The Sun. — London, England, 1844-06-07 00:00:00

fourtblZbittiott SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. GLOBE.—The Dissenters' Chapels Bill is within sight of port, uninjured by the stormy opposition by which it has been assailed on its passage. The debate which last night arose on the second reading will go far to remove the misapprehensions of the sincere, and the misrepresentations of the interested, opponents of the measure. The very large majority of 190 in favour of the measure may well be appealed to by the Ministry as an answer to the accusations brought against their pru dence, for damaging their position with the country by in troducing the Bill, and persisting in pressing it against tho formidable opposition which its object had provoked from the confederation of Churchmen and Dis senters, who had entered into a kind of holy alliance against it. We have reason to believe that so late as Wednesday the Go vernment was undetermined as to proceeding with the Bill during the present session. It was only upon an assurance that the opposition would give a cordial support to the mea sure, that Sir Robert Peel consented to brave the opposition with which he was threatened from the Inglis and Plumptre section of his own friends. To allow the Government to stand committed, to the Bill, malgre the expostulations and up braidings of the " unto' pious" portion of the community, was in Sir Robert Peel both courageous and politic. Had the Premier succumbed to the party on his own benches which sought in this instance to force upon him, as principles of legis lation, the dogmas of their school, he would have resigned him self to the most intolerant of guides, and would inevitably have found himself committed to the policy he affected to countenance, when in opposition, for the purpose of obtaining theiraid to obtain the Government. Sir R. Peel having obtained his object, he now gently loosens the bonds by which the bigots of his party sup posed he was bound to them for ever. He shows them, in every possible way, that though they were valuable in their place for the purpose of keeping up a delusion in the country, he has too much prudence to attempt to carry on the Government upon the principles they would force upon his adoption. Sir R. Peel knows that he can depend for aid npon the men he once treated after another fashion. When any measure in accordance with the principles upon which they, as a Government, sought to legislate, is endangered by the im practicable adl:erents to obsolete principles, Sir Robert Peel knows that he may depend on his opponents for the necessary aid to carry such measures. The Liberals are ready to rescue him from the hands of his dangerous allies, who are only held in subjection by the certainty that their ,defection on such occasions would be more than made up from the oppo site benches. We think that such conduct on the part of the Liberals is marked by consistency of principle and generosity of spririt. They see their own principles of legislation adopted by those who successfully resisted them, when made the basis of measures brought forward by them selves. Instead of reproaching the Government with incon sistency, and imitating the example so frequently set them by their political opponents, the Liberals show their fixed attach ment to principles by aidins , the Government in carrying mea sures in accordance with them. Thus the cause of truth and justice is advanced. Those who have become converts to the principles they formerly denounced, are open to the accusations of these who once acted with them in check ing and counteracting their progress. The Liberals are, hew ever, worthy of commendation for thus showing themselves free from the factious spirit which was formerly embodied and arrayed against them. By imitating such an example, they might, it is true, avenge their own cause. But the paltry party advantage would be more than counterbalanced by the loss of reputation they would incur, as a party ; and, with the loss of character, of the moral force which is derived from it, in the estimation of the country. The de bate and division of last night will afford a new illustration of the general truths vie have here stated. But for the aid which the Liberals generously afforded to the measure of the Government, it would have been abandoned, or defeated. Mr. Alacaulay's admirable exposition and defence of the principle of the Bill aided and enforced Sir William Follett's vindication of the legal points which are involved in the change it proposes to effect. That part of Dlr. Alacaulay's speech, in which he demonstrated the inconsistency of the Dissenting portion of the opponents, was most effective. By arraying themselves against themselves— their conduct, when seeking relief from laws which affect their own privileges, with their conduct in resisting similar changes of the law when those changes are necessay to afford relief to others—left nothing to be desired. It must close the mouths of the most clamorous, and convince them of the mischiefs they are likely to inflict upon themselves, when they thus stultify their cause by striving to injure others. STANDARD.—" The Socinians' Frauds Protection Bill" was last night read in the House of Commons by a large majority, 307 to 117. The second reading was moved by the Attorney-General, whose appearance in the House, after his late serious indisposition, occasioned a degree of satisfaction which was warmly and generally acknow ledged. Undoubtedly, the adoption of the measure, odious and mischievous as it is, by a man so universally respected and beloved as Sir W. Follett, greatly softened the tone of those whose duty it was to oppose it; but of course nothing could materially affect the numbers on both sides. The Ministerial party was reinforced by the Roman Catholics, represented by Air. Sheil, with the semi-Romanist party repre sented by Dlr. Alonckton Alilnes, and that party to which we do do not like to give its proper name, but which it may he re membered a few years ago, under the guidance of Mr. Joseph Hume, divided thirteen against the acknowledgment of a Divine Providence in an Act of Parliament. Supported by tires respectable allies, or rather supporting them—for the Romanists. semi- Romanists, and the others are really the prin cipals in the case, and the Ministers merely auxiliaries—the Government divided in the great majority that we have men tioned. There is something remarkable in the number assembled upon this occasion (which, if the matter discussed merely respects a few suits more or less in the courts of equity, as is pretended, can be regarded as of but very inferior interest) a House of 430 —pretty nearly the fullest House of the :session—was somehow collected—nobody will say to give effect to the feeling of the country ; but how collected, and with what ends we can only partially explain. Ihe Roman Catholics were there to damage the Protestant religion and the Protestant Church to the utmost of their power, as (but for a certain oath) it is their duty to do—the Tractarians were there, to provide facilities for the nursing of every heresy—we hardly need say with what purpose the enemies of religious truth mustered in their full force. There were, however, persons voting in the majority, whose motives our sagacity cannot fathom. They will, how ever, no doubt, be able to explain these motives to their con stituents upon the hustings, as it is very certain they will be called upon to explain them, and in a somewhat peremptory tone, too. Last night's vote is not an event to be forgotten in a hurry by a people like the people of England ; and though it was said that there was a signal prepon derance of argument in favour of the Bill last night, we can find none of these arguments in its favour that will bear the cool free air of the hustings. This boast of the preponderance of argument, indeed, affords to us a remarkable illustration of the opposite conclusions at which men arrive, according to the side on which they contemplate a subject ; for if we were called upon to say on which side the preponderance of argument lay, we should not hesitate a moment to decide in favour of Sir Robert Inglis and his friends ; and if called upon to recon cile this decision with our respect for the men of indisputable wisdom and integrity, to some of whom we are unfortunately opposed, who have come to an adverse decision, we should say that the whole difference lies in our respective views of— what is an argument? They to whom we are opposed may think a consideration of expediency, and of very low ex pediency too, an argument in such a case. We think diffe rently ; we think that in all measures respecting the adminis tration of justice, and still more in all measures affecting the truth of religion, considerations of right and considerations of right only, are the arguments to be admitted. It seems to us no less absurd to admit arguments of expediency in questions of justice and of religious truth, than to drag in abstract moral principles into an argument upon a corn-tax or a bank regulation. Right has its department, and expediency has a different department • and questions affecting justice and re li g i on are not to be argued upon maxims drawn from the " expediency" category. Now, what are the arguments advanced in favour of the Bill ? First, there is precedent, the statutable prescriptions. We have answered that argument by showing that the ground neon which statutable prescriptions rest is, the assumed acquiescence of the party out of possession. and the consequent inference that the possessor has had a title, or proof of a title lost by lapse of time; but cessante ratione ces sat et lex, and therefore no prescription has hitherto been per mitted to protect an a b use o f a trust, because in that case the sentinel himself has turned traitor. We might answer the argument from precedent by the nullum tempus laws in favour of the Crown and the Ch urc h. It has never been pre tended that these laws were not just and wise at the time of their introduction ; but surely at no time were Crown and Church property more exposed to invasion, than religious trust property is proved to be at present, by the very reasons as signed for passing the Bill now in the House of Commons. Mr. Macaulay talked of the statutes of Merton and West minster in the thirteenth century, as establishing the doctrine of prescription. Does Mr. Macaulay know what was the tenure of property in the thirteenth century, or rather does he not know that whatever formal titles men might claim, all depended upon the uncertain breath of a tyrant, or the equally precarious award of the role du fait? Why not revive the trial by combat, among the other legal institutions of the thirteenth century? But this is all idle babble. We have now means for perpetuating proofs of title and of ascertaining title, if lawyers would only let us use them, such as our ancestors never dreamed of, and there fore there is now tenfold less excuse for smothering justice under prescription than there was even a century ago. Prescription is the slovenly resource of barbarism, or of a barbarous neglect in the administration of justice. It is not as we advance in civilization that we ought to multiply prescriptive laws. _ - - - MARKET INTELLIGENCE. (From the London New Price Current of June 7.) SUGAR. —To-day there was a good business transacted in West India Sugar for all purposes, but the merchants were compelled to accept lower rates, making the decline for the week Is 6d on low and mid, and is per cwt on better sorts, mid yellow Tobago was sold at 58s per cwt. The total pur chases for the week are 1,550 hhds and trcs. REFINED—There has been less business transacted in Re fined Goods this week, and prices are rather lower. To-day the Grocers purchased with much caution; 76s 6d is the value of brown, and 77s 6d for standard Lumps. Maunmus.