' BLOOMSBURY, and No. 9, HALF-MOON ,t,..,i;''F', PICCADILLY, the sole inventors and po A s : ; 14 4 k , of tbe well-known .MINERAL S d UC f CE t D r +N i ,",,' for filling DECAYED TEETH, a_r . l *I tC 4IIO DIBLE ARTIFICIAL TEETH, fixed . fixed p 4rl e4 ° 4 4 : W IRES or other LIGATURES, respictfu , ll! -‘' ''llt -'e to their Patients and the Public, that on . ac "g "r th t . i tt -Ae r , e great atten ion required to their professional the t he b .4 t B in the Metropolis, they are induced to lace i , ,., : ° da of Medicine Venders generally, throug p h N ou T t (3 1 1 1 1 - "° 11 ) their INVALUABLE DETERGE . n % ). ° lie ~,t e l' cl GUM TINCTURE, for the restoration r\ -°11.04'. ' 4111 to their pristine state of health and - °N rt T i A l t well as their inestimable EGYPTIAN i '44ll ' f GI C POWDER, so much approved by the *°s, Ye„°,' London and Paris, for cleansing, preser an ag,.."'L beautifying the Teeth, and imparting d. l eff inat co ' i n '- p l u e ()clout. to the breath ; both these me 1- h i e d by a'l4cla have, for many years, been acknaw 4-. p oe 1.1 F amily a nd Nobility of England tl i , rane e , oyal . I ) fi, te st, i n ' 4/ be the only preparations which have stood 4 e d pre""ii n and restoring the masticatory organs, Itii:litl ek"th tlY g of their salubrious and beautifying °to the",°eParately, they impart a firmness and elasticity htr eit°ros, and effectually eradicate all mercurial and ` 4 ll nfe'eterius articles hich too often prove the destruc titl'et b i 'l i tal,;: l i cl e l e set of properties of these inestimable .. reparations, l ied) s . w hich public attention is more particularly . e The Deterwith each packet of the Powder and Tincture. Lllto, 6d. gent Tooth Tincture is sold in Bottles at I , lt ll e r , 41 . 1 . 18 - each, large Bottles contain . three of the tO 'lee at 4 4 ' ,nd the E4yptian Odontalgic Powder in old b t : a • bd.. each, duty included. k t eet . s.! PPointment by Messrs. Sanger, 150, Oxford ti) It't•str4l. Smith 11, Gower-street., North; J. Pett, 243, . I .414,, set ' et i Nix, Royal Exchange • Rouse, Welling-. ka -ela Nix, • ' • 39 Black- VO''r4; on Bridg e F High, T. Bailey, , i , 1 4 4 a Sterling, 86, street, Wiitechapel ; t tetair, ~.,e d Son, 447, West, Strand ; Fisher and t ° ,eap,t de . ‘ 6 , New Bond -street ;J. and T. Rigge, 65, Van& „ ' R. Johnson, 68, Cornhill ; Prout, 229, ',N.' 74, Temple -bar ;W. Holwell, Brunswick-house, ik141,7,120re-street, Borough. 140,,, tti Surgery performed on the Teeth on Messrs. M's Principle, Charges as in Paris. (No. P 2,7.34.) WHITEHALL-PLACE, MAN , 10, 18:33. 1 OTICE is hereby Given, that all Persons interested in the DIS FRIBUTION of the FUNDS appropriated by the TREATIES of 1915 and 1818, for liquidating the demands of British subjects upon the French Government, who may have omitted to prefer their claims be'bre the late Commission, or whose claims having been preferred before tl:e 1 ite Commission were not adjusted in consequence of such claims having been sent in su4,se quent to the sth of May, 1826, will be permi - ted to bring their adjudication of the French claims under the above treaties, provided that the previous delay shall be shown to have arisen from circumstances over which the parties had no control; and provided, also, that every claim to he so preferred shall be sent in to the present Commissioners within three months from the date of this notice. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 25. Mr. Alderman Wool), Mr. BuLwER, and others, from the Commons, brought up the Blacklriars Bridge Bill, Dramatic Performances Bill, and other private Bills, which were read a first time. The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented a petition from the University of Cambiidge against the Jewish Emancipation Biil. The Chancery Regulation Bill was read a third time and passed. The Earl of HADDINGTON said he should have to present shortly petitions from Glasgow, praying their Lordships either to throw out the Bill entitled the Scotch Burgh Reform Bill, or that they might be heard by counsel against the Bill. But there was one petition which had been intrusted to him, upon which he wished to say a few words. It had been stated in the newspapers in that part of the United Kingdom, that he had given notice of his intention to propose, in Com mittee on that Bill, the insertion of a clause, to the effect th it all inhabitant householders, paying five pounds rent, should be entitled to vote for magistrates in these hutglis ; hut he had never given such notice, nor had any such intention, and should leave himself free and unpiedged when the question came before Parliament. Either from that misapprehension, or from some other cause, be had received a petition from the tradesmen of the city of Edinburgh for the extension of the franchise to all persons in Scotland paying 51. rent. They bad a perfect right to state their wishes, and he felt it his duty to pre sent the petition, expressing his regret that be could not go to the full extent of their prayer.—(Hear.) The petitioners prayed, either that the law might be enacted as they wished, or the Bill rejected altogether. The latter alternative he was more likely to agree to. IRISH CHURCH TEMPORALITIES BILL. On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND, the douse resolved itself into a Committee on this Bill. Clause 79 was agreed to, with some verbal amendments, as were clauses 80 to 89, inclusive. In c!ause 90, at the suggestion of the E. 1 .1 of WICK LOW, the words one hundred were substituted for 50. Clauses 91 to 116, inclusive, were agreed to, with a few verbal amendments. On the 117th clause being put, . Lord WYNFORD moved as an amendment, " That the power of declaring churches vacant where divine worship should have been admitted for the space of three years should be vested in the Bishops or Ordinaries instead of in the Commissioners to be appointed under this Bill." The Earl of RIPON said it would seem, as well as he could understand the Noble and Learned Lord's amend ment, that a power of appeal was to be given from the decision of the Bishop or Ordinary to the Lord Lieutenant and Privy Council ; but the same objection existed against placing the power alluded to in the hands of the Commis sioners. He did not conceive that aoy body would be more competent to discharge this particular duty than the Commissioners. The power would only be applicable to 66 livings out of 1,400; and he would therefore ask their Lordships on what ground it could be supposed the Com missioners would act unfairly. Lord WYNFORD said his chief objection to the clause was that the discretion was vested in the wrong hands. This Bill was most derogatory to the character of the Irish clergy—(Hear)—and his anxiety was, if possible, to save them from some portion of the humiliation intended to be heaped upon theta.