—There has been a greater desire manifested by importers to realise, and the market having been largely supplied, has produced a decline in prices of is to is 6cl per cwt. EAST INDIA.—The market has been bettter supplied with Bengal Sugar this week, at a decline im previous prices of is per cwt. This afternoon the market was much better sup plied with Foreign free-labour Sugar ; Manilla only partly sold at easier rates, viz., middling damp yellow at 17s, low ditto 16s to I6s 6d, middling brown ditto 145 to 15s, low 12s 6d to 13s, good 17s 6d to 18s; sound was all taken in, good greyish yellow at 19s to 19s 6d. Si am was nearly all taken in at 13s to 14sfor v ery low 18s for damp brown a few lots sold at 18i to 22s Gd for damp white, grey,; and 23s 6d for sound white. Java of sound quality was withdrawn ; washed sold at 18s Gd to 20s 6d for good greyish, being about the value. _ FORVlON.—Holders of yellow Havannah Sugar submitting to a reduction on former rates of 6d to Is per cwt, buyers have been induced to operate more freely. To-day a cargo of yellow Havannah Sugar afloat was sold at about 21s 6d per cwt. a MOLASSES.—There are sellers of West India upon rather lower terms, but few purchasers are to be met with, and the private sales are only 100 puns, chiefly at 248 for good De merara, being 6d to is per cwt under former rates. Bengal Sysup 14s to 17s per cwt. For Jamaica Honey prices are rather lower. TEA.—The market has presented a flat appearance all the week, and holders generally have been more inclined to re- ; alise ; the business transacted has been almost exclusively I confined to the p u bli c sales, which commenced on Tuesday ; and finished yesterday ; the trade evinced little inclination to purchase black T ea, and the demand was unusually limited, al thoughmerchants were desirous to realise, and sub rnditt .e valuedtiog°arae s eduction on th e rates of the last auctions. To aytu e wa s little business done in any ki nd of Tea : 101 d to lld is the of baa a dull a p pearance. comraon Congo u , cash, The market COCOA.—West India is offered rather under last week's prices. Trinidad taken in—good red at 465, good fair 44s to 455, ordinary 425, middling grey 42s 6d to 435, and ordinay 40s to 41s 6d, sea damaged however sold at 30s to 39s per cwt. Foreign is held with firmness. COFFEE.—lmporters of West India are still anxious sel lers, and have submitted to a reduction on former rates of 2s to 3s per cwt, but upon these terms several of the trade have been induced to operate. This afternoon the demand was brisker for Ceylon Coffee, and 1,350 bags bulked at public sale were all sold at former rates, low good ord pale fetched 45s 6(1 to 475, good ord 47s 6d to 48s 6d, fine ordinary rather coluory 49s Gd to 51s 6d, fine fine ordinary Demerara sort 57s 6d ; privately several par cels were disposed of. The quantity on the water is 60,000 bags. Of Mocha some parcels were sold privately at full prices, but 17 bales at auction were taken in at 71s to 72s for good middling greenish, and 70s for middling yellow. 614 bags of Manilla, sound was all withdrawn, but the damaged sold at 22s 6d to 245, and very low lOs to 12s per cwt. RUM, BRANDY AND HOLLANDS.—Jamaica Rum upon rather lower terms, 3s 3d for fair quality 30 to 31 per cent overproof. In Demerara, strong quality 32 to 38 per cent overproof at 3s 2d to 3s 4d. Leewards, proof at 2s 2d to 2s 3d, and 5 to 6 per cent overproof 2s 41d. Cal cutta Rumat is lOid to is lld for proof with cer tificate. Brandy at the following terms :—Cognac, best brands of the vintage of 1838—hhds at 5s sd, puns 5s 3d ; ditto, 1839, hhds 5s 3d, puns 5s Id ; ditto, 1840, hhds 5s 2d, puns ss; ditto, 1841, hhds 5s ld, puns 4s lid ; ditto, 1842, hhds 4s Ild, puns 4s 9d, mid and and good mid qualities 3s to 4s 3d, and low 2s 8d to 2s lld per gallon. For Geneva prices are firmer; sales for shipping made at is 9d; fine in small parcels for home consumption has fetched 2s 2d to 3s. English Corn Spirits 80s 2d per gallon, cash. SAGO.—At 16s 6d to lis 6d for middling white small pearl. Sago Flour 205 to 21s per cwt. Arrowroot, Bermuda taken in at lOd to 100 ; Nassau at 2d, St Vincents 4d, but 10 brls wore sold at 8d to 9d per lb. RlCE.—There has been a brisk demand for Bengal, and the rates paid are rather above those of this day week. For Java higher prices being required has checked business. Cleaned Rice at 13s to lis for Patna, and 21s to 26s per cwt for Ca rolina. This afternoon Siam Rice taken in at lOs for mid dling white. SPICES.—For black Pepper former rates are sustained, and a good demand has been experienced. This afternoon Cassia Lignea met with little attention, and 228 chests at public sale sold at 64s Gd for good mid, and 53s to 54s for good ord, being for the former the previous value, but 2s to 3s per cwt lower for the latter. Of Malabar Ginger 148 chests of su perior quality went at sBs to 110 s for bold clean. The market was quiet for Pepper, and 403 bags common stalky and dusty Sumatra at auction sold at lid to 214 being Ad to id per lb cheaper. INDIGO.—The market has a dull appearance for East India Indigo, and few transactions have taken place in any descsip tions this week ; those parties that are inclined to sell are compelled to take prices 2d or 3d per lb under those of the last quarterly sale. Oita,—Palm Oil at 27s 6(1 to 28s for fine quality. Cocoa Nut Oil at 26s to 27s per cwt. Cod is 331 to 331 lOs, pale Seal 33/, anp to arrive 321; Southern here 26/ lOs to 321 for common to fine. The market is firm for Sperm Oil; fire British 75/ to 75/ lOs per tun. Rape Oil at 38s for pale and 37s for brown. In Olive Oil few sales made ; Gallipoli is 50/, and other sorts 48/ to 491 per tun. Linseed Oil at 25s 6d to 25s 9d per cwt. TALLow.—For Russian Tallow on the spot iittle business has been transacted, and 40s to 40s 6(1 per cwt is the nearest value of Petersburgh yellow candle. For delivery few buyers are to be met with, and there are ready sellers for the last three months of the year at 41s 3d to 41s 6d per cwt. Town Tallow at ns per cwt, nett cash. COURSE OF EXCIL Amsterdam CF. 12 6 Ditto, at sight l2 4 Rotterdam 2U. 12 6i Antwerp Hamburgh M.B. 13 14 Altona l3 l4# Paris, 3 days' sight 25 65 Ditto, 3 months 25 85 Marseilles Bourdeaux 25 90 Frankfort oa Maine l2li Petersburgh, 3Us 364 Berlin .7 Vienna, effee. fl. 3 M 953 Trieste, ditto Madrid 37 Cadiz 14ilbao 36 Barcelona 36 .NGE.----(THIS DAY.) Gibraltar Leghorn 3O 45 Genoa 25 90 Milan Venice 47 Naples 39 Palermo, per oz ll7 Lisbon 54 Oporto 534 Rio Janeiro 23 Bahia 23 Buenos Ayres NewYork,2ldys sight Philadelphia PRICES Oli BULLION, PER OZ. Foreign Gold, bars. £3 17 9 Portugal Gold Coin 3 17 5 New Doubloons..... 0 0 0 New Dollars 0 4 10 Silver in Bars 0 4 111 SevillQ - RY NOTES. PROMISSO (From This Night's Gazette.) An account of the Average Aggregate Amount of Promis sory Notes payable to bearer on demand, which have been circulation in the United Kingdom, distinguishing those circulated by the Bank of England, by Private Banks, and by Joint-Stock Banks, in England and Wales, by the Banks in Scotland, by the Bank of Ireland, and by all other Banks in Ireland, and of the Average Amount of Bullion in the Bank of England, during the four weeks ending the 24th day- of May, 1844, pursuant to the Act of 4th and sth Vic toria, cap. 50 : ENGLAND. Bank of England Private Banks 5,142,830 Joint-Stock Banks 3,680,413 SCOTLAND. Chartered, Private, and Joint-Stock Banks 3,041,079 IRELAND. Bank of Ireland Private and Joint-stock Banks Total Bullion in the Bank of England Z15,572,000 1 - IENRY L. WICKHAM. Stamps and Taxes, June 7, 1844. THE LONDON GAZETTE (THIS EVENING.) FOREIGN-OFFICE, MAY 30, 1844. The Queen has been graciously pleased to appoint George Tradescant, Esq., to be her Majesty's Consul at Amoy, in China. The Queen has also been graciously pleased to appoin Rutherford Alcock, Esq., to be her Majesty's Consul at Foo. chow-foo, in China. The Queen has also been graciously pleased to appoint Charles Edward Keith Kortright, Esq., to be her Majesty's Consul at Cartbagena, in the republic of New Grenada. The Queen has also been graciously pleased to appoint John William Perry Farren, Esq., to be Her Majesty's Consul in the Philippine Islands. WHITEHALL, JUNE 7. The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under the Great Seal, granting the dignity of a Knight of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto William Cornwallis Harris, Esq., Major in the Bombay Corps of Engineers. WAR-OFFICE, JUNE 7. Ist Dragoon Guards—Lieutenant G. W. C. Jackson to be Captain, by purchase, vice Turnor, who retires; Cornet P. S. Thompson to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Jackson, June 7. 6th Dragoons—C. Tower, Gent., to be Cornet, by pur ehase, vice Fitzwygram, promoted, June 7. 11th Light Dragoons—Captain 1. Jones to be Major, by purchase, vice Rotton, promoted ; Lieutenant B. Harrison to be Captain, by purchase, vice Jones ; Cornet G. T. Dun combo to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Harrison, June 7. 14th Regiment of Foot—F. Fortescue, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Swinburne, appointed to the 83d Foot, June 7. 15th Foot—Quartermaster R. Imray, from 83d Foot, to be Quartermaster, vice Cartmsil, who exchanges, June 7. 36th Foot—Captain W. T. R. Brady, from half-pay Unat tached, to be Captain, vice Brevet Major W. H. Adams, who exchanges; Lieut. P. L. M*Dougall to be Captain, by pur chase, vice Brady, who retires ; Ensign J. A. Brockman to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice M‘Dougall ; D. Tom, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Brockman, June 7. 41st Foot—A. E. Hardinge, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur chase, vice Wethered, promoted, June 7. 56th Foot—Capt, Sir W. Maxwell, Bart., from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice John Charlewood, who ex changes ; Lieut. L. C. Conran to be Coptain, by purchase, vice Sir W. Maxwell, who retires • Ensign F. M. Ram sa y t o b e Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Conran ; H. C. Lanauze, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Ramsay, June 7. 61st Foot—Lieut. F. Huson, from the Ist West India Regi ment, to be Lieutenant, vice Dobson, who exchanges, June 7. 85th Foot—Lieut. D. W. P. Labalmondiere to be Captain, by purchase, vice Emslie, who retires ; Ensign J. W. Walling ton to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Labalmondiere ; Ensign J. D. Swinburne, from the 14th Foot, to be Ensign, vies Wal lington ; Ensign and Quartermaster J. Cartmail, from 15th Foot, to be Quartermaster, vice Imray, who exchanges, June 7. 87th Foot—Captain Henry Thomas Earl of Chichester, from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice C. T. Graves, who exchanges; Lieutenant Radcliff to be Captain, by purchase, vice the Earl of Chichester, who retires; Second Lieutenant W. H. Taylor to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Radcliff; J. Fitz Gerald, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Taylor, June 7. Ist West India Regiment—Lieut. T. J. Dobson, from the 61st Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Huson, who exchanges; J. Rose, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Spratt, who resigns. June 7. UNATTACHED.—Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel J. R. Rotton, from the II th Light Dragoons, to be Lieutenant-Colonel, by purchase; Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel J. Crosse, from Major half-pay Unattached, to be Lieutenant-Celonel, without pur chase ; Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel Sir F. Watson, from Cap tain half-pay Portuguese Service, to be Major, without pur ehase, June 7. HOSPITAL STAFF.--Surgeon W. W. Bell, M.D. from the 26th Foot, to be Staff-Surgeon of the First Class, vice J. French, M.D., who retires upon half-pay, Jnne 7. BREVET.—Captain W. S. R. Brady, of the 36th Foot, to be Major in the Army, June 28, 1838; Captain H. T. Earl of Chichester, of the 87th Foot, to be Major in the Army, Nov. 23. MEMORANDUM.—The date of the commission of Ensign Richard Maclaine, in the 78th Foot, to be 31st May, 1843, instead of Bth April, 1842. Lieutenant-Colonel Manley Dixon, upon half-pay unattached, has been allowed to retire from the army, with the sale of an unattached lieutenant-colonelcy, he having become a setler in Canada, June 7. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Northumberland. Northumberland and Newcastle Yeomanry Cavalry—R. C. Bewicke, Gent., to be Cornet, vice Cookson, promoted, May 24. CORT OF ER. Trinity Term . In t he s e v en th X year o f t U he Reign of Queen Victoria. Thursday, June 6.—This Court will, on Tuesday the 18th day of June instant, and on the follo w i ng d ays — name l y, Wed nesday th e 19th, Thursday the 20th, Friday the 21st, and Saturday the 22d days of the same month, hold sittings, and will proceed in disposing of the business then pending in the new trial and special papers. --By the Court. Read in open Court, June 7,1644, SAML. DARE, Master. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. TRINITY TERM —I n the seventh year of the reign of Queen Victoria, June 6,1844 —This Court will, on Saturday the 29th day of June instant, hold a sitting, and will proceed to give judgment in cases that stand over for the judgment of the Court. N. W HITEHALL, MAy 31. C. TINDAL . The Lord Chanceller has appointed Henry Coare Kingsford, of Canterbury, in the county of Kent, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High C ourt of Chancery. BANKRUPTS. JOSEPH LEVET, carpenter, Soham, Cambridgeshire, June 20 and July 25, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Amw Turquel l-ter and, o race fficial assignee, Old Jew r y- c h am b ers; Wilkin, JAMES BATTEN, sheep-dealer, Tilehnrst, Berkshire, to surrender June 20, at half.past twelve, and July 25 , at Cole man-street, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, offic ial assig nee, man-street, London; Hill and Ce,.: ,Throgmorto n - s t reet, London. JAMES YOUNG, laceman, Aldermanbury, June 20, and July 25, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee, Coleman-street ; Wilson, Aldermanbury ; Soles, Aldermanbury. WILLIAM BARNES, bonnet maker, Ludgate-hill, June 14, at half-past twelve, and July 19, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Groom, official assignee, Abchurch-lane, Lom bard-street : Teague, Crown-court, Cheapside. GEORGE FIELDING, ironmonger, Thame, Oxfordshire, June 21, and July 12, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Foster, official assignee, Abchurch-lane, Lombard-street; Tippetts, Pancras-lane, City. JAMES BA RGUS WILLIAM KNIGHT, printer, St- James's-walk, Clerkenwell, June 18. at one, and July 9, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Green, Basinghall- street. WILLIAM TURNER, builder, Manchester, June 19 and July 10, at the Manchester District Court. Pott, official as signee; Chester, Toulmin, and Chester, Staple-inn, London; Chapman and Roberts, Manchester. JAMES LINTHWAITE SAIITII, cebinet-maker ' June 18, and July 23, at one, at the .Birmingham District Court. Valpy, official assignee Birmingham; Brown and Palmer, Leicester. GEORGE JENKINSON, butcher, Wolverhampton, June 15 and July 18, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. Bittleston, official assignee, Birmingham ; Clark, Wolver hampton ' • Smith, Birmingham. JOHN PARKER, corn miller, Hull, June 17 and July 10, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Freeman, o ffi cial as signee, Leeds ; Tilson and Squance, Coleman-street, London ; Wells's, Hull ; Horsfall and Harrison, Leeds. :IMEON HARTLEY SPENCE, maltster, Leeds, June 22, and July 18, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee, Leeds ; Milton, Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane, London; Dunning and Stawman, Leeds. NOTICES OF INSOLVENCY. T. Paragreen, foreman, jun., Richmond-street, Maida-hill. J. Enoch, jun., upholsterer, Leamington Priors. J. Barker, baker, Richmond-buildings, Brighton. W. Roberts, coal merchant, Bangor. J. Rae, Toxteth-park. P. Doran, Blundell-street, Liverpool. J. Thompson, innkeeper, Peterborough. T. Hall, butcher, Great Ashby, Leicestershire. J. P. Hillhouse, tea dealer, Bedford. J. Williams, silk weaver, Bethnal-green. J. Rees, manufacturer of pills, Leckhampton, Gloucestershire. J. S. Harvey, traveller, City-gardens, Islington. T. Lee, licenced victualler, !Millwood, Yorkshire. A. Gray, miller, Long Ash ton, Somersetshire. E. Middle, jnn., butter dealer, West-by-Water, Somersetshire. W. Mace, victualler, Worcestershire. T. Dale, Provision dealer, Chesterfield, Derbyshire. C. George, maltster, Worcestershire. C. Cheetham, hatter, Pimlico. B. B. Wilson, surgeon, Holme, Westmoreland. J. Mitchell, wheelwright, High-street, Vauxhall. W. Basford, engineer, Ratcliffe-highway. F. W. Cole, builder, Hammersmith. P. Hillen, warehouseman, Shepperton Cottages, Islington. PRICE OF SUGAR. The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, for the week ending June 4, 1844, is; 355. 9id. per cwt., exclusive of the Duties of Customs paid or payable thereon on the im portation thereof into Great Britain. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'Clock. Lord PORTMAN presented a petition from Somerset, com plaining of the existing fees to clerks •f the peace and magis trates' clerks. Earl 13ROWNLOW presented petitions from Yorkshire against any alteration in the corn-laws. The Marquis of NORMANBY gave notice that on Monday he should present two petitions on the subject on the subject of the law relating to coursing ; and on that day he should put a question to the Government as to whether they would object to any alteration in those laws. The Duke of RICHMOND expressed a hope that the Noble Marquis would postpone his question till Thursday, when he (the Duke of Richmond) should be enabled to lay a case of considerable hardship before their Lordships. The Marquis of NORMANBY said he would do so. HOLYHEAD RAILWAY. The Marquis of NORMANBY, at the request of the Earl of Wicklow, postponed his motion for a Committee on this railway till Monday. ENDOWMENT OF SCHOOLS BILL. On the motion for the colnmittal of this Bill, The Bishop of SALISBURY opposed the Bill, on the ground, that the Bench of Bishops had not been consulted upon it. The motion was then postponed (as we understood.) VISIT OF THE KING OF SAXONY. At twenty minutes past Five o'clock, his Majesty the King of Saxony entered the House, and took his seat opposite to the Bench of Bishops, and near to the Woolsack ; a chair having been previously placed for his Majesty's accommoda tion. The House was, at this time, exceedingly crowded, both by Peers and strangers. Two ladies were in the House, the lady of Lord Lnrgan, and the Noble Lord's daughter. His Majesty the King of Saxony appeared to pay particular attention to the proceedings in the House, but we did not observe him converse with any Noble Lord, with the exception of exchanging a few words with the Marquis of Londonderry. Shortly after his Majesty entered the House, The LORD CHANCELLOR said he wished to know if the Noble Lord near him (Lord Monteagle), who had a notice on the paper with respect to the Corn-laws, would have any objection to postpone it to a future day, as it would be inconvenient to the Government, on this evening, to have it brought on. Lord MONTEAGLE expressed his surprise at the request which had been made to him. He was perfectly ready either to .bring on the motion or to p ost p one it. B u t other Noble Lords might not be in a position to wish for its postponement, inasmuch as the motion had already been re peatedly postponed; and those Noble Lords might complain that he had not acted with firnmess and resolution, if he con sented to postpone his motion. Ho thought there was that which the House ought to consult before private convenience, and that was the public interesi. —( Hear, hear. ) The Duke of WELLINGTON was nnderstood to say, that if .he had had the opportunity, he would have informed the Noble Lord, that it was the wish of her Majesty's Govern ment that this motion should be postponed. Lord MONTEAGLE said, that he would postpone the mo tion provided it were understood that it should be brought for ward on Monday next. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to say that he hoped there would be no objection to the motion being brought on on Monday. Lord BROUGHAM said he had come down to the House to attend to the motion of his Noble Friend, and he hoped that the postponement of that motion would not be made a precedent. Lord CAMPBELL thought that all inconvenience might be obviated by their Lordships returning to the old system of meeting at eight o'clock in the morning.—( Hear, and a laugh.) The Duke of WELLINGTON would have no objection to come to the House at eight o'clock in the morning ; but he thought that Noble and Learned Lords—(A laugh)—who had other business to attend to, and who were younger that he was, would find it very inconvenient to come down to the House at eight o'clock.