—(Heir.) He wished to vindicate their rights and privileges, and therefore it was that he wished this duty to be performed by the Bishops, and not by the Ecclesiastical Board.—(Hear.) The Earl of LIMERICK expressed it as his opinion, that if the clause were allowed to stand it would tend greatly to the subversion of the Protestant Church in Ire land.—(Hear, hear.) Sitting in that House, quietly de bating public affairs, it was impossible for their Lordships to form any adequate idea of the state of continual appre hension under which the Irish clergy lived. He had been credibly informed that many of them had been driven from their duties, and this he believed was true. He should certainly oppose the amendment. Lord PLUNKET said that the clause now under dis cussion was a very material part of the Bill, and in place of destroying any benefices which at present existed or had hitherto existed, notwithstanding the intermission of the performance of divine service for three years, it was the professed object of the Bill to deal fairly and equitably by the Church of Ireland. It had no reference to any inter ference with the due performance of divine service in that country. The object of this clause simply was, to invest the Board of Commissioners with the power of deciding that where divine service had not been performed for the period of three years, they should either forfeit the revenues arising out of such parish to the general fund fur the aug• menta'ion of small livings, or forfeit it for the benefit of the fund itself. This Bill would not prevent the per formance of divine service in any church, although it had not been previously performed for three years, if the Board of Commissioners considered it necessary for the good of religion that it should be resumed. The Duke of CUMBERLAND objected to this Bill as forming a bad and dangerous precedent in undue interfe rence with the affairs of the Church. Lord PLUNKET could only say, in reply to the Noble and Illustrious Duke, that this clause only related to places where divine service had not been performed for three years. In point of fact, its main point was to compel the performance of divine service; and the questio❑ in dispute seemed to be whether the Ordinary of the diocese or the Board of Commissioners should decide in what cases the performance of divine service should be dispensed with in the church. The Noble and Learned Baron opposite (Lord Wynford) had opposed this Bill upon the assumed ground that the granting this power to the Gurimissioners would he i❑ derogation of the proper authority of the Bench of Bishops. Lord WYN FORD ob,erved that what he meant to convey to their Lord;bips was, that it should be in the power of the Bishop of the diocese to determine when and under what circumstances divine service shou'd be resumed in parishes where it had not been performed for three years. Lord PLUNKET—Then the observation cf the Noble and Learned Baron merely went to the extent of saying that the discretion in this ease should be vested in the Bishop of the diocese rather tha❑ in the Board of Commis sioners. Lord WYNFORD—TIie Noble and Learned Lord had so far understood hint correctly. Why take the jurisdic tion froni the Bishop of the diocese ? Lord PLUNKET said that really the Noble and Learned Lord was attempting to make a metaphysical distinction in a case which did not admit of differences. He ' (Lord Plunket) had every desire to understand the Noble and Learned Lord, but for the life and soul of him he could not comprehend the meaning of the Noble and Learned Lord, who never yet hail spoken without a meaning.-.... ( Hear, hear.) It was very true that the Bishops, by spiritual censure, could enforce the residence of the in cumbents upon their benefices, but who was to account for the absence of discretion upon the part of the Bishops in the enforcement of such a regulation ? It was under these circumstances that it was considered necessary t o establish a Board having for its objec t the p rotection of Protestant Christianity in Ireland.--(ilear.) It was said, however, why not take the certificate of toe Bishop as to the propriety of re-opening churches in which divine ser vice had not been performed for three years ? He objected strongly to any such discretion being vested in the Bishops as against the Board of Commissioners. The Bishop might be partial, he might have family objects to answer, and, therefore, he thought it would be safer to trust the power to the Board of Commissioners. If the Com missioners did not discharge their duty properly--if, 58 it was hinted, they were regardless of the interests of reli gion—still they would in all cases be amenable to the tribunal of public opinion, Indeed it would shock the LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 26, 1833. cotnmon sense of mankind if Commissioners so appointed, and for such sacred purposes, were to be guilty of a dere liction of their duty.—(Hear.) Now who were the Com missioners under this Bill ? Why, they were the Most and Right Rev. Prelates of the Irish Church ; and if the Most Rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Dublin) were not now in the House he could speak of him in terms which, if he were absent, every Noble Lord would admit to be emi nently deserved. The Commissioners were to be eleven in number, of whom at least some eight (if not all) were to be clerical persons. Then their Lordships also had the security of the Chief Justice of the King's Bench, an indi vidual too eminent and too high for any panegyric which be could pronounce upon him : they had also the Lord Chancellor of Ireland for the time being, in whom he would confidently express a hope that the Protestant reli gion would never suffer. Upon these grounds he must oppose the amendment. The Marquis of SALISBURY said that if this clause were agreed to it would go for ever to prevent the per formance of divine service in any parish in which it had not been performed for three successive years before the passing of this Bill. The Bishop of EXETER begged leave to state that he meant to give no vexatious opposition to the Bill. His object was, as far as he could, to improve it, and preserve unimpaired the undisputed jurisdiction of the Bishops. A good deal had been said about the patronage of the Crown in these cases. For his own part he hail no apprehension from its exercise or its influence, and it was an undeniable m isrirn of law that no laches cunt(' conclude the Crown in the exercise of its proper patronage. This Bill, if it passed in its present state, would be a great infliction upon the Irish clergy ; it would, in fact, be a Bill of pains and penalties, and he therefore hoped that this clause would be abandoned.