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He had no objection to Monday, or any other day, for the Noble Lord's motion.—( Hear, hear.) Lord MONTEAGLE said that it would perhaps be as well to postpone his motion to Thursday next. The Gold and Silver Wares Bill was read a third time and passed. The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions from Worthing, Shoreham, and other places in Sussex, in favour of agricultural Protection. The Earl of RODEN presented a number of petitions from the north of Ireland in favour of Presbyterian marriages. The house then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. ARMY IN INDIA. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock, and in formed the House that he had received a letter from the Governor-General of India, acknowledging the thanks of the House, which were given on the2oth February last to the army in India. DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL. Petitions against this Bill were presented by Mr. Shaw from Ireland ; Mr. Barnard, Deptford; Sir R. H. Inglis, Mr. Boyd, places in Ireland ; Mr. W. 0. Stanley, Anglesey ; Mr. Tre lawney, from Tavistock ; Sir C. Douglas, the Earl of Hills borough, from Down; and by Mr. Stafford O'Brien. Mr. BUTLER presented petitions in favour of the Bill from the city and county of Kilkenny, and in doing so said he was now obliged to act as Member for both the city and county of Kilkenny, on account of the incarceration of Mr. John O'Connell. Mr. SHARMAN CR AWFORD presented petitions in fa.. your of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill, from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of KiJcoun, Duncormack, and Killog, county Wexford; Donoughcloney and Newtownards, county Down; Ballymoney, county Antrim; Raphoe, county Donegal; Dunsbaughlin, county Meath ; and Bough, county London derry ; and from the inhabitants of various religious denomina tions residing in Cromlin, county Antrim, and Saintfield and Ballymullen, county Down. Also a petition from the Blackwater Congregation of Rochdale to the same effect. Also eight petitions against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill from different bodies of Wesleyan Methodists in Rochdale, signed by upwards of 500 names. MAIL WAYS. The Ashton, Staleynridge, and Liverpool Railway Bill; the Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway Bill; the Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton Railway Bill, were severally read a third time and passed. NOTICES OF MOTIONS. Mr. TRELAWNEY gave notice that on an early day he would propose to the House a measure for relieving her Ma jesty's subjects of the Jewish persuasion from civil disabilities. Mr. SHAW gave notice that he would move the substitution of a possession of sixty years instead of twenty-five years in the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. PARISHES (SCOTLAND) BILL. On the motion that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House on the Scotch . Parishes Bill ) Mr. DUNCAN APNEILL said that he thought it right to state what WM the object of the Government in proposing this Bill. The Bill did not introduce any new principle into the law of Scotland. It had for its object to facilitate the division of parishes in Scotland. By the law as it now existed, the patronage of a new parish belonged to the patron of the old one; hut where other par ties bore the burden of erecting the new parish church, it seemed but reasonable that some other provision should be made, saving ) of course, the rights of the heritors. As the law at present stood, there was not any power of attach ing districts to churches, which had been erected in parishes, without the consent of the heritors. Parties willing to erect churches, and to provide endowments for their supprt, and for the. support of the ministers, had at present no power to erect them into distinct parishes. There was no power anywhere existing for that purpose. The Church of Scotland at one time believed it had that power, and had exercised it, but when the matter was brought before the courts of law, it was decided on an appeal to the House of Peers that the Church had no such power. The pre sent Bill gave a power, in such cases, to attach a district to the church, and to erect it into a separate parish, without the consent of the heritors, who, as they were not called upon to contribute, had certainly no right to interfere capriciously to deprive persons of that religious instruc tion for which they were themselves willing to pay. Some of the petitions against the Bill proceeded upon the erro neous impression that the Bill was intended to give power to certain individu a l s w h o h a d contr ib ute d towards the erection of churches, and who still continued in communion with the Church of Scotland, to take possession of these churches, notwithstand ing the opposition of persons who had likewise con tributed towards their erection, but who were not mern hers of the Church. The Bill contained no such provisions. Ttliheie dci ßill did not set k to ma k e any demands on the public t funds. Its objecLas he said b e f ore , was to g i ve facilities for v t r e i o c o f parishesuld be:any ; and objection su ch b t e o i n g g i i n t a g object co b (s lut t n t e o e t upon it. blr. FOX AIAULE thOught that some necessity should at least be sh own for brings, o in this Bill, r on the subjeet a t a ll . Hl-;, as s p o k en of died , f i'j o 3 g pares. The first cl ause of the Bill trenched soi.Verrhat on the right of property. He admitted there were some points which created alarm in Scotland, and which were made clear by the Learned Lord Advocate. There was no ob jection to what was proposed with regard to giving the staters of ministers to those who directed the forty churches in the Highlands of Scotland. There was no objection to giving the status of parish ministers to the minis-ere of great towns. His main objection to the Bill was that it was unnecessary, and therefore he should propose that the Bill be committed this day six months. The amendment having been put, Mr. P. M. STEWART said that this was a far more im portant Bill than its title seemed to indicate. It was one of the most extraordinary and unaccountable attempts at legislation that ever was made in the House. It was, in fact, a Bill for church extension, and a Bill for this purpose was introduced at a time when a great secession had taken place from the Esta blished Church of Scotland. How would English Members like to have such a Bill proposed for England, if a secession took place in England. But more emphatically he put the question to Irish Members on both sides of the House, who had experience of what it was to possess churches without con gregations. The Hon. Gentleman then went on to object to several of the details of the measure. He thought there was a salutary tendency in the law to prevent persons indulging in their charitable propensities at the expense of their successors. There was no precedent for a Bill of this description. Why should they offer these facilities for the extension of a church which was already much too large for the wants of those be longing to it, while they offered no such facilities to the real Church of Scotland—the Free Church. They gave permis sion to take lands for railroads. They were now giving per mission to take lands for the purpose of extending the Esta blished Church. How would they treat an application or the part of the Free Church to take lands— (At this period of the Hon. Member's speech his Majesty the King of Saxony entered the House. His Majesty occupied the seat of the Sergeant-at-Arms, and appeared to pay great attention to the proceedings. Soon after the King of Saxony entered the House, Sir Robert Peel went up . to his Majesty, and entered into conversa tion with him. No interruption, however, took place in the proceedings of the House, and the debate proceeded as though his Majesty had not been present.) He believed the object of the Bill was to restore Dr. M'Leod to the status of a parish minister. He had a great respect for Dr• lll 4 Leod personally; but he made himself exceedinily con spicuous when the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir It. Peel) visited Glasgow some years back, and the general belief was that the main object of this Bill was to restore this gentleman to position of a parish minister. Mr. HUME was sorry that this Bill had been introduced. It was quite unnecessary, as five hundred new chapels had been erected in Scotland within the last eighteen months. It was also contrary to all sound principle, and he thought the object of its introduction was to call off attention from more important qu. stions.—( Laughter. ) He should give it all the opposition in his power. Mr. E. ELLICE, jun., said he would oppose the Bill as nothing less than a confiscation of property.—(Hear.) He had heard nothing to show a necessity for this Bill. There were many churches in Scotland which had no congregations, and it was perfectly unjustifiable to bring in this measure for the support,f the deserted church. Mr. WAELACE could not be persuaded that the object:of the measure was not to bring the people of Scotland to think less of their new free church than they did. There was already plenty of space (and to spare) in the churches of the Establish ment, and it was to the new church the patronage of the Government should be extended, although he himself was still a member of the old church. —( A laugh.) The effect of the measure would be to divide the people of Scotland, and to create dissensions amongst them, upon that very theme, the nati ona l re li g i on, upon wh i c h they had been so much united. He supported the amendment.—( Hear. ) Sir JAMES GRAHAM was surprised that the Hon. Gen tleman who had just sat down could say that the Bill was brought in with objects which had not been avowed. The Hon. Gentleman ought at least to give his grounds for that statemet.—( Hear, hear.) The principle of the measure was not Erastian—it was a principle which had been always upheld in the best times of the Scotch Church. [LEFT SITTING.' COMMONS INCLOSURE BILL. ( A portion of the following was omitted in our Thigd Edition last night.) On the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Commons Inclosure Bill being read, Lord WORSLEY apologised to the House for having kept the Members so long in suspense with regard to this measure, in consequence of his indispo sition; but he was still very anxious to proceed with the measure, because several parties had been put to inconvenience by the delay. He had that day, however, had a communication from the Government with respect to this Bill, and he found that, though favourable to it generally, her Majesty's Government wished it to be materially altered. He would therefore suggest that those Hon. Members who were opposed to the Bill would withdraw their opposi tion, and allow the Bill to be committed pro forma; he would then fix another day for proceeding with it, after having communicated with the Commissioners of Woods and Forests as to the alterations that would be required. He hoped the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman opposite would not feel it necessary to persevere in his opposition on the preSJnt occasion, but that he would permit the Bill to go into Committeeproforma. Colonel SIBTHORP said that no one could regret more sincerely than he did the indisposition of the Noble Lord. He had put down 46 clauses in this Bill, on each of which he was determined to take the sense of the House. He protested against the Bill as a measure calculated to effect serious injury to that class which the House was most bound to protect. But as the Noble Lord had expressed a wish to have the Bill committed pro forma, for the purpose, as he understood, of expunging some of the clauses—and among them, perhaps, the 46 clauses to which he objected—he (Col. Sibthorp) would not object to the Bill being committed pro forma, if the Hon. Member for Montrose did not object. If, however, the lion. Member for Montrose persevered in his opposition, he (Colonel Sibthorp) should undoubtedly support him in it. Mr. lIUME said it was not often that he agreed with the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman, but he did so on the present occasion. This Bill had been brought in without due consultation with the public authorities of the coun try. The Bill would require a great deal of pruning before it could be made even passable. Such a measure as this ought to be a Government measure.—(" Hear, hear" from Colonel Sibthorp.) It was a Bill that would affect the whole country, and if passed it would be a great injustice to the labouring classes. Already had 2,000 Inclosure Bills been passed, and the only effect of them had been to give an additional quantity of land to the squirearchy of the country. No one could be more willing than he would be to support any measure of the Noble Lord's (Lord Worsley's), be cause he knew the Noble . Lord was actuated by the best intentions.—(Hear, hear.) But all the best lard of the country had been already inclosed, and there was no necessity for new powers to enable persons to inclose land which was worth cultivating. He hoped the Noble Lord would withdraw the Bill for the present session; as he could assure him that the working classes throughout the country looked upon the measure with great suspicion. If there was any necessity for in creased powers of inclosure, let the Government take the matter into their own hands. supported d te a d t a th fu e tu ß r i e ll s . tag n e e . Lord SANDON recommended that the Bill should be allowed to pass through Committee pro forma, and that Mr. AGLIONIIY believed that the interests of the poorer classes would be much the details might be dis s c u u p s p s better protected under it than they were at present. — (Hear, hear.) He thought the more land that was inclosed and brought into cultivation would be pro tante an ad vantage to the working classes. He knew himself a neighbourhood is which, by the system of inclosing, much good had been done. Those who wanted work were amply supplied with it. They had draining and planting, and other work of a similar character, and the result will, that what had been an uncultivated waste, was now well laid out as arable land or in plantations. He hoped, therefore, that the Noble Lord would proceed with his Bill. Mr. HENRY BERKELEY thought that the Bill gave the Commission such arbitrary powers as were never given to a Commission before. Was he to be told that the poorer classes were to depend upon any Commission for the liberty of taking their wives and families out for the exercise that was absolutely necessary for health and comfort? The Bill introduced by the Noble Lord last year would never have passed to a second reading had it not been for the very remarkable language of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth. He had many objections to the Bill ; he said that it was very bad in many points, but he said also that the Noble Lord had expended a very great deal of industry upon it, and that the House might therefore allow it to pass the second reading.—(Hear, hear.) Ho did not question the Noble Lord's industry, but he thought there were other Members in that House whose zeal had not been similarly rewarded. He would say to the Noble Lord that before touching the parks of the poor, he ought to begin with the parks of the rich. The flower plucked on the uncultivated waste was just as 'valuable to the poor man and his child as was the rose, or rich exotic, grown in the nobleman's hot-house.— (Hear, hear.) They would, by passing this Bill, be debarring the working man from the pure air of heaven, and condemning him, instead, to receive into his system the dust of their car riage wheels. Lord JOHN MANNERS supported the Bill of the Noble Lord. He thought the country owed him a deep debt of gratitude for having had the boldness and deter mination to bring forward this measure ' • and he hoped the Hon. M em b er f or M on t rose wo uld withdraw the amendment. Colonel WOOD opposed the motion. He thought that there was no necessity for instituting a Commission, as desired by the Noble Lord. If a waste were worth inclosing, it was worth coming to Parliament for powers to do so. He had heard objections against the enor mity of the expense, but he begged to say that these were very trifling after all. He would, therefore, he repeated, oppose the Bill of the Noble Lord. Mr. C. BULLER said that they must remember, when speaking of commons, that the term .embraced not only fields really waste, but such as were not properly cultivated. He knew a very large tract of waste land, and it was proposed by all those intereste d in it to parcel it out in allotments, in order to its cultivation. It was found, however, that under the present state of the law such could not be done. Then, surely, it were well that that state of things should be altered. He thought that by Commissions—he did not care whether it were the Tithe Commission or any other—but surely those matters could be better inquired into and arranged by them than by coming up to that House. He thought they ought not to throw the Bill overboard without well considering its details. It was one of the utmost im portance to the weal of the country, and therefore en titled to the consideration of that House. Mr. MILES thought they might read the Bill pro forma, and then take leisure to consider its provisions. Mr. WARBURTON thought that the Bill could be easily carried into effect without encroaching upon towns.pla ces of He m s n u p s p e Mr. HUME said, that as the motion was merel y for omretendt thein ne ighbourhood of large . going into Committee proforma, he would nottohpep,oloeniste. The Bill was then committed pro forma , a n d resumed. COUNTY CORONERS BILL. The House then went into Committee upon the County Coroners 13111, the clauses of which were agreed to with ' verbal amendments, and the House r esume d, w h en th e report was ordered to be brought up on Wednesday next. The House then adjourned at a Quarter past Seven. GUANO.—A lively interest was excited last week' in the Colonial market, owing to a sale by auction of the first cargo of guano imported into London from the re cently discovered island of Ichaboe, on the western coast of Africa. The interest was increased by a similar sale in Liverpool, a few days before, of the largest quantity that has hitherto come from the same place, in one bottom, namely, the ship Blake, of one thousand tons. The competition at both sales was very spirited, and each cargo was sold in about twenty minutes. The desire for Ichaboe guano has arisen from the fact, that all the emi nent chemists who have analysed it, have found it to possess the fertilizing properties in the highest degree ; and the results of its application by practical agriculturists has proved the correctness of their analysis. The farmers in the northern and some of the western districts in England and in Scotland, were among the first to try Guano, when introdnced from South America, four years ago, and have had the best means of ascertaining its qualities. The conse quence is that the consumption in these parts of the kingdom is, this year, increased at least twenty times above that of last year, being no small evidence of the superior merits of this invalu able manure. Besides the demand for home consump tion, several ships have discharged in the West Indies, and there are large orders for various ports on the Continent. The immense benefit to the shipping inte rest, from this new branch of commerce, may be con ceived, when it is known that about four hundred ships are on their way to Ichaboe and the adjoining islands for the next year's supply, and that from this cause the value of shipping has advanced fifteen to twenty per cent. We perceive that a cargo of Ichaboe Guano is to be sold by public auction, at the Corn Market, Mark lane, on Monday, the 10th instant. THE ALBERT CAP.—If we were to judge of the " New Regulation Cap for the Infantry" by the numerous letters we receive from all ranks, expressing utter disgust with it, we would be led to think that the selection could never have been made by a soldier. Indeed, it is worthy of fair consideration how far it is advisable to force this ob noxious head-dress upon our soldiers. We could show letters, and quote opinions, all tending to convince us that desertion has, in some cases, taken place, rather than wear the " Janus cap," and that, in many instances, recruits have refused to enlist in a regiment that now has the cap in wear. The men who are to wear the cap ought to have some voice in the matter; and, we believe, the whole army condemns it. It is not too late to amend the order ; the issue, as vet, is very limited—but on the Ist of next April the whore army will have this fools' cap placed on their heads, on a most suitable occasion, " All Fools' Day." This cap, like other unseemly things, we heartily wish the army well rid of.—Naval and Military Gazette. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 6. WILSON'S ESTATE BILL-INCLOSURE OF HAMPSTEAD- HEATH. The Earl of EGMONT moved the second reading of this Bill, and in doing so he denied that it was intended to apply the powers of the Bill, should it be passed, for the purpose of inclosing Hampstead-heath. Lord DENMAN felt it his duty to oppose this Bill, for he was at a loss to know what grievance there was of which Sir Thomas Wilson could complain, and there fore there was no necessity for this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The will un d er w hi c h Si r Th omas Wilson held his property, provided that Hampstead-heath should not be leased for more than twenty-one years. It had been said that this Bill was not for the purpose of inclosing Hampstead heath. It was true that it .was not intended to cut up the heath into small portions, as was the case of an inclosed common ; but it was meant to give by the Bill power to certain parties to build over 400 acres of land, which now made the heath a healthy and happy place, and the resort of thousands on every Sabbath-day in the summer time ; and this, he thought, ought to be more gratifying to the proprietor than any trifling increase in the value of that property. The holders of copyhold property near to the heath were greatly annoyed at the prospect of hav ing 400 acres of the heath built upon. It had been said that the will of the late Sir Thomas M. Wilson was a very strange will, but he (Lord Denman) thought it was a very humane will, for he believed that Sir Thos. Wilson as much devised the enjoyment of Hampstead heath to the public as he did any of his property to his son. Under these circumstances he should move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. The Earl of COLCHESTER supported the Bill. _ . _ _ . . Lord CAMPBELL thought the Bill ought to be re: jected. The same powers existed with respect to the property of Sir Thomas Wilson, as were possessed by his ancestors. Why then should he come to Parliament for further powers as to the disposal of such property as that on Hampstead-heath ? Why should Par liament give powers to a private individual, at the expense of public convenience and comfort. This Bill was precisely the same as the Bill of last session, which was brought forward to empower Sir Thomas Wilson to lease Hampstead-heath for periods of sixty and seventy years. He (Lord Campbell) hoped their Lordships would reject this Bill. The Earl of WICKLOW said that within the last ten years thirty Bills similar to this one had passed, and he would ask what objection there could be to this Bill going before a Committee of their Lordships' House ? He should support the second reading. The Earl of MANSFIELD argued that if this Bill were unsound in principle, there was no necessity for going into the Committee, and therefore he should op pose it in the present stage. Lord COTTENHAM said, this Bill if passed would not interfere with Hampstead-heath at all.—(Hear.) The Bill contained nothing which in an ordinary case would prevent its passing, and, therefore, if they refused to pass this Bill, they would forfeit their character for doing equal justice to all. Lord BROUGHAM was surprised that his Noble and Learned Friend should defend Sir T. Wilson in an at tempt to dispose of his estate by statute, in such a manner as to be in opposition to his father's will. Lord COTTENHAM explained. Lord DENMAN said, that from the plan which he held in his hand, it appeared that it was proposed to build upon 400 acres of Hampstead-heath; and this, if carried into effect, would very seriously inconvenience the public in the enjoyment of the heath. The Earl of EGMONT replied. Their Lordships then divided— Contents Non-contents Majority against the second reading The Bill is consequently lost. GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA. 20 -11 The LORD CHANCELLOR read a letter from Lord Ellenborough, stating that he had received the thanks of the House of Lords, expressing their Lordships' appro bation of the services rendered by the army in India. Tho letter was ordered to be entered on the journals of the house. Their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 6. DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL. ' Viscount ACHESON presented petitions for and against the Bill. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, on moving the second reading of this Bill, he would endeavour to state to the House as clearly as he could, the object which was contemplated by it ; and he was the more anxious to do so, because he was satisfied from what was taking place out of doors, and from the language of many of the petitions presented against the Bill, that much misapprehension prevailed upon the sub ject.—(Hear, hear.) Petitions had been presented against the Bill from vacious denominations of Dissenters, and, amongst others, from the classes who claimed to have an interest in the property which was the subject-matter in dispute, and who said that if the Bill were passed they would be deprived of property to which they were now entitled. He would deal with that allegation in another part. There were petitions from the Wesleyan body. He could not think there was any provision in the Bill which could in any way whatever affect the property of the Wesleyan body—(Cries of "Hear, hear")—nor would it affect the pro perty of the members of the Church of England, for its operation was confined to Dissenting chapels. The costs of the suits which had been going on for nearly fourteen years had almost destroyed the property in dispute, and although the House of Lords had come to a decision, it was at that moment as much a question what class of Dissenters were entitled to the benefits of this charity as when the suit was instituted fourteen years ago. He did not know whether gentlemen were aware that a fresh infor mation had been filed on the part of the Independ ents against the Presbyterians, alleging that the latter did not agree in doctrine with Lady Howley, the founder of the charity, and that they were no more entitled to it, therefore, than were the Unitarians.— (Hear, hear.) That suit might probably go through all its different stages. The litigation might last another fourteen years ; and the whole charity would be dissi pated before an ultimate decision would be given at to who would be entitled to it. Neither the members of the Church of England nor the Wesleyan Methodists were affected by the Bill. He felt every respect for the conscientious feeling which induced them to present pe titions against any Bill which they thought likely to en courage a faith hostile to that which they themselves professed ; but he could not help thinking that it was too late at that time for them to be inquiring whether the Legislature had done wisely or not in extending a com plete system of toleration.—(Hear, hear.) That had been the spirit of the Legislature of this country now for some years—(Hear, hear)--it was in that spirit that the Legislature passed the Bill of 1779, which relieved the ministers of Dissenting congregations from the necessity of subscribing the doctrinal Articles of the Church of England ; it was in that spirit that they had repealed in 1813 the clauses of the Toleration Act against Unita rians, and in 1817 the Act making it blasphemy to deny the divinity of our Lord. The same spirit of toleration had been acted upon with respect to the Unitarians in Ireland, who had been placed upon the same footing as regarded all civil rights, as regarded all civil property, as regarded their chapels, as regarded their schools, as re garded their charities, as other classes of Dissenters.— (Hear, hear.) He could not help thinking that they would not be acting in the spirit of complete toleration, or in the spirit of the Acts which had been passed, if they allowed any feeling which they might entertain to pre vent them from legislating for them in the same spirit as they legislated for other Dissenters.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the apprehension that this Bill would encou rage Unitarianism in this country was wholly un founded.—(Hear, hear.) He did not believe it would have any effect, either one way or tho other ; anti even if it would, the time for interference was on the prop sal of the Bills of 1813 and 1817, for the extension of complete Toleration.—(Hear, hear.) li e Wou ld now call the attention of the House to the circumstances which had induced her Majesty's Government to adopt this Bill, on the recommendation of high legal authorities in the House of Lords. The measure came down to that House recommended by the authority of such men as the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Penman, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. Her Majesty's Government, in bringing forward the measure, had no other object in view but that of doin,, , s justice, and put ting an end to vexatious and cruel litigation.—(Hear, hear.) He would now state the nature of the provisions. He believed that no objections were entertained with re spect to the first clause, but still it must not be forgotten that that was a most essential clause.—(Hear, hear.) Before the Toleration Act passed, any gift for founding a chapel for the purpose of putting forth doc trines contrary to those propounded. by the. Church of England, would be held bad either in a court of equity or a court of law. Before the passing •f that Act, all Dissenters stood on the same foundatioW; none of their acts were legal. By the Act of Toleration, however, Protestant Dissenters were placed in a very different situation, their acts were declared legal, but the Catholics and Unitarians were excluded from' the operation of that Act. After the passing of that Act, all other Protestant Dissenters, if they founded schools or any other chari ties, those foundations would be recognised by the Court of Chancery and the courts of law, and they would perpetuate the trusts. Such, however, was not the case with respect to the Catholics and the Unitarians. Very early indeed there appeared to be a repugnance on the part of Dissenters to subscribe to the provisions of the Toleration Act. In 1772 an Act was introduced for the purpose of putting an end to persons subscribing the ar ticles of that Act. That Bill passed the House of Com mons by a large majority, but it was thrown out in the House of Lords. In 1772, however, the Bill passed, and no Protestant Dissenter after that pericd was called upon to sign any of the declarations of the Church of Eng land. After the passing of that Bill any foundation for the benefit of Unitarian chapels would be held legal. The first clause of the present measure put all Protestant Dissenters, Unitarians among the rest, upon the same footing as the Roman Catholics, it gave, in fact, a retro spective effect to the operation of the Toleration Act. Such was the first clause. He understood there was no opposition to the clause, and certainly it was a most important part of the Bill. The second clause was in tended to afford relief against an evil which would rise to a monstrous height if some remedy were not applied; he meant that spirit of litigation among the Dissen ters to which the decision in the case of Lady Hewley's charity had given rise. —(Hear, hear.) The first clause related to all charitable foundations ; the second clause related to chapels only. It was said that, according to the existing law, no lapse of time could be pleaded to a breach of trust. If the breach were of such a nature as to call on the Attorney-General to interfere, on behalf of the public, it was perfectly true no lapse of "time could be pleaded against the Attorney-General ; but, in cases of breach of trust, in which private parties were concerned, a lapse of time could be pleaded ; and with regard to this Bill, he trusted he should satisfy the House that it contained no violation of the existing principles of law, but on the contrary, it was framed in strict analogy with those principles. There was was no doubt but that a party might give land or money in trust for purposes of religion, and if such a person said that a chapel which he founded was intended for the use of Ronian Catholics alone, the will of the donor would be strictly abided by, and such would be the case with regard to every other sect ; but he did not think that in every case of charitable foundation of that nature, in which the doctrines to be taught were not stated—he did not think they were bound to assume that in every such case the founder intended that those doctrines only should be taught which he himself pro fessed. They had no right to assume such to be the case, for this reason : many of these chapels had been founded by bodies of Dissenters who were conscien tiously opposed to the subscription of any articles of faith, and they had r.o right to assume that these persons would impose burdens upon others which they shrank from themselves.