—( Hear.) There was a great outcry through out the country against pluralities, and no one could more strongly deprecate sect: abuses than himself ; but if this clause were passed into a law it would increase plurali ties, and as such he felt it to be his duty to oppose it. He believed there was no indisposition in the clergy of the church of Ireland to perform divine service, except in cases where there was no church or licensed building in which to perform ir. He had a return in his hand (the only one, be it remarked, to which he had access) that in the diocese of Cork and Ross sixteen new churches had been built wiibin a few years, and that no less than thirty three communicants bad presented themselves in the course of each successive year. Now did not this fact show that if the Irish people had churches there would be no want of Protestants, and no lack of zeal in the Pro testant clergy ?—(Hear, bear.) In several parishes throughout Ireland there was an anxious desire for the increase of churches ; and in the parish of Balinatnona the parishioners offered to build a church at the expense of of 3501., which would have been accomplished if it were not for the threats and intimidations of the Catholic priesthood and the Irish agitators. Lord MELBOURNE was surprised at hearing the Noble and Learned Lord (Wynford) evince a disposition to support sinecure benefices. He could assure the Noble and Learned Lord that this Bill was not intended as any insult to the Bishops of Ireland. The question was one of great delicacy; indeed it might be considered one of great invidiousness; but this be was prepared to say, the nomination to vacant benefices would be much better placed in the hands of the Board of Commissioners than in the discretion of the Ordinary of the diocese. The great object of this Bill was to conciliate the Protestants of Ireland, but in so doing not to interfere with the general interests of any class of his Majesty's subjects. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said that the clause before the Committee was a very proper subject to be inquired into. He would not believe that benefices could be called sinecures, because divine service had not been performed in certain parish churches within the pe riod of three years. He held in his hand an account of all the benefices i❑ Ireland, and he found that there were only 66 in which divine service had not been performed fur the last three years. It certainly was a melancholy thing that in so many parishes divine service should not have been performed.—(Hear.) But yet he would contend that the non-performance of divine service, under the peculiar circumstances alluded to in the course of this discussion, did not prove that such benefices were sinecures. He did not think that the clause would have an injurious effect upon the interests of the Irish Church if the modifications which he recommended were adopted. The LORD CHANCELLOR looked upon the clause as one of very great importance. He felt much satisfaction at the calm consideration with which the subject had been treated by all sides of the House. But, looking at th e way in which the Board of Commissioners was to be con stituted, he could not see any ground for the apprehensions which some Noble Lords entertained. There could scarcely be a more episcopal body not strictly episcopal. Out of eleven members there were seven either Bishops or of epis. copal nomination. In whatever way he considered the clause, be could see no grounds for the jealousy which was supposed to be likely to arise from the manner of its con stitution and from its authority. He could see no objection on the part of the Crown, which had in the first instance the nomination of the members of the Board as Bishops, and none on the part of the Bishops, as so large a majority of the members of the Board was to be nominated by the Bishops themselves. As to the proposition that the suspend ing of benefices should be in the discretion solely of the Bishop of the diocese, he thought that the inte rests of the Church would be more certainly secured by the discretion being vested in a Board of several members and of episcopal constitution ; and for the Bishop him self of a particular diocese the clause as it stood would be a protection from the imputation of exercising the power improperly. He believed that in some parishes in which service had not been performed for three years the fault had not been in the clergy, and the application of the funds under the clause would serve to remove the causes which prevented them from attending to the duties of the parishes. The Bishop of LONDON was desirous of bringing their Lordships' attention to one view of the clause not yet noticed by any of the Noble Lords who had spoken to the question. In the evidence given before the Committees of both Houses of Parliament respecting the state of Ireland it had been admitted on all hands that the residence of a Protestant clergyman, a man of education, even in a parish in which there were few or no Protestants, was of the greatest possible benefit to the people. He was, there fore, strongly opposed to any measure which could have any tendency to diminish unnecessarily the number of such residents. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought that it would be more appropriate to term those benefices with which the clause proposed to do away non-cures than sinecures. It way to be considered, however, that a great many causes interposed to prevent the church service from being performed in many parts of Irel Ind ; and those causes had been in most active operation precisely in the three years previously to February, 1833, being the period chosen in the clause as that during which non-residence should cause the suspension of the benefice. Now, really, he thought that if it was intended to prevent non-residence the best way would be, if three years were the disqualifying term, to say that a benefice should be suspended for non performance of service during three years from the last vacancy, and not in those three years in which in many parts of Ireland the performance of the Protestant service was rendered by the circumstances of the country totally impossihle.