—(Cheers.) In no case in which it was distinctly stated in the foundation deed what were the doctrines to be taught in these chapels would the present Bill interfere. He could not understand what was meant by saying that the present Bill would encourage a violation of trust, as it would not interfere in any case in which particular doctrines were directed to be taught. In what cases would it interfere then ? It should be recollected that these Unitarian chapelS were not founded by deed ; they were generally built in this manner : a congregation dissented from the Church Establishment, they wished to establish a chapel ; they forms d a voluntary association ; they sub scribed funds and built the chapel, which, in the first in stance was vested in trustees, because it was necessary by law that it should be so ; but so little had the trustees to do with the management of the chapel that in all the small chapels the original trustees had fallen off, and new ones had been appointed. The congres gations relied upon possession. Who supported the minister ? Not the trustees, but the congregation. Who paid him ? The congregation. Who re moved him ? The congregation. The trustees had no more power than any stranger. Supposing a cer tain number of - persons to have purchased a chapel— to have appointed a preacher—supposing that son had succeeded son, and supposing that in the lapse of time the clergyman had preached doctrines different from those of the original founder—supposing that to be the case, yet, after those persons had laid out their money in purchasing a chapel, and after it was possessed from generation to generation, he thought it was extremely hard they should n ow b e deprived of it.—(Hear, hear.) Why, if this plea were good, although for a hundred or a hundred and fifty years Unitarian doctrines might have been preached, all the money subscribed fur such a chapel—all the money left for the benefit of the clergy man or his family during this time, would be handed over to strangers.—(Hear, hear.) This was not, at least, founded on a principle of justice and equity, supposing it were even founded on law. He would here assume it to be law—what, he would ask, was it property which had come for the support of such chapels should be given to those who were perfect strangers?— (Hear, hear.) But it ought not to be assumed that the law was clear ; it was the novelty of the law in the case which induced the Noble and Learned Lords to recom mend the Legislature to interfere. If, on the face of the deed, it appeared that the trust was for the support of Trinitarian doctrines, or any particular sect, the Bill would not interfere in such a case. It was only where they had not, on the face of the deed, any particular system of doctrine mentioned, that the Bill would inter fere. When there was no particular system of doctrines mentioned, were they to assume it was th e i n t en ti on of the testator that it should be applied for any particular sort of doctrines ? How were they to know that the testator was of the same faith with themselves? In the case of Lady Hewley her deed was produced, and cer tain documents and catechisms were produced, for the purpose of showing that she was a Trinitarian. Sup posing that to be so, had she declared that this trust was for the benefit of Trinitarians ? It was very doubtful whether such evidence was admissible. Lord Chief Justice Tindal, in his judgment, stated that private views or secret intentions were not ad missible in evidence. He admitted that the Lord Chancellor of Ireland was of a contrary opinion. But he would ask was it not mischievous and improper that the most solemn points of Christianity should be discussed in courts of law? This was not the proper tribunal for theological discussions. What he recom mended was, that they should introduce a certain test which might be applied to' cases of this nature, and which had been applied in other analogous eases. There was no single case in private life that did not depend more or less on usage. Under the old law if a question had been set up the modus would be proved by twenty years' usage, and by a recent Act of Parliament a ques tion could not be set up after a modern usage of thirty years. It was necessary that there should be some guide, some landmark, in order to prevent those scan dalous contentions which had hitherto taken place. The proposed Bill did not disturb existing rights. It did not take anything from congregations who might be in pos session of a benefice, and which they might have for many years been enriching. The Bill confirmed existing rights, but it did not perpetuate injustice. It might be urged that particular trusts might be misappropriated, but they were misappropriated only through the minister, and there was no great danger cf such perversion through him, as he was liable to be dismissed upon proof of such perversion, and any mem ber of the congregation could prefer the complaint. There was, therefore, no danger of Presbyterians being ousted from their property. The Bill was not meant to interfere with the religious tenets of any sect; it had perfect regard for every form of Christianity.—(Loud cheers.) He did not think it was at all open to those charges which had been made against it ; he hoped and believed it would prove beneficial to the great body of Dissenters, and that it would annihilate that spirit of litigation and dissension which had been the production of so much scandal and ill-will.-----(Hear, hear.) The de tails of the Bill might be discussed in Committee, and he trusted the second reading of the Bill would have the general concurrence of the House.—(Loud cheers.) Sir B. INGLIS, although wishing the Hon. and Learned Gentleman joy of the manner in which he had been received by the House, must say, that he was unconvinced by the arguments of his Hon. and Learned Friend, and came to a different conclusion from the premises laid down. He looked upon this as a question of law and of property, and on that ground he opposed the Government measure. He did not say the Bill interfered with any scheme of Christianity,but he hoped they would act as men interested in the cause of truth and justice. The Bight Hon. and Learned Gentleman had fortified his praise of the measure by the approbation of the Lord Chancellor, but he (Sir H. Inglis) appealed from Lord Lyndhurst in the House of Lords to Lord Lynd hurst on the Bench, and to the opinion of that Noble and Learned Lord in Lady Hewley's case.—(Hear.) The Bill did not affect any property in which the inten tions of the founder of the trust were clearly marked out; but he would ask his Bight Hon. Friend how liti gation was to be prevented by the Bill, which left open the Court of Chancery to all those who chose to con test the measures of trustees. At a meeting held this day, a resolution was come to, condemning the Bill on the ground of its opening the door to litigation. A. petition was agreed to, signed by " John Wilks," for merly a Member of this House, and recognised as the representative, if not the leader of the Dissenting body. The third clause was one of great importance. As it was brought into the House of Lords it was a very sim ple clause, and the marginal note was actually larger than the clause itself. Whilst the Bill was passing in the House of Lords alteration was made in the clause, with such breathless haste, that whereas the clause its e lf was essentially changed, the marginal reference remained the same.—(A laugh.) The clause was originally worded so as to affect suits commenced before the first day of March in this year; and the alteration was made to enable parties to plead the Act, in suits that might be instituted after the passing of the Bill. There might be good reasons for the Bill, although he had not been able to discover them; yet he was sure that it would not effect that most important of its porouferstteef objects, the prevention of litigation. The eei - Chancery had now as much power (and no more) a 5,!,,, Bill would give it, for deciding disputed matters relating to trusts of a religious character. He had now to re of to a recent decision of Sir Edward Sugdee, a P e ci e b s e ° o f whom he could not speak in other terms then those Ju dge' the highest respect and esteem. That Learned however, had, upon some grounds, which he (S! l ' A Inglis) could not comprehend, deferred his Jug . , rnent, because this measure was in progress in ti t ment. In conclusion, he would say that he thOuge' . . e , all events, the 3d clause might he so modified us move his objections. He moved an amendment th atee ' Bill be read a second time that day six months. at , Mr. IeLUAIPTRE, in seconding the ainend we bt e said that he thought the opposition which 0 , been given to the Bill ought to have e e _ et , mended the attention of her Majesty's Governraele It was said the Wesleyan hely had no interest in s ' ed matter. Supposing they had not, was it to be sePr to that on such a ground they would: give their sanction error? But then it had been said the Bill was n et , e l' . derstood. He asserted it was fully understood, an e, ° be , would say if it was carried, as he was afraid it woul a_ the Christian public of this cou ntry, would be in sen bye and cruelly used by this measure. His voice was fe e _ d , in that House, but he was not to be deterred from dressing let the House when he found Christian prie, ci P l e assailed. He would perseveringly give his opposi tie-„ t es the Bill, and in. doing so he believed he was speaking sentiments of thousands out of that House. Mr. MACAULAY then rose to address the Lie llse ; He despaired of adding much to the excellent argenleure, of the Learned Attorney-General, whom, he was l e er• all must be happy to see a g a in i n his place• — ' a ot ee hear.) He had thought it right, however, that person on that side of the House should rise to eeP ,. ;tl his conviction of the excellency of this Bill. He rs , rls i t i o re to observe the temperate manner in which his- o e Friend the Member for Oxford had treated the seel.e He had considered the matter as one not of a theoleg!ir character, but mere meuni and tuum. 'The course, ho,bo ever, that had been pursued by the Hon. Memb er w ee had seconded the amendment was very differea t ; s of had made the questi o n one , no t o f property, b. i f i t he divinity.—(Hear, hear.) N ow , f or his own part" , of Bill was in favour of Catholics, the Secession Churc Scotland, or the Free Church, his language would he%, same, and he should vote in precisely the same w i l e et he should do that night.—(Hear, hear.) The g. ise point, he considered, on which an y que stion would alrit would be the second clause.--(Hear.) As to the o, clause, no objection had been m a d e t o it, e ven by his oti Friend the Member for Oxford. Th en ca me the se c . clause, which rested oat the principle of preserietlee A few hours ago he should not have supposed that r; Hon. Member would have got up in that House or ; cell where, and denied its necessity ; he had, however' ha d painfully undeceived. A conclave at Exeter-ha" . 10 0 sent in a resolution of certain proceedings that hael, l i ert el place there, from which it a pp e ared that they coos' or the principle of prescription as untenable and enw e t for of a British Legislature, and that it was inconsistea its. the Governmeet to bring forward principles of n ic e tion. If these gentlemen w ere r i g ht, the laws by w ro ng. men had been governed for ag es were totally w ",ter The law of prescription had been known in every Tri' used age.—(Hear, hear.) It was known to the old to burial of Athens ; and even after the French Ilev° ll d o r it was admitted in the Code Napoleon; in short ilse e o trine of prescription was k nown even i n co untries W; to t the name of Justinian had never been heard. It w e ss el et te) of the great charter of thi s country's leberties. -- Tlthe It must be clear to any well-think** mind, ta l/ er te principle of prescription was necessary to the Pr es pr it tion of property, and there would be no securiti if it was taken away. W as it t o b e su pp ose d or toler ate that a man should be comp e ll e d t o p a y a bill ee e g e re by his great-grandfather in the year 1660?—(Hea r ' f Well, then, if it was desirabl e th a t a cer t a in time ° i dol scription should be made to limit rights, he e 0 1 4 . 1. e ase' see why it should not be appli e d t o th e presen t But then it was said they wanted to pass an ex P e e s veeei law. Why, let them go to what Act they week's t ool would find none that had not a retrospective °Pe ll yel and till religious bigotry stepped in there t hee no objections offered to suc h Acts. 1311tte of it was said that th e y ma d e th e len e eid be time. for doing wrong the re ason w hy it se e ' „- els continued. The present question, in his opinie n 'et to one oil which the principles of limitation °loop apply most forcibly .—(Hear, hear.) Now, he-„eA Members bestowed m uc h a tt ent i on on the, ,t;l3r., had they compared the p e titi ons i n f avou r or ee•tli" with those against it? If th e y h a d, th e y woule, the one sound arguments, a nd i n t h e o th er nothl er ed declamation. Let them loOk t o th e ceses o f the d' s tet. chapels in the country. Tak e th e case o f Ciren e h e Large sums were laid out on the c h a p e l there, evh le been derived from sources foreign to the par eT t ie : re eiel l then worshipped there. Let them go to l'e_ e ir then. There was a large chapel, the ceeepe tion of which, up to 1774, were I-T hite t•liiii' There the chapel was filled with the monuments e, wit, tarians ; it had a library and school-house attachn e es; which had been erected at the expense of li nit ee ' - stie l , and at this moment the members of that cong.etpot were sitting still, not daring to repair their chaP e psi daring to build or make improvements, till 00 : 0 0 6 what would be the result of this Bill. It did not li e sd where they went ; thi s was th e common and Orutiopf• history of Unitarian chapels and congregadatte Go to Manchester,—he was not quite sure of the te' but certainly fur seventy y ears a t l eas t, UnitarisP 6o oo trines had been taught at panchester ; there large be had been laid o u t an d monuments h a d b een b u ilt i b ibe ee lieved that the great D r . P r i est l y hi mse lf preached sot'. At Leeds, at the pr e s e nt moment , 4,000 1 . were dn t he scribed for repairs of the g r ea t U n i tar i an chapels %Odle fund was lying idle, becau se th e y d are d not use it' tee House decided whether it cou ld a ff or d them Pr; ee - At Maidstone there was the same s t or y ; i n deed n e pt not matter where they went; but at Maidstone for se 7 001. years Unitarian principles had been taught, and had been subscribed ; a t E xe t er th e same princie ..A l° Kell been taught for eighty years; there 2,0001. ha; jeit l4 , subscribed. It was the same at Rotherham, en" and other places. And were these the places whit e ibi s British Legislature would allow to be subjected tt' t for robbery? He really could not use any other W e i , pre' how would it be viewee with regard to any othe t? perty? Would it be borne for a single racomeir!ogs,'s was really painful to think what must be the fe e ', l , these who cried out for the ejectment of t, l ,,etsb"; viduals; why what were the claims of those evn e t eers to eject them, compared with the claims of the °' remain? What were their associations with t gd tb es e i of a Priestly or a Lardner? What feelings eli? ( D in connection with the monum en t s o f U n itarian gel; What feelings had they in connection with the 01 - stones which the piety of four generations b li „ e latells over the ashes of sisters, and wives, and d i a'Z i Yet they came forward to eject men from P'sn'ted Do were to them invaluable, and the loss of which e pe e '. be supplied, while to the intruders those ver y plrie had no more value than any other tlis i d where they might have a roof o L l e tr i. No o heads. If the House threw out this Bill, Cu e .' edi t " not merely be robbing one party to give robe roue to which would be bad enoug h, b ut t h e y would o oll be one arty of what they conside re d i n valuable., e s 1 , 0 , bestow it in a quarter wher e it cou ld o nly . be trophy of an inglorious war—a trophy . whic b e W ,Oortil' y. 0 1 rive no value except from the humiliation allur-tin bed tion of those who were driven out. An imente he t y been thrown out in some of these petitions -4 'a oe lieved it had been repeated elsewhere—of fraud part of the Unitarians. It was asserted that t," 0 1 foe., have known what was the intention of the orig l o l3 , o 0" ; ders of these chapels—that they must have i t oce/ er ie were attached to Trinitarian doctrines, all% land this they must have inevitably, down to a v er lol o -4 riod, either have been Trinitarians or have Prfe s seat i pi be so. For, it was urged, till 1779, everY -1 " - ] orti c o t teacher was obliged to subscribe to the doctrinso me rr y of the Church of England, which, if he was / 00 s. man, he could not do, if he held Unitarian on 10 ; 79 is sq,e inference, therefore, was clear, that down to l' TOIL/ senting minister must either have been sl e d le ? ) tarian or a rogue ! N o w, he believ-(OesPs's were neither the on e nor the othe r '" - r gon l e e o The very eminent per s on w h o had used this 0, y pt was no doubt well ac qua i n t e d w ith the hist ° r en t ; o f Church, of which he was so bright an ornare e i e torief he questioned if he was so well read in the ver y e pi c ' r or; lei non-conformity. The truth was that d by d y period those articles ceased to be subscribed t ee tlat _,t senting ministers. Even in the first genera a t e bre e ct scription was refuses), among others by the,. e i , there Calmet; this was in the first generation art e ^ c roee,v passed, and they all knew the force of the c tet te i.ett which told them that " new brooms sweeP e d, (Hear, hear.) In 1711, the Whigs, he b elie d) , they formed a coalition with Lord Notting ba w etcbe,e, Bill passed through the House of Lords , P2 A clgw eil s order to favour the Dissenters, they inser' - e nect sli t if the.,. l which really took away the stringenc of as to the subscription of the articles y . It stiS s eee s ret any information should be laid against ,fee seel minister for non-subscription to the articieinet_tionsib, any time between the lodging ef the infors._e_ole e bs o' ll o o l the delivery of the judgment, the minister ; scribe the articles, the costs of the suit shoo Tee t 5 cast upon the shoulders of the infortneneeeiegtog was, that in 1773, as proved both by the PrThisse°,4 Parliamen;; and the publications of the Dissel w eie party themse!ves, the majority of t e u bse eibed tore' preachers then alive had never t eeito to , articles at all ; the whole of the argerne s ' ae ' e st ''' rao f t f h ou e n g d r e o d un on d. tle a i a ns i i t n n ce e r e i e t s e s ' a o r f y t t h o e p D ro is y s e e , n a 7 t.... be tto .ie w t t %,4 o l , General had very simply and ably stated it 00 e . pe and naturally these congregations, ciple of the Presbyterians of the day—tha t artiF i e „ confession of faith at all, having no distinct b livi eP ro t lie which the divisions of sects could be fi t te•etbe r sty subscription of articles, and only bound as e e , ore principle of religious freedom —what was sens ibly t hat than that they should glide gradually and w or taintY le ere • with „ in ge one into another, without knowing one ? holding 0 1 7 b l e o f the doctrines preached in the chapel on ano ther pi% might rt ide nt eaven venture ti t i h re e t s o am re e fe a r s h t i l a ios n e d reas eil eiie t e lieve he was perfectly intimate. He Inie wh of ecclesiastical history, with which he ea Lt re fer ee . tb r ; the history of the great Scotch secession'eetoesesedeee Se eet opnr.e"Frhieednd°tn° enctiletre the same as the original docrines 0 • Der e.,y W ese c e o, n am:facit e ne erl"_ btee, P c ar e e doctrines now held by the . Scot:p ,j SU J t f u e: 5 0 r: —(Hear.) He had talked with many b s t be 61 ? -e suasion, and they all acknowledged t at eel by dß' tP ' • g w e h n i e c r h at w io e n re o c f on s s e id ee e d re e d rs Presbyterians. The first seceders ma'r ea d Steed to t to thud fro oro when the great George Whitfield t! . d (c o seceders, vital were n n d o trine of the connexion between Mir" " gcotwl. ea Presbyterians would not unite . with e difee'si r ed of them on this point. The old %tate. )3tit ut en ' c/ miring his abilities and connexion between Church and _ . ,i n g o the Presbyterians of the present day 'J o / Chas" separation voluntary system , and the The Deeueuedco suppower, 130 THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 7, 1844. :i