—(Hear, bear.) If the regulation could be carried into effect in a just and equitable manner he was sure that every Noble Lord in that House would be glad to see an end put to what he would call sinecures, the existence of which was not attributable to the clergy, but was an evil growing out of the circumstances of the country of late years. The Earl of SUFFOLK said that the distinction drawn by the Noble Duke appeared to him to amount to this, that sinecure benefices in Ireland were parishes in which there were no churches, and non-cures were those in which there were no souls.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He supported the original clause because he did not think it well to leave so large a discretion to the Bishop of the diocese as would be given by the amendment. He agreed with the Noble Duke that it would be a very desirable thing to put an end to these non-cures. The Earl of WICKLOW had always objected more to this clause than to any other part of the Bill. He was far from finding fault with the desire of his Majesty's Mini sters to diminish the number of non.cures, as the Noble Duke below him had very aptly termed certain benefices, in which non-residence and non-performance of clerical duties had been within late years caused by those instances of Ireland of which, and of the effects of which, their Lordships were well aware. From the returns laid upo❑ their Lordships' table it appeared that out of 200 parishes which would come under the operation of the clause, there were but 66 in which the Commissioners would be war ranted in suspending the benefice, and of these 66 there was a large majority in which the non-performance of the Protestant service was occasioned by circumstances over which the clergymen had no control. He objected, therefore, to the choice of those three years in which there hid been the greatest agitation in the country, and the greatest obstacles to the residence of the clergy, and to the performance if the church service. At the same time he did not think it well to leave the suppression of benefices altogether to the discretion of the Bishop of the diocese ; and he thought that if the clause were properly amended, so as to make any other three years than those of agitation the ci iterion of suspension, and to give the Bishop of the diocese a share of the discretion, but not the whcle responsibility of the suspension, there would be very little of further opposition to the progress of the Bill through their Lordships' House.—(Hear.) Earl GREY believed that the gravest and most success ful charge made against the Church of Ireland by its ene mies was that it derived a large revenue for services which were not, and which in many cases could not, be performed. Now he thought that the best mode of redressing any grievance which might really exist in this respect was to apply the funds derived from emoluments of benefices to which that change would apply to the removal of those causes which occasioned the non-performance of clerical duty. Noble Lords had said that the non-performance of that duty had been caused by many circumstances, and not always by the want of a church or of a congregation, but by terror and intimidation.—(Hear.) Well, then, surely the Board could discriminate between the various causes, and their Lordships bear in mind that a full discre tion was left the Commissioners—(Hear)—and where the non-performance of his duty was occasioned by violence offered to the clergyman they would take care to put him in such a situation that he could perform his duties. He had no objection to the obligation that in all cases of suspension a record of the causes of suspension should be kept by the Commissioners ; but, looking to the constitu tion of the Board, he could not think that any apprehen sion need he entertained that they would use the power intrusted to them for any other purposes than to promote the interest of the Protestant Church itself. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY felt the saute confidence in the commission as that expressed by the Noble Earl (Grey) and the Noble and Learned Lord. He had no doubt that, with a commission so constituted, the interests of the Church of Ireland would be in no danger. There was one point on which he differed from the Noble Earl, but it was not one of great importance. He saw no reason why, in the case of a benefice to be suspended, the Bishop of the diocese should not interfere. It was most desirable that this respect should be shown to his authority. What he desired, therefore, was, that his consent should be necessary to the suspension of any bene fices within his diocese. If it should appear that his assent was refused from any interested family motives, then the matter might be submitted to the Lord Lieutenant i❑ Council. He did not apprehend any difference of opinion between the commission and the Bishop, unless the com missioners should he in error. When a benefice was suspended, he thought it desirable that the funds of the benefice should be allowed to accumulate .`or the purpose of building in it a church and a glebe-house, in place of going to the general fund. If there was no Protestant inha bitant, then the income of the benefice might be handed over to the general fund. He wished it also to be left at the discretion cf the Bishop whether a curate should be appointed, with a reasonable stipend, to perform the duties in a suspended parish, or whether they were to be per formed by the clergyman of the neighbouring parish. Earl GREY would suggest a proposition which he thought would satisfy all parties. It was, that the Bishop of the diocese in which a parish was proposed to be sus pended should have a voice in the Commission, and thus a conflict of opinion between the Bishop and the Commis.. sion would be avoided. There was more difficulty as regarded the revenues of the benefice. He thought it would be better they should go to the general fund. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the alteration sug gested by his Noble Friend would get rid of much of his difficulty. Lord WHARNCLIFFE suggested that the Bishop of the diocese should have a voice also where the question was whether the suspension of a benefice was to be taken off or not. Earl GREY had no objection that the Bishop of the diocese should have a voice in that case also. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said the solid objections of his Noble Friend (the Dike of Wellington) to the clause were not yet answered. Lord BEXLEY recommended that the clause should be postponed for the present. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE objected to that part of the Most. Rev. Prelate's amendment which provided that the revenues of any suspended benefice should go, not to the general fund, but to the building a church and glebe-house i❑ the particular benefice. Upon this last point the House divided-- For the Amendment Against it Majority against Ministers On re-entering the gallery, we found that Earl GREY had moved that the House should resume. Lord KENYON complained of that course of proceed ing. He had heard no satisfactory reason assigned why their Lordships could not then proceed with the Bill. The Earl of WICKLOW was understood to say, that it was quite unusual to resist a motion similar to that made by the Noble Earl. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that his Noble Friend, who had the conduct of the measure, desired to have time to consider what other alterations might be necessary to make in the measure in consequence of the alteration which their Lordships had just made. If the Noble Baron desired to take the conduct of the measure into his hands, he had no doubt that his Noble Friend would readily agree to place it in the hands of the Noble Baron. But it that were not the case, it was necessary that the alteration should be considered. The Duke of WELLINGTON was understood to sly, that he thought the further consideration of the clause should be postponed. The House then resumed. The Committee to sit again to-morrow (this day). Their Lordships adjourned at eleven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 25. The House resumed at half past five o'clock. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that he would ask a question to-morrow relative to the conduct of a Noble Lord at the W.ra•ick election. . .. Mr. O'CONNELL also inquired what progress bad been made in the report upon the Ecclesiastical Courts ? Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he bad no doubt the report would soon be before the House. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Mr. O'CONNELL rose to call the attentio❑ of the House to a matter which he considered of very great im portance—the manner in which the proceedings of that House were reported in the public priots. Colonel PERCEVAL rose to order, and moved that strangers should withdraw. The gallery, however, was not cleared. Colonel PERCEVAL, as soon as the disturbance created by the motion for the removal of strangers had subsided, was understood to suggest to Mr. O'Connell the propriety of withdrawing his motion. Sir E. KNATCHBULL said, as the standing orders of the House did not recognise any reports of their pro ceedings, he thought the Hon. and Learned Member must be out of order in discussing such a subject. The SPEAKER understood the object of the Hon. and Learned Member's motion to be to enforce the standing orders of the House, in consequence of the inaccuracy of the reports of their proceedings. Now, if by sufferance such reports were published, it was competent for any Hon. Member to move the standing order for the exclu sion of strangers on that or any other ground which he might think fit. 11 , 1 r. O'CONNELL moved that the proprietor of the Morning Chronicle should to-morrow be called to the bar of the House to answer for a breach of the privileges of the House in publishing reports of the debates. He meant afterward: to move that the proprietors of the Times, Morning Herald, and Morning Post Newspapers, should likewise be called to the bar for a similar breach. But he gave the priority to the Morning Chronicle, on account of the article which ap peared that day, excusing the omissions of a report of a speech of his (Mr. O'Connell's). The article in question exhibited evidences of shrinking; but he found that the very same day a speech of his (Mr. O'Connell's) was treated in the same manner. He had ascribed the inferi ority of the reports to incapacity as the most charitable view of the subject, and had attributed that incapacity to the falling off in the wages of the reporters ; but he found (PRICE ID.) th it was not the case. He was, therefore, compelled to suppose that there were some other motives. He did not complain of the misreporting of his own speech in parti• calm., for be b. lieved that Hon. Members had in general been very imparti illy misreported. The Honourable Member then proceeded to state that he had procured from the stamp-office a list of the Journal Proprietary of the Metropolis, and that he should wage war with them all till he defeated them—that he would move day by day for their appearance at the bar of the House far I.l•each of privilege. He alluded to the Morning Chronicle, as part proprieted by an lion. Member of the House, whom he would not then ramie. He alributed the defec•s he im puted in the reports of Parliamentary speeches to the de teriorated character of the reporters. He then denounced the monopoly of the press, and said that a capital of 20,000/. was insufficient to originate a new morning paper. The chi f burden of the Hon. Member's com plaints was that of his own speeches—those he deemed the best were often not reported at all. Of all the morn ing papers, the Morning Post was this one in which he had observed the greatest impartiality—a circum stance which probably arose from the reporters being gene rally Scotchmen. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then laid on the table of the House copies of the Morning Chronicle and Times of yesterday, with the legal docu ments from the stamp-office, which served to show the proprietorship of these journals ; and moved that Mr. W. I. Clement he called to the bar of the House fur publish ing certain reports, purporting to be accounts of their proceedings. Mr. O'DWYER seconded the motion. He had him self, by his literary labour, been greatly assisted in his progress to the station of independence in which he was at present placed ; but he could not allow that having been engaged in putting down despotism of other kinds, the House should submit to the spurious despotism which it was now attempted to exercise over them. The fats of Members of that House ought not to depend upon the caprice or corruption of reporters. The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from a report in a morn ing paper, in which the Hon. and Learned Member fot the University of Oxford (than whom no man practised more unvarying courtesy) was made to speak of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin and " his tail." This could not be a mistake, but was a wilful falsehood. If it were meant by the writer that he (Mr. O'Dwyer) was a joint of that tail, his answer was, that he had been returned to Parliament independently, by a free constituency. He heartily approved of his Hon. and L-arned Friend's mo tion, because it would bring the question to a short issue. The SPEAKER the❑ put the question, that Mr. Ce ment be ordered to attend at the bar of the Horse. Lord ALT HORP—The complaint of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman of a breach of the privileges of this House, comes before us in rather an extraor dinary shape—(Cheers and laughter)—because, although his complaint is, that the speeches in this House are reported in the newspapers, the cause of his complaint is, that his speeches are not reported.—(Great laughter.) The motion of the Hon. and Learned Member is in its technicality very extraordinary.—(Hear, hear, hear.) I am scre that no man—l am sure that no Gentle man in this House—would wish to do any tiling that could have the effect of preventing the fair report ing of the debates of this House.—(Loud cheers.) I believe, generally speaking, that the debates are reported very fairly.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I say, gene rally speaking.—(Hear.) I cannot say at present that I am a very good judge, for the House might be aware that I have not a great deal of time to read them— (Hear) —but when I have had occasion to look at what has taken place in this House, I have thought that it has been fairly done.—(Hear.) I certainly do think it is for the interests of those persons who report the pro ceedings, as well as it is for the interest of the public, that the reports should be done with the greatest impartiality, and therefore I do believe that, in departing from that principle, they could not be acting according to their own interests.—(Hear, hear.) I dare say by this time the Honourable and Learned Gentleman has seen a little of the effects of what is called passive resis tance—(Loud laughter, and repeated cheerings)— but I ant prepared to say, that no person who wishes to see this privilege continued under sufferance—to the benefit, I am sure, of the community at large—but must be anxious that it ba exercised with the greatest impartiality.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The attention of the House, however, being now called to the subject, and the Hon. and Learned Gentleman having given expression to his sentiments, and the wish of the House being that this privilege should be exercised with impartiality, I hope that gentlemen will not so readily take offence at any thing that occurs, and I certainly do hope that the Hon. and Learned Mem ber will not persevere in his motion : for we could not in reason or common sense call any person to the Bar for publishing the debates, all of us knowing that they are regularly published. I hope the Hon. and Learned Mem ber will be satisfied with the notice he has taken of the subject, and withdraw his motion.—(Loud cheers.) Dr. BALDWIN said that, looking at the papers gene rally, the Hon. Member for Dublin had been the best treated of any in the House by the Press of London. Not a Member on that side of the House, and none ex cepting the Right Hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury benches (who had more frequent occasions to address the House) hail any thing like the same space afforded them, as the Hon. and Learned Member.—(Hear, hear.) He thought, therefore, that the Hon. and Learned Member had no right to complain. He (Dr. Baldwin) did not feel any particular regard for that Hon. Member, but he did consi der him to be one of the main props of the Irish represen tation in that House, ant; he should regret exceedingly that any feeling should emist, between the Hon. Gentleman and the press, by which his service to the country might be reduced. Ha entreated him, therefore, to withdraw his motion.--(Hear.) It ought to be considered that the pub lic press of London was not confined in its operation to the metropolis, nor to England, Ireland, or Scotland, but it extended over the whole empire, and he might say over all the world.—(Hear.) He would repeat, that it did not become a Member to make such a motion, who had received so much fairness at their hands.—(Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL would only modify his motion by altering the day for the appearance of the proprietor of time paper from to-morrow to Monday.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," and " No, no.") Mr. FINN (as we understood the Hon. Gentleman) wished some mode could be adopted of asserting the privi leges of the House only with reference to partial and unfair reports. Lord STORMONT was at a loss to know with what view the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin wished to call the parties in question to the bar. It must be either to punish them for the offence of publishing the proceed ings of that House—a proposition which could hardly be made—or to dismiss them untouched. That was the situation in which the motion placed them. The indivi duals in question were to be brought up upon a breach of privilege, which breach of privi:ege was publishing the proceedings in that House ; and then the charge that was to be made against them was not that they published re ports of the speeches of other Hon. Members, but that they did not publish reports of the speeches of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. It was no doubt much to be desired that the reports of the proceedings of that House ought to be fairly and impartially reported ; and be was certainly of opinion that during the last two years the re ports had not been given with so much ability and impar tiality as formerly. But he did not see how that could be remedied by called the parties in question to the bar. _ . Mr. O'CONNELL, in answer to the Noble Lord, said that he had not placed a breach of privilege in its present shape. If any proposition were brought forward in a tan gible shape, to render reports impartial, he would support it. Lord J. RUSSELL supposed no one could deny that it was exceedingly proper that the reports of their pro ceedings should be fairly given. But he could not accede to the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The view which he (Lord J thn Russell) took of questions of privilege, was that the House was too liable to come to a hasty decision respecting them. On this occasion he per fectly aereed with the Hon. and Learned Member, that the indulgence of the House in permitting the debates ti , he published had been abused. This was not a solitary instance of its being so. He recollected, that when on some occasion the present Lord Chancellor expressed an opinion personally unfavourable to the reporters, his pu nishment was, that for a time all his opinions on ques tions of law and of foreign and domestic policy were suppressed. He agreed that the circumstance in question was an abuse of power, hut he did not Pee his w iy out of the difficulty, and thought that if the House adopted the proposition of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, they would scarcely extricate themselves without some lose of dignity. He should therefore vote agan' s t the motion. Mr:. WHALLEY observed that the wonder was, not Vat there were occasional inaccuracies in the reports of the debates in that House, but that those reports were given so well. It should he remembered, that if all the speeches in a debate were reported at full length, a single newsp.per would not contain them. The best check which existed against any undue proceedings in that House was, that the discussions upon every subject were con veyed by means of the newspapers to all parts of the env. p re. if a complaint were made that the speech of an Hon. Member were misreported, a fair occasion might present itself for the interference of the House; but when the complaint was that the spe..ich of an Hon. Member bad not been reported at all, he was at a loss to understand in what terms the Speaker could express hims.lf, if the offending party were called to the bar. He should cer tainly, vote against the motior. Mr. TENNYSON said, if it were a breach of privdepa to report, it must be a breach of privilege to misreport. Now the omission of any -peches in a debate placed th© proceedings of that House in an erroneous point of view. He thought some means might, in a Committee, be found of obviating the evil. But he perfectly agreed with the Noble Lord that great difficulty would attend the course taken by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin. He hoped, therefore, the Hon. and Learned Member would be satisfied with what had taken place in the discussion, and if the error were repeated he would consider in what better mode to proceed. He recommended the lion. and Learned Member to withdraw his motion. Mr. SPRING RICE said, that if ever there was an occasio❑ which required this step of avoiding the expres sion of an opinion by the House, and of adopting the previous question, it was this. The course proposed by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin would cont.• promise the true privileges of the House, as it could le id to no satisfactory result. No one could suggest what they were to do if the motion were carried. On the contrary, if it were negatived, that might compromise the privi leges of the House. When he saw the notice of the Hon. and Learned Member on the order book, he thought that it was merely intended as a warning. He would not oc cupy the attention of the House with any details respect ing so unimportant a perso❑ as himself. All he woral r ay was, that when he was in the position in which the 1100 and Learned Member now stood, he found that the best course to adopt was to pass by the matter with total indifference, rather than place the House in a situatio❑ of difficulty. In his opinion, the only remedy for the evil was to be found in the impartiality and good sense of the public. Wnat other remedy was there? Would they have official reporters? In that case, everything must be taken down, and a valueless mass would be produced, that would be perfectly useless. The public required to have reports of the proceedings of that house ; and the public, by the exercise of their judgment, must render those reports impartial. Without that, no interference of the House could be beneficial ; and unless any attempt were made, by distortion, to give a colouring injurious out of doors to the character and honour of individual Members, the less the House interfered the better. On those grounds, he would move the previous question—ft precedent for which existed in the case of Thomas Franklin, in the year 1771. As to the privilege of excluding persons from the House, that was a privilege with which he thought they ought never to part. Valuable as the pub lication of the debates generally was, times and circum stances might arise which would render that publication undesirable. The privilege ought, therefore, to be pre served ; but be did not think that any case had now been made out for its exercise. Mr. O'CONNELL asked the Hon. Member if he did ❑ot think the omission of all notice of a speech a ease ? As long as there remained a thread of their privileges, he would not submit to lie punished by the reporters. He had given his notice in the hope that it might have a pro per effect ; but, on the contrary, the right to continue the practice in question had been audaciously asserted. Ile was persuaded that it was absolutely necessary that the House should have reporters of their own. He would certainly persevere, and if this privilege were trampled upon, be would go on to move that the gallery be cleared ; for he should be unworthy of the great city which sent him there, if he were to submit to the basest of all despotisms. Mr. SANDFORD said that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman talked of punishment. He owned, that after having heard the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's original complaint, be was very little surprised at what had taken place. to his opinion, there was as much fairness and accuracy in the reports of the proceedings in that House as could be expected. Mr. O'CONNELL asked what reports the Hon. Ge❑tleman was speaking of ? Mr. SANDFORD answered, of the reports generally. In his opinion that House would do well to imitate the example of the other House, and to assign a proper and convenient place for the reporters. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman complained of having been misreported. Mr. O'CONNELL observed that he had not said a word of himself. Mr. SANDFORD said that the only way in which the reporters could act was not to report the Hon. and Learned Gentleman at all. Mr. BUCKINGHAM was understood to eulogise the system adopted in the Chamber of Deputies in France, and to recommend that accommodation similar to that afforded in the House of Peers should be provided in that Haase. Sir R. H. INGLIS understood that in his absence allu sion had been made to an expression attributed by one of the Morning Journals to him, which he had certainly never used. He should be content with stating, however, 'hat the feeling excited with reference to that expression had no need to be so strong in Ireland, since in those other parts, and to those individuals to which it had once been applied—such gallant sou's as an Argyle or a Gordon, for instance--it had never been considered as an epithet of degradation, but one of honour and of glory. As to the more immediate question, he must say he was perfectly astonished at the general acetiracy—(Cheers)—at the more than extraordinary fidelity with which the reports of that House were given—a fidelity which was almost marvellous, so instinctively and instantaneously were the ideas of Hon. Members caught hold of by the genlewen in the gallery.—( Hear, hear.) Sir It. PEEL said if Mr. Clement were called to the bar of that House, he really could not understand in what manner they were to address him—(A laugh)—or what promise they should exact.—(Hear, hear.) The real question was, that the power of that House was so great that they were afraid to exercise it.—(Hear.) If they were to exclude reporters altogether, such a proceeding would he entirely dissonant to the feelings of the public, and would inflict a serious injury on the business of that House and of the country—(Hear)—and yet what other control had they than by a threat, which, however, they would be all averse to putting into execution? There was to be sure another way in which they could proceed, and that was by authorizing a body of men to act as their own reporters. But there were many objections to a recog nised body, for their reports must not only be very accu rate but verbal, which ne believed would be found very inconvenient to many of them.—(Hear, and laughter.) He did not hesitate to say that the present plan was the preferable one. Whether verbal reports of proceedings would raise the character of that House with the country—. (A laugh)—he left to the judgment of each individual gentleman. Indeed he believed that under such a system it would be found. impossible in the House of Commons to give faithful transcripts of what occurred. But as to the , iomplaint then before the House, in his opinion they must look to the public for a corrective.—(Hear.) The speeches of the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin were of far too much importance to the country to be suppressed, and be might depend he would triumph over the efforts now made for that purpose. This casual colli sion between the Honourable Gentleman and the press— (Laughter)—would soon pass away ; and if he would be advised by him, he would at once withdraw his motion.— (Cheers.) By devising any new means of making the public acquainted with their proceedings, it was his own opinion that they would not at all improve the reports.-- (Hear, hear.) He had heard with great alarm the state ment made by the Hon. and Learned Member the alter /lay that the salaries of reporters had bees reduced from six to two guineas a week ; fur he, of course, concluded that the interest of the public in the proceedings of that House had fallen off precisely in the same ratio—(Loud laughter)—thst they took only one-third an interest in cheat that they formerly did.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentle man had, however, corrected that mistake. Now, though he did not deny that the conduct which the Honourable :Wernher complained of was a great abuse of the in fulgence of that House, he felt bound to Pay chat the reports iti the public journals were :ze nerally characterised by great impartiality and wonder ul fidelity. When he saw the Honourable Gentleman telling foul of the reporters for their inaccuracy, be roust rewind him that there were times when it was impos si ble T, avoid errors. That very evening when an f j -17. 0 :: the lemon (Mr. Buckingham, we believe) rose l d :t the unavoid. )4;:ise of leaving it—(.A laugh)—and it was impossible ible noise attendant on their departure, n like correctly (card. the Hon. Gentleman could be anythe motion,g but (card. His advice was not to press !o House, from forty to fifty Members rose,ida to a ddress the pur. public, who wool I cave the m atter in the hands of hortly right itself if occasion required. It was better to p resent, a • a ll events, that tl:e mqti should e th an that it should be n gativ.:si. It jass,i (e wer rut d one a nother fortnight would not e lapse b e f ore t h e re 1 ,.14R5. THOMSON'S NEW NOVEL. "Is day was published, in 3 vols. post Svo., Vi b es N S T A NC E. 6 , 4 w: 1 Y the Author of Life of Henry VIII.," & . c. p Nlt v,uld place this work beside the Recollections of a rhey are worthy of each other."—Atlas. p h rits Of bustle a nd dialogue - characters of all kinds pass and jol t afore us ; di nner s, balls, card parties. with their appro ."t*ell;animvitsTof mirth, flirtation, and scandal, fill up Bentley, New Burlington-street. 41 4 _ it, et " this day, by R. HEWARD, 5, Wellington koi Strand, and to be had of all Booksellers, No. 1., kt -. 4 B v o ., price Is., of "GLISH H ISTORY for tile PEOPLE The of ENGLAND. t 4 th e REIGN of the STUARTS in the Lives of some t kost Emi nen t S tatesmen . 7 5 GRADUATE of the UNIVERSITY of CAMBRIDGE. I. contains the Life of Hampden. 4,, TO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES. p3plete System of Family Devotions, by the Rev. '4EXANDER FLETCHER, Finsbury Chapel, Lon- Oh. Now publishing in M on thl y P arts , 2 s . eac h, to ut completed in Twelve Parts. A . GUIDE for FAMILY DEVOTIONS : Containing -1; A HYMN. fi t !i• A PORTION of SCRIPTURE, with suitable Re th;4l. A PRAYER, for each Morning and Evening of biy in the Year. tf Work will consist of 730 Hymns-730 Portions hi,ZlPture, with Rtflections—and 730 Prayers, and the "Ir 7 will be illustrated by beautiful Engravings. Virtue, 26, Ivy-lane.